Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Tom Watson Apology
Topic Started: Oct 22 2015, 03:00 PM (282 Views)
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tom Watson has apologised to the widow of Lord Brittan for repeating the description he was given by one of his (Lord Brittan) accusers ("close to evil"). He "regrets" having done so, regrets the upset it has caused for his family.
David Cameron said he must go further and "examine his conscience about whether he's said enough so far" and said he had "a lot of questions to answer"

Will David Cameron apologise for describing J Corbyn as "a threat to our national security, our economic security and your family's security"?
When politics are the reason for such exchanges being made, criticisms levelled, and posturing at play, shouldn't the PM be setting a good example of behaviour?

As an aside; if it were not for Tom Watson we would not know of the organised paedophile activities of the past, nor of the coverup involving the MET.
I understand that former MET officers have contacted TW detailing their own suspicions of a top level cover up and that there are currently 19 investigations ongoing regarding MET failures/corruption.
Hounding the Corbyn tribe is now a favourite sport of the National press .... hypocrites that they are.



Edited by Affa, Oct 22 2015, 03:03 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Oct 29 2015, 11:55 AM
Affa
Oct 29 2015, 10:16 AM
I'd say that decrying watson for repeating the description given of Brittan by a victim of this abuse is edging close to evil! The motivation's for doing so are vile!
I do recall Gordon (when he was mistaken that he was a Prime minister) saying no more boom and bust and British jobs for British workers, did you take his word as well? not that it matters much, I just like to see fair play where criticism is concerned.

Relevance?
But the answer you sought is Yes!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Oct 29 2015, 12:03 PM
Affa
Oct 29 2015, 10:16 AM
I'd say that decrying watson for repeating the description given of Brittan by a victim of this abuse is edging close to evil! The motivation's for doing so are vile!
Really. Then you too should be excused Jury service as your standards of proof are flaky to say the least.

Proof of what?
I require no proof that Tom Watson made the comment he is being lambasted for, and brought into disrepute by Tory Hawks.
He voiced an opinion that he was given ........ and if we are to judge standards in public office by that criteria then the HoC would be empty.
The worst he has done is upset the family of LB, and he has regretted their sadness. Their shame is not from what TW has said, but from what LB did in office when alerted to these vile goings on.
We have Tories defending LB's reputation whilst trying to wreck the career of an MP who questions whether LB behaved in the public's best interest when he was in a position to act - and did not.

The motivations for all this are Party political and ignore the greater issue of organised child abuse. No wonder it is believed that Tories are people born without a conscience.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa:
"The motivations for all this are Party political and ignore the greater issue of organised child abuse. No wonder it is believed that Tories are people born without a conscience."

Not everyone's motivations are party political (a lot are though..).

I do not see how Mr Watson can be viewed as a bad person, then again I am just another compassionless Usual sh1t scroungelizer. :P
Edited by skwirked, Oct 29 2015, 12:38 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Oct 29 2015, 12:35 PM
The worst he has done is upset the family of LB, . .


:nono:

What you didn't mention is he made a dying man's final days misery, he has effed the career of DCI Setlle, he has exposed 'Jane' to stress the vulnerable person really did not need, he has encouraged others to make false allegations and now the effect of his actions is to discourage real victims from coming forward.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Oct 29 2015, 12:35 PM
RJD
Oct 29 2015, 12:03 PM
Affa
Oct 29 2015, 10:16 AM
I'd say that decrying watson for repeating the description given of Brittan by a victim of this abuse is edging close to evil! The motivation's for doing so are vile!
Really. Then you too should be excused Jury service as your standards of proof are flaky to say the least.

Proof of what?
I require no proof that Tom Watson made the comment he is being lambasted for, and brought into disrepute by Tory Hawks.
He voiced an opinion that he was given ........ and if we are to judge standards in public office by that criteria then the HoC would be empty.
The worst he has done is upset the family of LB, and he has regretted their sadness. Their shame is not from what TW has said, but from what LB did in office when alerted to these vile goings on.
We have Tories defending LB's reputation whilst trying to wreck the career of an MP who questions whether LB behaved in the public's best interest when he was in a position to act - and did not.

The motivations for all this are Party political and ignore the greater issue of organised child abuse. No wonder it is believed that Tories are people born without a conscience.


You said: "I'd say that decrying watson for repeating the description given of Brittan by a victim of this abuse is edging close to evil! The motivation's for doing so are vile!"

The implication made by you that Brittan was in some way associated with this matter. There is no evidence that he was. Then you make a false logic claim that the matter, because it was heinous in the extreme, somehow excuse Watson for his politically motivated actions. These two matters are quite separate and as yet there appears to be no proof of a crime taking place.

I am sure you echo the claim "that Brittan was not proven innocent" made by that other incorrigible Tribalist Jonkey. In my view such a stance puts you beyond the pale.
The fact that you cannot see that Watson was motivated by politics says everything about your Tribalist stance. What he did was a disgrace to civilised behaviour.

I certainly hope that you are never called for Jury service as that could put justice at risk.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 12:37 PM
Affa:
"The motivations for all this are Party political and ignore the greater issue of organised child abuse. No wonder it is believed that Tories are people born without a conscience."

Not everyone's motivations are party political (a lot are though..).

I do not see how Mr Watson can be viewed as a bad person, then again I am just another compassionless Usual sh1t scroungelizer. :P
Very bad logic. A Strawman argument as nobody condones such and as yet there is no proof of crime. You really are so desperate to stick shit on the Tories it has addled your and Jonkey's thinking processes, such as they are. It is a vile thing to attempt to incriminate and then condone one's claims with "well he has not be proven innocent has he". Disgraceful. Now you come here with a completely false argument. I do not care whether your target is blue or red, I would defend him/her from such ignorant vulgarities.
It is as plain as the nose on his face Watson was playing very dirty politics from behind the shield of Westminster. What an evil cowardly cretin. Such people;e should be drummed out of the country never mind politics. Your defence of his actions only demeans you.






Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
How bizarre, a long post about a strawman argument that I didn't even make, that is what you would call an opinion. What made you post such?

I am well aware of dome of the nobler Tory MPs who put their career on the line to report the child abuse as well as many other non-MPs who have suffered for whistle blowing. Your utter, utter bollocks that I want sh1t to stick to the Tories is just that. Yet it was you who tried to turn my political corruption thread into an anti-Watson crusade despite no-one mentioning his name. I am not saying you are the only one guilty of trying to make political capital out of the issue but you should apologise for your outrageous attempts at such.

Also note that I was attacked by Steve for levelling accusations at Harriet et al who were involved in PIE. Also in my political corruption thread, one of the lists contained every Labour criminal conviction and paedo incident. Oh yes you didn't read it fid you? You jumped in arse first and started ranting about Watson.  ::)

The rankest kind of hypocrisy, look in a mirror sometime.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Your statement implied that there was congruence and there was none. You are not allowed to use the act of defending an innocent man as an excuse to label that defence as being without conscience just because it did not embrace matters relating to as yet unproven crimes. The matters are quite separate and making such a point is classic Strawman. You and the others do such in desperation and I would jump to the defence of anyone receiving the sort of treatment Watson and you lot dish out. I find your position as disgraceful, lacking in civility and illogical. This slight of hand is unacceptable in a modern civilised society.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Fine, I'd defend any Tory or other MP who did what Watson did.... and you find that disgraceful, well fine by me you stick to your position and I will mine.

Child abusers and their defenders deserve far, far worse than posthumous name calling. If that makes me a brute thug contemptuous of democracy it bothers me not one jot.
Edited by skwirked, Oct 29 2015, 06:45 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Oct 29 2015, 12:24 PM
Rich
Oct 29 2015, 11:55 AM
Affa
Oct 29 2015, 10:16 AM
I'd say that decrying watson for repeating the description given of Brittan by a victim of this abuse is edging close to evil! The motivation's for doing so are vile!
I do recall Gordon (when he was mistaken that he was a Prime minister) saying no more boom and bust and British jobs for British workers, did you take his word as well? not that it matters much, I just like to see fair play where criticism is concerned.

Relevance?
But the answer you sought is Yes!
I was referring to the banner line underneath your posts.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Oct 29 2015, 04:56 PM

You said: "I'd say that decrying watson for repeating the description given of Brittan by a victim of this abuse is edging close to evil! The motivation's for doing so are vile!"

The implication made by you that Brittan was in some way associated with this matter. There is no evidence that he was. Then you make a false logic claim that the matter, because it was heinous in the extreme, somehow excuse Watson for his politically motivated actions. These two matters are quite separate and as yet there appears to be no proof of a crime taking place.

I am sure you echo the claim "that Brittan was not proven innocent" made by that other incorrigible Tribalist Jonkey. In my view such a stance puts you beyond the pale.
The fact that you cannot see that Watson was motivated by politics says everything about your Tribalist stance. What he did was a disgrace to civilised behaviour.

I certainly hope that you are never called for Jury service as that could put justice at risk.


You'll waste a lot of time trying to find where I have accused Liam Brittan of being involved in the paedophile activities that we do know were taking place.
So you start from a false premise.
I have not sought to excuse Tom Watson for pursuing his efforts in attempting to expose these activities, I have congratulated him for them.
You continue to misread my comments.
We have no proof of these crimes because there has not be an investigation that has brought any of the culprits to court ......... guilt nor innocence has been established, and neither have any of the accusers been so judged. - they too remain innocent victims though some here have already outed them as fantasists or worse.
So we come to the last criticism ...... that Watson was politically motivated, that he is a career politician attempting to advance his reputation.
Utter BS! He has risked ALL on pursuing this, including a damaged reputation, press intrusiveness, and ....... if he had not done so after being presented with evidence he would be no better than Liam Brittan and those party to the State cover-up that has kept this paedophile ring free to remain as abusers.

Has Tom Watson earned the plaudits some here say was his motive?
His accusers most certainly deserve far worse than has been his treatment.






Edited by Affa, Oct 29 2015, 07:46 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Hope OP poster doesn't mind me doing this.

I am probably going to look like even more of a conspiracy crockpot nutcase..oh well.


This appears to be limited proof of some police collusion:

http://nyenquirer.uk/police-organised-crime/

This appears to be ltd proof of Thatcher having knew sbout the paedophilia:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11381191/Margaret-Thatcher-warned-of-paedophile-scandal-secret-documents-reveal.html

Blair:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/blair-government-briefed-police-paedophile-6123122

Danczuk's attack on Clegg:

https://www.rt.com/uk/238825-thatcher-ignored-mp-pedophile/

"
"Nick Clegg, who sits in this department, has already written to me refusing to carry out an investigation into who knew what about Cyril Smith in his party and it’s disappointing to see the Cabinet Office continuing this unhelpful approach,” Danczuk said."
"

Most of this seems to have some merit.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Oct 29 2015, 11:55 AM
Affa
Oct 29 2015, 10:16 AM
I'd say that decrying watson for repeating the description given of Brittan by a victim of this abuse is edging close to evil! The motivation's for doing so are vile!
I do recall Gordon (when he was mistaken that he was a Prime minister) saying no more boom and bust and British jobs for British workers, did you take his word as well? not that it matters much, I just like to see fair play where criticism is concerned.
:'( Why do you always feel the need to mention something a non Tory did as some form of mitigation? especially given the nature of the allegations?

If you think excusing child abuse because is ok because it's the blue team under the spotlight then you should hang your head in shame.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 01:10 PM
:nono:

What you didn't mention is he made a dying man's final days misery, he has effed the career of DCI Setlle, he has exposed 'Jane' to stress the vulnerable person really did not need, he has encouraged others to make false allegations and now the effect of his actions is to discourage real victims from coming forward.
But then on the other hand some of these people were not the most helpful in getting to the bottom of this, we now have doctored documents, deleted testimonies which is frankly pathetic and amateurish and now seemingly lost photographic evidence if shithead Tim Loughton is to be believed.

You play with fire you can expect to occasionally to get burnt, it's what happens when allegations of this magnitude surface.

Few who are interested in the truth will buy your faux sympathy.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Oct 29 2015, 06:25 PM
Your statement implied that there was congruence and there was none. You are not allowed to use the act of defending an innocent man as an excuse to label that defence as being without conscience just because it did not embrace matters relating to as yet unproven crimes.
Dishonesty of the highest order.

There was without doubt clear intent to bury the Dicken Report which contained allegations of child abuse and even murder in high places, firstly the report was hidden away under the official secrets act which had the effect of removing it from any meaningful scrutiny, Brittain was the man in charge of this as the late Barbara Castle confirmed to several sources, he is at the very least guilty of covering up the deeds of some extremely vile people, secondly when this report did finally surface Brittain was unhelpful to say the least, possibly because two of those looking into it had family members allegedly named in the report! And now unsurprisingly given the nature of all this it has become not operation get the kiddy fiddlers but operation get Watson ffs!

File under the Official idiot Act.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Oct 29 2015, 07:56 PM
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 01:10 PM
:nono:

What you didn't mention is he made a dying man's final days misery, he has effed the career of DCI Setlle, he has exposed 'Jane' to stress the vulnerable person really did not need, he has encouraged others to make false allegations and now the effect of his actions is to discourage real victims from coming forward.
But then on the other hand some of these people were not the most helpful in getting to the bottom of this, we now have doctored documents, deleted testimonies which is frankly pathetic and amateurish and now seemingly lost photographic evidence if shithead Tim Loughton is to be believed.

You play with fire you can expect to occasionally to get burnt, it's what happens when allegations of this magnitude surface.

Few who are interested in the truth will buy your faux sympathy.
So what you appear to be saying is it is perfectly OK to hurt people if you can say you are trying to help other people and in no way are seeking to advance your career

and then pretend most of those hurt didn't count

Not my values at all. File under Christopher Jefferies?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 08:43 PM
So what you appear to be saying is it is perfectly OK to hurt people if you can say you are trying to help other people and in no way are seeking to advance your career

and then pretend most of those hurt didn't count

Not my values at all. File under Christopher Jefferies?
No, what I am saying is save your crocodile tears for those that genuinely deserve it.

You seem to be one of the slightly brighter members on here, usually, if you don't feel some level of revulsion at the very obvious attempts to bury this story by shifting the focus from the main allegations onto the feelings of those caught up in the paperwork side of things then sadly you are missing a trick, and frankly being wilfully led astray.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Oct 29 2015, 09:06 PM
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 08:43 PM
So what you appear to be saying is it is perfectly OK to hurt people if you can say you are trying to help other people and in no way are seeking to advance your career

and then pretend most of those hurt didn't count

Not my values at all. File under Christopher Jefferies?
No, what I am saying is save your crocodile tears for those that genuinely deserve it.

You seem to be one of the slightly brighter members on here, usually, if you don't feel some level of revulsion at the very obvious attempts to bury this story by shifting the focus from the main allegations onto the feelings of those caught up in the paperwork side of things then sadly you are missing a trick, and frankly being wilfully led astray.
Too Kind ^
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Oct 29 2015, 09:06 PM
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 08:43 PM
So what you appear to be saying is it is perfectly OK to hurt people if you can say you are trying to help other people and in no way are seeking to advance your career

and then pretend most of those hurt didn't count

Not my values at all. File under Christopher Jefferies?
No, what I am saying is save your crocodile tears for those that genuinely deserve it.

You seem to be one of the slightly brighter members on here, usually, if you don't feel some level of revulsion at the very obvious attempts to bury this story by shifting the focus from the main allegations onto the feelings of those caught up in the paperwork side of things then sadly you are missing a trick, and frankly being wilfully led astray.
Seconded, every character of this.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 09:12 PM
Tigger
Oct 29 2015, 09:06 PM
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 08:43 PM
So what you appear to be saying is it is perfectly OK to hurt people if you can say you are trying to help other people and in no way are seeking to advance your career

and then pretend most of those hurt didn't count

Not my values at all. File under Christopher Jefferies?
No, what I am saying is save your crocodile tears for those that genuinely deserve it.

You seem to be one of the slightly brighter members on here, usually, if you don't feel some level of revulsion at the very obvious attempts to bury this story by shifting the focus from the main allegations onto the feelings of those caught up in the paperwork side of things then sadly you are missing a trick, and frankly being wilfully led astray.
Seconded, every character of this.
Well you all three of you can falsely insinuate what you like. The thread title is about Watson's apology and if you think me pointing out the breadth of his 'errors' is far wider than some incl Watson would like to mislead us about is some sort of conspiracy by me to hush up sex crimes then that's despicable.

Yes we all know that deplorably, hierachy has been used by Churches and large organisations public ad private to protect some committing foul evil deeds. I've condemned that before and I do again

But less known is the way this situation has been exploited to create an industry to pursue vindictive allegations against anyone that can be accused and even or political gain. One in three teachers have been falsely accused, some never recovering. Link That is a staggering and appalling number. And it doesn't stop there.

So load what agendas you like on me condemning the false memory and false accusation industries and politicians seeking to gain advancement out of such. It isn't going to stop me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
I completely get what you are saying Steve, it is wrong and your point strikes really close to home (not specifically about child abuse - people try to make evil nasty things stick to people undeserving of such in many other ways too..).

It's a fair point and I believe you are sincerely defending a point that you feel is fair.

But IMHO that doesn't apply here; a deep dark cover up has taken place and there's potentially child abusers working as MPs.

This MUST not be ignored. It lends a different gravity to proceedings. This event, within the wider context really is a trifle and the guy is not even alive....
Edited by skwirked, Oct 29 2015, 10:26 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
What's your evidence that a deep dark cover up has occurred. And please not that that obviously faked sign in list PS used to go on about
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
By and large the reactions of the political establishment to the unfolding of the crisis, the suspicious death of that south london council worker, "the guest house".

That Thatcher doc which you dismissed, I explained why I disagreed with your dismissal.

The evidence against Blair which I linked.

And Danczuk's attack on Clegg.

And just my instincts in this case..it just feels wrong.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Oct 24 2015, 03:48 PM
skwirked
Oct 24 2015, 02:44 PM
Well Steve has a bit of a point, but attacking us isnt the answer. Best spend energy finding out the real culprits.

I ask Steve does he believe any of the paedo ring stories and if so please share the evidence he's using.
I can't agree!
Steve's POINT has been that Tom Watson is a self serving "manipulative uncaring little shit".
Mine is that he (Tom) is a brave servant of the public trying to bring justice where the authorities have demonstrably failed (the public) in their duty to do so.

We are Poles apart!

If we do not hold the Prime Minister to his word his word becomes meaningless
If we don't hold the Prime Minister to his word? Do you mean if he does not abide by his word, otherwise the sentence is itself meaningless.

Whose WE anyway.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 10:29 PM
What's your evidence that a deep dark cover up has occurred. And please not that that obviously faked sign in list PS used to go on about
Lots of things just don't add up, at the risk of once more repeating myself go over the previous posts.

Lost files, certain witnesses not called, deleted testimony, establishment figures connected to those involved being given the job of heading the inquest, lost images, other MP's who were initially on the case now going after Watson, and so on.

Sorry, but just pedantically focussing on one or two comments by Watson that are personally dubious or offensive to certain individuals does not answer in any way the questions and points being raised, in fact it's starting to get the feel of OJ's now legendary glove in some respects........
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Oct 29 2015, 10:41 PM
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 10:29 PM
What's your evidence that a deep dark cover up has occurred. And please not that that obviously faked sign in list PS used to go on about
Lots of things just don't add up, at the risk of once more repeating myself go over the previous posts.

Lost files, certain witnesses not called, deleted testimony, establishment figures connected to those involved being given the job of heading the inquest, lost images, other MP's who were initially on the case now going after Watson, and so on.

Sorry, but just pedantically focussing on one or two comments by Watson that are personally dubious or offensive to certain individuals does not answer in any way the questions and points being raised, in fact it's starting to get the feel of OJ's now legendary glove in some respects........
Yeah let's not forget the mountains of "lost" or accidentally fucking deleted evidence....

Theres so much stuff that says its a cover up its quite frankly ridiculous..
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 10:25 PM


But IMHO that doesn't apply here; a deep dark cover up has taken place and there's potentially child abusers working as MPs.

This MUST not be ignored. It lends a different gravity to proceedings. This event, within the wider context really is a trifle and the guy is not even alive....
Steve has sorely criticised Tom Watson for not ignoring these allegations.
In fact he would have no issue to pursue if they had not been ignored by several governments.
I have no problem with Steve for reminding that false accusations can be very damaging, but that does not justify his attack of Tom Watson ..... and to repeat - if these allegations had been properly addressed there would not be ANY allegations. We have this situation because there has not been a thorough investigation ....... so anyone innocent of these crimes need never fear a false accusation. The dirt sticks because it has not been washed away. The fault for that is not TW's, he is attempting to clean it up.
Hero!
I don't care whether anyone alive or dead is exposed as being guilty - what does bother me is that there has been a cover-up. We do need to expose THAT. And know that it cannot happen again.






Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Oct 29 2015, 10:44 PM
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 10:25 PM


But IMHO that doesn't apply here; a deep dark cover up has taken place and there's potentially child abusers working as MPs.

This MUST not be ignored. It lends a different gravity to proceedings. This event, within the wider context really is a trifle and the guy is not even alive....
Steve has sorely criticised Tom Watson for not ignoring these allegations.
In fact he would have no issue to pursue if they had not been ignored by several governments.
I have no problem with Steve for reminding that false accusations can be very damaging, but that does not justify his attack of Tom Watson ..... and to repeat - if these allegations had been properly addressed there would not be ANY allegations. We have this situation because there has not been a thorough investigation ....... so anyone innocent of these crimes need never fear a false accusation. The dirt sticks because it has not been washed away. The fault for that is not TW's, he is attempting to clean it up.
Hero!
I don't care whether anyone alive or dead is exposed as being guilty - what does bother me is that there has been a cover-up. We do need to expose THAT. And know that it cannot happen again.






The last part, we are in complete agreement.

I would be glad if everyone shared all their most convincing evidence that this is a cover-up, there's a few more bits but I have to spend more time looking for them again.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 10:34 PM
By and large the reactions of the political establishment to the unfolding of the crisis, the suspicious death of that south london council worker, "the guest house".

That Thatcher doc which you dismissed, I explained why I disagreed with your dismissal.

The evidence against Blair which I linked.

And Danczuk's attack on Clegg.

And just my instincts in this case..it just feels wrong.
Your Thatcher link shows she was aware of a case the DPP and Attorney General said could not be prosecuted. Was she supposed to over rule them? And as pointed out the article you link to says the revelation undermined stories of some cover up conspiracy

Your Blair link clearly says "The 111 pages of documents makes no mention of the minister being under suspicion while former members of the Blair government and the inspector who helped write some of the documents deny ever being told." so no smoking gun and if anything an exoneration

Your Danczuk link is all about Cyril Smith. An appalling case where the local police seemed to fear challenging him. But the suggestion that Thatcher and Blair would intervene to halt an inquiry into a member of their oppositions has to be seen as bizarre.

So what are we left with? The Dickens file he said he was stupid enough to hand over the only copies (FFS the photocopier and PC backup technologies are less than 21st century) and then we were told it was skullduggery destroyed -- except it's turned up.


There have been and will be paedophile leaning members of Parliament. Statistically that's inevitable. There have been and will be false allegations against MPs. We should oppose both.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 11:10 PM
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 10:34 PM
By and large the reactions of the political establishment to the unfolding of the crisis, the suspicious death of that south london council worker, "the guest house".

That Thatcher doc which you dismissed, I explained why I disagreed with your dismissal.

The evidence against Blair which I linked.

And Danczuk's attack on Clegg.

And just my instincts in this case..it just feels wrong.
Your Thatcher link shows she was aware of a case the DPP and Attorney General said could not be prosecuted. Was she supposed to over rule them? And as pointed out the article you link to says the revelation undermined stories of some cover up conspiracy

Your Blair link clearly says "The 111 pages of documents makes no mention of the minister being under suspicion while former members of the Blair government and the inspector who helped write some of the documents deny ever being told." so no smoking gun and if anything an exoneration

Your Danczuk link is all about Cyril Smith. An appalling case where the local police seemed to fear challenging him. But the suggestion that Thatcher and Blair would intervene to halt an inquiry into a member of their oppositions has to be seen as bizarre.

So what are we left with? The Dickens file he said he was stupid enough to hand over the only copies (FFS the photocopier and PC backup technologies are less than 21st century) and then we were told it was skullduggery destroyed -- except it's turned up.


There have been and will be paedophile leaning members of Parliament. Statistically that's inevitable. There have been and will be false allegations against MPs. We should oppose both.
Oh the irony of this post! ;D

You seem to be accepting that there were some very dubious goings on in the past but apparently not now!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Oct 29 2015, 11:16 PM
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 11:10 PM
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 10:34 PM
By and large the reactions of the political establishment to the unfolding of the crisis, the suspicious death of that south london council worker, "the guest house".

That Thatcher doc which you dismissed, I explained why I disagreed with your dismissal.

The evidence against Blair which I linked.

And Danczuk's attack on Clegg.

And just my instincts in this case..it just feels wrong.
Your Thatcher link shows she was aware of a case the DPP and Attorney General said could not be prosecuted. Was she supposed to over rule them? And as pointed out the article you link to says the revelation undermined stories of some cover up conspiracy

Your Blair link clearly says "The 111 pages of documents makes no mention of the minister being under suspicion while former members of the Blair government and the inspector who helped write some of the documents deny ever being told." so no smoking gun and if anything an exoneration

Your Danczuk link is all about Cyril Smith. An appalling case where the local police seemed to fear challenging him. But the suggestion that Thatcher and Blair would intervene to halt an inquiry into a member of their oppositions has to be seen as bizarre.

So what are we left with? The Dickens file he said he was stupid enough to hand over the only copies (FFS the photocopier and PC backup technologies are less than 21st century) and then we were told it was skullduggery destroyed -- except it's turned up.


There have been and will be paedophile leaning members of Parliament. Statistically that's inevitable. There have been and will be false allegations against MPs. We should oppose both.
Oh the irony of this post! ;D

You seem to be accepting that there were some very dubious goings on in the past but apparently not now!
I do? :nono:

You seem to want there to be massive dark conspiracies so much you will not challenge anything that might support it

How like Blair with his dossier
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
"Your Thatcher link shows she was aware of a case the DPP and Attorney General said could not be prosecuted. Was she supposed to over rule them? And as pointed out the article you link to says the revelation undermined stories of some cover up conspiracy"

Very flimsy Steve, maybe the govt didn't w ant it to come out?

Re the Mirror link, Driscoll claims the evidence was omitted and tampered with...

"
A six page memo dated September 7, 1998, for Mr Boateng entitled “PAEDOPHILE INVESTIGATION – LAMBETH” stated that government inspectors would maintain “close contact” with detectives.

The document shows how closely the Blair administration was monitoring the police investigation, raising questions about what exactly was known.

The papers, released following Freedom of Information requests by the Mirror, also show that information was being passed to ministers verbally.

It is not clear if the dossier includes all written briefings for ministers.

Mr Boateng, now 63, was moved in late October 1998 to the Home Office as part of a reshuffle and was replaced by John Hutton.

Reuters
Paul Boateng says he was not aware that any minister was under suspicion at the time
On November 5 the SSI inspector attended another meeting where the issue of the minister being investigated was allegedly discussed again and a report was prepared for Mr Hutton.

No mention is made of the minister.

Mr Driscoll was issued with disciplinary proceedings and removed from Lambeth later that month.

The case against him was eventually dropped.

Six months later the SSI informed Mr Dobson that Mr Boateng had been told before he left the department that he would be excluded from updates about the Lambeth investigation.


A confidential memo, written by SSI Chief Inspector Denise Platt, stated Mr Boateng was at the centre of a “perceived conflict of interest” because his wife Janet had been the chair of Lambeth social services during a period in the 1980s.

Ms Platt, who was made a Dame in 2004 and is currently a trustee of the NSPCC, has denied being told a minister was being investigated or being “involved in providing any briefings” to ministers about the Lambeth investigations in 1998.

JNVisuals
Angell Road in Brixton
This is contradicted by the documents which name her as having briefed ministers and produced documents for them.

Her former deputy Jo Cleary also declined to meet, saying when approached at her home: “I have signed the official secrets act.”"

Why was he kicked out? Why does that documented contradiction occur?

It's very very sus.

Re Danczuk yes but recall the specific quote about Clegg too....Clegg confirmed this with his shady behaviour.


"So what are we left with? The Dickens file he said he was stupid enough to hand over the only copies (FFS the photocopier and PC backup technologies are less than 21st century) and then we were told it was skullduggery destroyed -- except it's turned up."

Ugh. Too many coincidences, far too many.

I dont believe evidence of all kinds gets lost or accidentally destroyed, I dont believe people just die in sus circumstances, I dont believe the govt acts shadily when dealing with this for no reason.

There are dangerous paedophiles out there who need to be brought to justice.

I note you avoided the north yorks link, it has evidence too via newspapers and photos.
Edited by skwirked, Oct 29 2015, 11:34 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 10:50 PM


I would be glad if everyone shared all their most convincing evidence that this is a cover-up, there's a few more bits but I have to spend more time looking for them again.
A quick google search .......

Royal family member - part of paedophile ring before cover-up, ex-cop says


Former MI5 chief 'involved in child sex abuse cover-up'


The Westminster child abuse ‘coverup’: how much did MPs know?

The demand for 'proof' is unnecessary as evidence of a cover-up ..... a cover-up by definition is the prevention of proof getting out.
A pedant would know this. He would also know that without proof there is no case to answer.
That is how this has been used, is being used, and none of it does any credit for those that are denial and shout 'proof' when ever these allegations are mentioned.
I have no respect for those that do!

Edited by Affa, Oct 29 2015, 11:41 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 11:26 PM
I do? :nono:

You seem to want there to be massive dark conspiracies so much you will not challenge anything that might support it

How like Blair with his dossier
You seem to be dancing round this pile of shit hoping not to tread in it.

If you start getting some unpleasant smells check the bottom of your shoes.

;-)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 11:29 PM
. .I note you avoided the north yorks link, it has evidence too via newspapers and photos.
Could that just be because you didn't mention it in post 143 I was responding to?

But feel free to invent some dark conspiracy

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 11:33 PM
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 11:29 PM
. .I note you avoided the north yorks link, it has evidence too via newspapers and photos.
Could that just be because you didn't mention it in post 143 I was responding to?

But feel free to invent some dark conspiracy

Sure or my phone is slow and I forgot to paste it? Feel free to attack based on a simple question not an accusation..

EDIT: I did paste it in my post on here...

http://nyenquirer.uk/police-organised-crime/
Edited by skwirked, Oct 29 2015, 11:40 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Oct 29 2015, 11:31 PM
Steve K
Oct 29 2015, 11:26 PM
I do? :nono:

You seem to want there to be massive dark conspiracies so much you will not challenge anything that might support it

How like Blair with his dossier
You seem to be dancing round this pile of shit hoping not to tread in it.

If you start getting some unpleasant smells check the bottom of your shoes.

;-)
A smart person would avoid making any more comments on the subject - less they become tainted by that which they deny exists.
There are a number of smart posters here doing just that ....... avoiding embarrassment.

Post 153 edited version.
Edited by Affa, Oct 29 2015, 11:50 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Oct 29 2015, 11:29 PM
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 10:50 PM


I would be glad if everyone shared all their most convincing evidence that this is a cover-up, there's a few more bits but I have to spend more time looking for them again.
A quick google search .......

Royal family member - part of paedophile ring before cover-up, ex-cop says


Former MI5 chief 'involved in child sex abuse cover-up'


The Westminster child abuse ‘coverup’: how much did MPs know?

The demand for 'proof' is unnecessary as evidence of a cover-up ..... a cover-up by definition is the prevention of proof getting out.
A pedant would know this. He would also know that without proof there is no case to answer.
That is how this has been used, is being used, and none of it does any credit for those that are denial and shout 'proof' when ever these allegations are mentioned.
I have no respect for those that do!

I hope you aren't making an insinuation about me. All I said is "I would be glad" I demanded nothing from anyone.

As it happens they seem like robust evidemce to me, wonder what Steve thinks.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 11:48 PM
Affa
Oct 29 2015, 11:29 PM
skwirked
Oct 29 2015, 10:50 PM


I would be glad if everyone shared all their most convincing evidence that this is a cover-up, there's a few more bits but I have to spend more time looking for them again.
A quick google search .......

Royal family member - part of paedophile ring before cover-up, ex-cop says


Former MI5 chief 'involved in child sex abuse cover-up'


The Westminster child abuse ‘coverup’: how much did MPs know?

The demand for 'proof' is unnecessary as evidence of a cover-up ..... a cover-up by definition is the prevention of proof getting out.
A pedant would know this. He would also know that without proof there is no case to answer.
That is how this has been used, is being used, and none of it does any credit for those that are denial and shout 'proof' when ever these allegations are mentioned.
I have no respect for those that do!

I hope you aren't making an insinuation about me. All I said is "I would be glad" I demanded nothing from anyone.

As it happens they seem like robust evidemce to me, wonder what Steve thinks.

There was no criticism of you intended - the opposite, a show of solidarity with what you are trying to get across.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Oh fair enough, tiredness is setting in
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply