| 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: |
| Tom Watson Apology | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Oct 22 2015, 03:00 PM (279 Views) | |
| Affa | Oct 22 2015, 03:00 PM Post #1 |
|
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.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| Rich | Nov 2 2015, 12:47 AM Post #241 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I am not the one making claims, am I? I do not need to prove his innocence as you are the one that is tacitly saying he is guilty, a conglomeration of "incidents" may well point to the supposed allegations that you make but at the end of the day that is not hard evidence and amounts to a field of beans.......next armchair lawyer please. |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 2 2015, 12:50 AM Post #242 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Can you refute any of the evidence provided so far? Steve tried and it looks to me like he failed. No one has even attempted to refute the evidence I quoted a good few posts back. Refute it if able. |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Nov 2 2015, 12:57 AM Post #243 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Do you not get it, I need do nothing as the man is innocent by default, for the very last time, if you have hard and undeniable evidence that Tom watson is right about Leon Brittan then go to the fucking police and tell them as we are just using up valuable time debating an alleged crime. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 2 2015, 12:59 AM Post #244 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Do you need me to repost post 149 in super large font then? You clearly haven't read it |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 2 2015, 01:06 AM Post #245 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But that's just a link to a junk blog with an overlong junk video So seems you admit that Waton maliciously screwed a decent detective's caerer just because he wouldn't go along with framing a dying man. But you think that's nothing to apologise for I wonder if you've worked out yet who leaked the identity of 'Jane' to the media leading her to endure subsequent persecution. Edited by Steve K, Nov 2 2015, 01:07 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 2 2015, 01:12 AM Post #246 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Clearly you haven't read posts: (the reply) 152 then 156 181 187 Do I need to repeat them in ultra large font? I already have font sizes turned up for my struggling eyes thanks.
|
![]() |
|
| Affa | Nov 2 2015, 01:12 AM Post #247 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Twitter for one. But instead of questioning whether TW's efforts to force governments to investigate and prosecute wrong doings, in the press, in the elite circles, has been well received by the public and not so by the authorities, try to determine why he is being hounded by these same incompetent suspects of crimes against society. |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 2 2015, 01:15 AM Post #248 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That's a no then. How do you prosecute dead politicians? Tips? Do you bury them in pet cemetary then slap on the cuffs at dawn? Do you prosecute Blair because he was given a vague idea that child abuse might be going on but shut it down and did nothing about it? Is that prosecutable? Edited by skwirked, Nov 2 2015, 01:17 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Affa | Nov 2 2015, 01:32 AM Post #249 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
As I remarked some time back, the evidence of a paedophile ring that some posters demand 'as proof' is hidden from us by the authorities charged with investigating these allegations. Others before Tom Watson have notified the authorities of these allegations, provided evidence, and that evidence has been lost ......... we cannot know what evidence there is because the authorities have kept it from us = a cover-up. The bottom line is that children in care have been abused (or worse) and instead of leaving 'no stone unturned' as they should, they have buried the case under a pile of stones. Why anyone is not outraged by this amazes me ......... |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Nov 2 2015, 01:35 AM Post #250 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I do believe that a certain Mr Savile was posthumously prosecuted despite him not being able to refute the claims of said victims. |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 2 2015, 01:36 AM Post #251 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Likewise. SOME of The evidence DID get documented however! By multiple sources! There's the hard bloody proof..and the fact it got destroyed in sus circumstances is more hard proof than you could possibly need for christs sake. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 2 2015, 01:37 AM Post #252 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
152 is just a ramble, your link in 156 backs my post not yours, 181 and 187 further go on about Cyril Smith and your amazing theory that Thatcher would go out of her way to protect a high profile member of her opposition. About as likely as Mercedes giving Ferrari a head start every Grand Prix |
![]() |
|
| Rich | Nov 2 2015, 01:44 AM Post #253 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Then please take your concerns to a court of law and demand that something be done on the "evidence" that you are able to lay before them. Other than that let the topic die a fucking death until there are further developements. |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 2 2015, 01:46 AM Post #254 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
My damning quotes from the paper which were emboldened are a 'ramble' are they? You deny that Clegg tried to hamper the investigation? And you deny that Thatcher saw the evidence because an unsub'd sentence in the paper sez so, in opposition to the evidence presented therein? I think you are stuck. The other stuff is very damning indeed as I said; the MI5 file and Whips books evidence hasn't been contested by anyone. Nothing to do with Cyril. And the Cyril allegation well senior figures admitted that MPs treated each other very well, it was like a closed club...and you deny this? |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 2 2015, 01:55 AM Post #255 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The links you supplied showed Thatcher was aware of allegations |
![]() |
|
| Jonksy | Nov 2 2015, 05:15 AM Post #256 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I understand perfectly..The facts are that somewhere along the line with hundreds of reports and accusations there are ones that are true and this cover up extends to thatchers government the Met and M15. There are even links to where the CIA and Russia were collating the info for the usual "stored in case". There are links to Australian news reports that named names on many of thees who were accused when they were still alive but not one of them tried to clear their names. Thatcher 'Turned Blind Eye' To Paedophile MPs http://news.sky.com/story/1440761/thatcher-turned-blind-eye-to-paedophile-mps Edited by Jonksy, Nov 2 2015, 05:15 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| disgruntled porker | Nov 2 2015, 08:04 AM Post #257 |
|
Older than most people think I am.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
This is all a bit "If if's and but's were apples and nuts" to me. It's fully understandable to defend a man's right to innocence until proven guilty. My concern is that some people on here would not support a full and honest investigation into the matter. I don't find it acceptable to just sit back and say, "Oh well, that's that then" when it is obvious that what could be damning evidence has been "misplaced". |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 2 2015, 08:08 AM Post #258 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Just another lefty retard Rich who does not give a fig for evidence, his opinions are evidence enough for him. Not worth attempting to debate with such people their block heads are fixed on myths. What is really telling in all this is the fact that Watson hid behind the shield of Westminster, surely if he was a man of honour and sure of the creditability of his information he would have made his claims as a citizen out on the street. The second thing is the manner which those that excuse Watson's disgusting behaviour use McCarthy style tactics to delude themselves, they do not delude those that can think and can spot their uncivilised stance. Pity we cannot exile this riff raff. The most disgusting claims I have seen in many a year are: "well he was not proven innocent was he". and the Strawman that by not fingering Brittan one was/would-be in someway condoning pedophilia. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 2 2015, 10:34 AM Post #259 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Those quotation marks are key. This is just another repeat of Danczuk's position. Another key point from your link: "the letter noted, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) decided "there was no reasonable prospect of conviction". So there was no basis for her to take any action against Smith or block any award nominated by an opposing party within their quota. It was up to Rochdale police to do their job, something they woefully failed to do. |
![]() |
|
| Jonksy | Nov 2 2015, 10:35 AM Post #260 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Are those on the right who want a full investigation into this whole sordid affair retards also in your eyes? Not of course as you are not qualified to to Analise others mental agility.. |
![]() |
|
| Jonksy | Nov 2 2015, 10:38 AM Post #261 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
He is part of establishment. And if you had read the link the investigation was taken away from the Rochdale police and they had to surrender all the case files.. But of course no rats to be smelt there then.. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 2 2015, 10:56 AM Post #262 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes of course you would say that. Again why would a Tory Attorney General lift a finger to protect a high profile member of the opposition? The answer of course is he would not No it does not. |
![]() |
|
| Jonksy | Nov 2 2015, 11:27 AM Post #263 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sorry i will have to find the other one I had...My mistake and I apologise. |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 2 2015, 05:39 PM Post #264 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Right. And you contend that she endeavoured to thoroughly investigate them? The other links are still even more damning imho. Edited by skwirked, Nov 2 2015, 05:40 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Jonksy | Nov 2 2015, 05:55 PM Post #265 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It's not rocket science why Attorney General didn't lift a finger as that would of opened up a hornets nest which would also swallow his own party.. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 2 2015, 06:05 PM Post #266 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Anyone can make allegations. You've taken 'allegations' and extrapolated them to be that she saw proof. False logic but you're not alone in such. |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 2 2015, 06:07 PM Post #267 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Say I accept tour point. Do you accept that she utterly failed to investigate the allegations? |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 2 2015, 06:22 PM Post #268 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I've seen more convincing logic |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 2 2015, 06:29 PM Post #269 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I accept that she didn't investigate. Why would she when she was told that the matter had already been investigated and the DPP had decided the allegations were not prosecutable? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31789827 |
![]() |
|
| Jonksy | Nov 2 2015, 06:35 PM Post #270 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Post a link to it then |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 2 2015, 06:37 PM Post #271 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You could google flat earth society |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 2 2015, 06:37 PM Post #272 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Because she had a very good inkling as to what might be going on. The Lab and Tory MPs who have tried to force this out into the open over decades get my utmost praise and respect. She should have tried her best to find out what was going on, I know you reject my other link re Hayman but it seems clear to me that there was a cover-up going on; they wanted to avoid 'embarrasement' and sweep it under the carpet. Look maybe she/others thought "oh most of the controversies center around 15-16 yr old boys and thats hardly a big deal", maybe they had no idea what the MPs/others were really capable of..or didn't want to know..... Edited by skwirked, Nov 2 2015, 06:38 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 2 2015, 06:49 PM Post #273 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think you are in danger of being filed in Rosswell. So much conspiracy so little actual evidence. Is this not typical of the behaviour of latter day Witch-Hunters? Next you will be insisting that all Tories are ducked and if they do not admit whatever you lot think, or dream up, they are guilty of the drown the buggers. Again first proof that a crime has been committed, then look for the guilty party(s). We cannot run a society on the basis of Red Nag myths and innuendo. |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 2 2015, 06:55 PM Post #274 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"Again first proof that a crime has been committed, then look for the guilty party(s). We cannot run a society on the basis of Red Nag myths and innuendo." I think you'll find we already do. Welcome to modern neoliberal Britain. PS: you've ignored all the evidence so far but what's new there? At least Steve isn't making long ranting unsubstantiated posts criticising those that attempt to see where the admittedly limited evidence leads. File: up Thatcher's hairy dead arse |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 2 2015, 07:07 PM Post #275 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There's been stuff all evidence so far from you. It's all been inuendo, wild extrapolation and the classic "they denied it so they must be guilty"" |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 2 2015, 07:08 PM Post #276 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What evidence? What you put up would not even make it to a Court of Law. Is that not just the point? |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 2 2015, 07:11 PM Post #277 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Just on the BBC (SE Today) another person broken by the false allegation industry Google Geoff Long |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 2 2015, 07:13 PM Post #278 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I have shown you evidence that there was a cover-up which you continue to ignore. So the MI5 file and the whips books evidence? Where's the lack of substance there then? Remember: much of the stuff I quoted wasnt even from my own links. My links which I posted have got stuff-all responses. There's a video re the whips book which you might want to watch. |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 2 2015, 07:16 PM Post #279 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
But unless the CP believes it will stand up in a Court of Law why should I take any notice of your unproven claims? I don't do conspiracy, I leave that for the Usuals. |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 2 2015, 08:49 PM Post #280 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Your opinion is of little interest. It's pure unsubstantiated twaddle, refute the as-yet unchallenged links if able or continue wasting screen space and be ignored, your choice. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |




![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)




8:29 AM Jul 11