Labour wasn't in government at the time but it's still part of the Establishment. It must be borne in mind that Blair also refused to accede to the demands made by the family of Pat Finucane for an inquiry into his murder (yeah, I know that's about collusion with Northern Irish loyalist terrorists, not child abuse, but he still refused to reveal the whole truth about it even though Labour wasn't in government from 1979 to 1997 (Finucane was murdered in 1989).
Fair enough. The problem is the establishment protecting itaelf. In some respects it is irrelevant who is doing the cover up, they all do it. This is not meant to sound like a defence of individuals btw.
Fair enough. The problem is the establishment protecting itaelf. In some respects it is irrelevant who is doing the cover up, they all do it. This is not meant to sound like a defence of individuals btw.
Using rent boys is quite different from ludicrous claims of murder.
I agree that using consenting rent boys is really a victimless crime - and frankly you wouldn't condemn MPs back in the 1980s for not being public about their sexuality.
However you have no real basis on which to say the claims of child being murdered are ludicrous - we just don't know so its best to await the police inquiries.
I agree that using consenting rent boys is really a victimless crime - and frankly you wouldn't condemn MPs back in the 1980s for not being ing murdered are ludicrous - we just don't know so its best to await the police inquiries.
By consrnting rent boys, do you mean boys in care who were selected and forced to participate? If so, that isn't a victimless crime. Some of these boys were as young as 12.
By consrnting rent boys, do you mean boys in care who were selected and forced to participate? If so, that isn't a victimless crime. Some of these boys were as young as 12.
No - I differentiate between adult gay men using the services of adult male escorts in a consensual financial transaction vs children or young men being forced to participate in acts.
I do hope you can see the difference - this shouldn't be a witchhunt of gay politicians but of rapists and paedophiles.
No - I differentiate between adult gay men using the services of adult male escorts in a consensual financial transaction vs children or young men being forced to participate in acts.
I do hope you can see the difference - this shouldn't be a witchhunt of gay politicians but of rapists and paedophiles.
There are lists of the people who were in Thatcher's cabinet in her first term as Prime Minister. One of them, according to "Nick", watched the murder of a boy. If the former minister in question is still alive, it will be easy to narrow the list of names down.
I think the whole thing is utterly horrifying - and I sincerely hope that if there is any substance to these claims of paedophile parties and young boys being murdered by or in front of Tory ministers, that somebody is brought to book for it, and names named.
Using rent boys is quite different from ludicrous claims of murder.
"Ludicrous"? do you know something the police don't? surely every claim of murder could be called "ludicrous" by someone, does that mean they should all be ignored?
A claim has been made to the police, the police will have looked into the claim and will certainly have more information about it than you, and the police have decided that it's worth further investigation, so how have you come to the position where you can call it "ludicrous"? what information do you have that the police don't?
As I have said before, I don't really think speculation about this case is a good idea until someone is at the very least charged,
and a case like this should be way above party politics. and cheap point scoring.
But see did also say last week, in a parliment committee meeting, that she is looking at people outside the uk to chair the panal as she is finding it hard to find someone in the UK that the victims trust and have failth in.
To be fair to Theresa May I don't think she's just scrapping it........her intention might be to re-start it as a Statutory Enquiry, which is something victim's groups had previously asked for
My main concern would be that a Royal Commission or Statutory Enquiry would just kick the process into the long grass for another year or two
We all know that if it was anyone other than the VIPs alleged to be involved, progress would be being made. That said, the victims are quite correct to delay until a panel they have faith in is installed. Even when that happens as it surely must, the guilty parties in this despicable business must now be busily pulling strings, calling in favours and even threatening to bring others down with them if they are ever exposed. How far does all of this extend - who has what on who? Even if dead, remaining relatives will be fighting to preserve reputations.
The recent murder allegations if true, have taken this to a level of deprivation and disgrace we could never possibly have imagined in the UK. We can only hope and pray the victims eventually get the justice they so richly deserve.
I find it hard to believe and very sad that a thread like this has been running so long and still only on page 11.
Maybe most are like me and just read what others are posting in here rather than just not thinking it deserves any discussion, shock or outrage.
If not then if they do try to once again cover it all up or let it drop out of the news not many will notice or care.
Keeps on coming doesn't it and it just goes to show how much easier it was in those days to cover things up and indulge themselves in these sordid activities. Thankfully, the advent of the internet has given people a voice and suppression is not as easy as it once was.
On the police investigating these allegations and in general. Lancashire police were investigating Cyril Smith in the 1980s and were confident they had more than enough evidence to get him into court. Just as that was about to happen, the police were told to drop the case and hand over every shred of evidence they had. After that, no further action was taken and nothing more was ever heard about it. Well, that right there is a reminder of the power and influence of the people we're talking about here - people that are apparently above the law.
Hopefully things have changed since then, but I do have my suspicions. I sincerely hope I'm wrong.
I find it hard to believe and very sad that a thread like this has been running so long and still only on page 11.
Maybe most are like me and just read what others are posting in here rather than just not thinking it deserves any discussion, shock or outrage.
If not then if they do try to once again cover it all up or let it drop out of the news not many will notice or care.
It's gradually gathering momentum. But, at any time you feel the whole thing could hit a brick wall and be closed down for whatever reason the government decide to come up with and that will be that.
More and more victims of the abuse need to keep coming forward, there needs to more brave journalism, the people involved in facilitating these sordid activities need to speak out and those people previously bound by the OSA need to start naming names. Once the sheer weight of evidence and testimony is so compelling and credible we might eventually get somewhere.
My concern is that the blame will be put on a few dead people and maybe a few minor members will be thrown to the wolves as a sacrifice to keep the public happy while the ones right at the top get off.
Comments
Fair enough. The problem is the establishment protecting itaelf. In some respects it is irrelevant who is doing the cover up, they all do it. This is not meant to sound like a defence of individuals btw.
Isn't there a mistake in those straplines under the headline ?
It says 26 years ago.........that's 1988 not 1998 !
I understand your point.
Arrrgggh! You're right. I should have read the article before I posted it.
Apologies.
So your post at 248 should have read -
'I wonder what Margaret Thatcher knew about all this'?
;-)
I agree that using consenting rent boys is really a victimless crime - and frankly you wouldn't condemn MPs back in the 1980s for not being public about their sexuality.
However you have no real basis on which to say the claims of child being murdered are ludicrous - we just don't know so its best to await the police inquiries.
By consrnting rent boys, do you mean boys in care who were selected and forced to participate? If so, that isn't a victimless crime. Some of these boys were as young as 12.
No - I differentiate between adult gay men using the services of adult male escorts in a consensual financial transaction vs children or young men being forced to participate in acts.
I do hope you can see the difference - this shouldn't be a witchhunt of gay politicians but of rapists and paedophiles.
With you now as regards the age of 'partners'.
I honestly believed that the article referred to 1998. Obviously, I didn't read beyond the strap-lines. Does Mail Online not have proof-readers?
Obviously not........they still haven't corrected it !
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Thatcher_ministry#Cabinets
"Ludicrous"? do you know something the police don't? surely every claim of murder could be called "ludicrous" by someone, does that mean they should all be ignored?
A claim has been made to the police, the police will have looked into the claim and will certainly have more information about it than you, and the police have decided that it's worth further investigation, so how have you come to the position where you can call it "ludicrous"? what information do you have that the police don't?
As I have said before, I don't really think speculation about this case is a good idea until someone is at the very least charged,
and a case like this should be way above party politics. and cheap point scoring.
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5438/theresa-may-to-scrap-panel-for-inquiry-into-child-sex-abuse
What a surprise...
But see did also say last week, in a parliment committee meeting, that she is looking at people outside the uk to chair the panal as she is finding it hard to find someone in the UK that the victims trust and have failth in.
My main concern would be that a Royal Commission or Statutory Enquiry would just kick the process into the long grass for another year or two
The recent murder allegations if true, have taken this to a level of deprivation and disgrace we could never possibly have imagined in the UK. We can only hope and pray the victims eventually get the justice they so richly deserve.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11306575/Five-Westminster-paedophile-rings-probed-by-Scotland-Yard.html
Astonishing.
Maybe most are like me and just read what others are posting in here rather than just not thinking it deserves any discussion, shock or outrage.
If not then if they do try to once again cover it all up or let it drop out of the news not many will notice or care.
Keeps on coming doesn't it and it just goes to show how much easier it was in those days to cover things up and indulge themselves in these sordid activities. Thankfully, the advent of the internet has given people a voice and suppression is not as easy as it once was.
On the police investigating these allegations and in general. Lancashire police were investigating Cyril Smith in the 1980s and were confident they had more than enough evidence to get him into court. Just as that was about to happen, the police were told to drop the case and hand over every shred of evidence they had. After that, no further action was taken and nothing more was ever heard about it. Well, that right there is a reminder of the power and influence of the people we're talking about here - people that are apparently above the law.
Hopefully things have changed since then, but I do have my suspicions. I sincerely hope I'm wrong.
It's gradually gathering momentum. But, at any time you feel the whole thing could hit a brick wall and be closed down for whatever reason the government decide to come up with and that will be that.
More and more victims of the abuse need to keep coming forward, there needs to more brave journalism, the people involved in facilitating these sordid activities need to speak out and those people previously bound by the OSA need to start naming names. Once the sheer weight of evidence and testimony is so compelling and credible we might eventually get somewhere.