I don't wish to criticise this MP that brought the dossier to the Home Secretary, but I seem to remember that we had photocopiers in the 1980's, so how come neither he nor the Home Office made a copy?
If you are talking about Dickens then yes he did make copies, 3 afaik. Home office may have one now ,nobody is sure, that's what needs to be investigated, Dickens sent another copy to the Home secretary Leon Brittain.
No action ever taken even after being assured it would be investigated.
Dickens died in 95, his wife burnt the files as they were too sensitive.
Cant blame her, 2 copies with the government for 12 yrs and nothing happened except her husband receiving numerous death threats, house burgled a few times, she must have been scared to keep them.
You have to look at the way things were in those days, being gay was illegal & also massively stigmatised, so many men who had same sex attraction wouldn't have been able to have healthy adult relationships. If you had a job that gave you access to children or got access to children via friends or by dint of being famous that might be a way of satisfying same sex feelings.
Rumours have been going around for years re weekends on his yacht.
Yes, all the allegations centre around children's homes around the country and Kincora in Ireland too. So, that old gay chestnut that even Cameron trotted out with regards to the McAlpine fiasco doesn't wash. Both Heath and Mountbatten were mentioned with regards to Savile bringing children from homes to them on their yachts. Apparently, the media abroad reported about Heath and a Sunday newspaper over here reported about Mountbatten back in the 80s.
It would appear there may have been a coverup that involved members of all parties, lets hope Cameron has the guts to follow this through and ignore the comments he will get in the media etc about it all even though he was not around back then.
Cameron has less guts than most think. It's much easier for him to make announcements which are little more than soundbytes, knowing that a major expose is about to take place. In other words, better write a get-out clause before the cacky hits the fan. As for not being around back then, he knows what he inherited, some are still alive. Anyone would thing matters like this are never spoken of, when the reality is they get round the corridors of power like they were strapped to a whippet.
Not talking about my individual circumstance, I'm talking generally.
The 80s were a cold, selfish time, where self was pushed and promoted above anything else. Society was suddenly a secondary concern, if one at all.
This is a widely stated and held point of view. It's one I hold it too.
The 80s in general were a cold, selfish, harsh, money orientated decade and they are notorious for being known as such, my Yuppie friend.
Where did you get this stuff? From watching Wall Street?
For the 99.999% of the population who weren't wearing red braces and doing a bit of insider trading, society was pretty much the same as it was before and after the 80's.
Jimmy Saville passed away before his crimes started to uncover. Rolf is now jailed but let's face it, he is an old man now. An old man who lived a good life and had a God-like status just like Saville. The point is that they will never hold those who were covering up the abuse for decades responsible and named. Everything will remain as it is and the main culprits for this wont be brought to justice, because the UK government at the time was involved in the cover up. Maybe one day when the people responsible for the cover up pass away, we will know the truth about the whole case. Until then, we will talk about what Jimmy Saville and Rolf Harris did, which is irrelevant at this point.
Not talking about my individual circumstance, I'm talking generally.
The 80s were a cold, selfish time, where self was pushed and promoted above anything else. Society was suddenly a secondary concern, if one at all.
This is a widely stated and held point of view. It's one I hold it too.
The 80s in general were a cold, selfish, harsh, money orientated decade and they are notorious for being known as such, my Yuppie friend.
Yes. very true, we are seeing a far more accountable society today, even the powerful are now open to scrutiny. only have to look at the long standing crimes and injustices ignored for decades now being investigated. am sure there will always be crimes and cover ups but at least now people are being listened too. just didn't happen in the 80s. horrible period for decency and accountability as these people felt untouchable.
How about appointing people to senior positions during your time in office, who then stay on with a new government?
I agree; it would not need to be politicians doing any covering up. Peter Hayman was a very senior civil servant. Civil servants are capable of losing documents and "suitably" advising ministers.
I agree; it would not need to be politicians doing any covering up. Peter Hayman was a very senior civil servant. Civil servants are capable of losing documents and "suitably" advising ministers.
Going by the length of time involved it is more than likely a civil service cover up.
Yes, all the allegations centre around children's homes around the country and Kincora in Ireland too. So, that old gay chestnut that even Cameron trotted out with regards to the McAlpine fiasco doesn't wash. Both Heath and Mountbatten were mentioned with regards to Savile bringing children from homes to them on their yachts. Apparently, the media abroad reported about Heath and a Sunday newspaper over here reported about Mountbatten back in the 80s.
Thanks Dan. I heard about Savile and Heath around 15-18 years ago, when living in the Netherlands.
There was a forum member in GD a few years back who started threads with linked photocopied documentation on child abuse in homes, unfortunately, the mods deleted them as soon as they were started. It was these threads that reminded me of the earlier stories about Savile, Heath, and a couple of others, but I can't remember their names. I had the impression that the OP of those threads was a victim.
Jimmy Saville passed away before his crimes started to uncover. Rolf is now jailed but let's face it, he is an old man now. An old man who lived a good life and had a God-like status just like Saville. The point is that they will never hold those who were covering up the abuse for decades responsible and named. Everything will remain as it is and the main culprits for this wont be brought to justice, because the UK government at the time was involved in the cover up. Maybe one day when the people responsible for the cover up pass away, we will know the truth about the whole case. Until then, we will talk about what Jimmy Saville and Rolf Harris did, which is irrelevant at this point.
I think quite a few of them were an open secret around London - pub talk, etc.
Going by the length of time involved it is more than likely a civil service cover up.
It was a very senior Civil Servant Tom Watson was referring to and payments made during both Labour and Tory governments of the past to the PIE by said Civil Servant
More I hear of this, am
Pretty sure it was right at top of Thatcher government or even somebody close to herl]
I find it interesting that Norman Tebbit has crawled into the light, to make it known that while he does not agree with the obvious cover-up, he nevertheless understands that it was done to protect the almighty establishment of which he was a major player. Saying something along the lines of 'if things happened here and there, it was considered more important to protect the system.'
This attitude shows what the rest of us were - and I believe still are - up against. A system that actively places 'important' people above the law, no matter what they do or who they do it too. It isn't hard to understand how a police force and judiciary that turned literally hundreds of blind eyes to the evil doings of Saville, Harris and fat old Cyril might also fail to deliver justice to those with real power.
Most insulting of all, to the victims and to people simply asking for the truth, is the current government stance that there will be no public enquiry. This is off the scale corruption and depravity, which shows the utter contempt with which politicians hold the rest of us. And what can we do about it..... sod all.
Cameron has less guts than most think. It's much easier for him to make announcements which are little more than soundbytes, knowing that a major expose is about to take place. In other words, better write a get-out clause before the cacky hits the fan. As for not being around back then, he knows what he inherited, some are still alive. Anyone would thing matters like this are never spoken of, when the reality is they get round the corridors of power like they were strapped to a whippet.
I think you are being a little unfair.....investigations into phone hacking and bringing those to justice.....rumours and known of to some degree since 2002 and nothing done until the current administration......Hillsborough nothing done until under Camerons time (not done under previous Labour or tory governments).......and these are off the top of my head....certainly not something that was easy to do....did Labour do them? nope....
Jimmy Saville passed away before his crimes started to uncover. Rolf is now jailed but let's face it, he is an old man now. An old man who lived a good life and had a God-like status just like Saville. The point is that they will never hold those who were covering up the abuse for decades responsible and named. Everything will remain as it is and the main culprits for this wont be brought to justice, because the UK government at the time was involved in the cover up. Maybe one day when the people responsible for the cover up pass away, we will know the truth about the whole case. Until then, we will talk about what Jimmy Saville and Rolf Harris did, which is irrelevant at this point.
all forms of the 'establishment' seem to have the same 'shield' with anything serious that goes with many forms of corruption and not just child abuse......and this goes to policitians also ....whether its to do with Iraq or other injustices things never come to light and when blame finally is laid ....its either after people have forgot about it or those responsible are beyond justice......
I find it interesting that Norman Tebbit has crawled into the light, to make it known that while he does not agree with the obvious cover-up, he nevertheless understands that it was done to protect the almighty establishment of which he was a major player. Saying something along the lines of 'if things happened here and there, it was considered more important to protect the system.'
This attitude shows what the rest of us were - and I believe still are - up against. A system that actively places 'important' people above the law, no matter what they do or who they do it too. It isn't hard to understand how a police force and judiciary that turned literally hundreds of blind eyes to the evil doings of Saville, Harris and fat old Cyril might also fail to deliver justice to those with real power.
Most insulting of all, to the victims and to people simply asking for the truth, is the current government stance that there will be no public enquiry. This is off the scale corruption and depravity, which shows the utter contempt with which politicians hold the rest of us. And what can we do about it..... sod all.
I find it interesting that Norman Tebbit has crawled into the light, to make it known that while he does not agree with the obvious cover-up, he nevertheless understands that it was done to protect the almighty establishment of which he was a major player.
In some ways Tebbit and Thatcher were not part of "the almighty establishment". Allegedly the establishment were furious with Thatcher for revealing the traitor Anthony Blunt and the massive cover-up that had happened. To quote the wikipedia entry on Blunt,
Sir Bernard Ingham, Thatcher's press secretary, suggested, "I believe she did it because she didn't see why the system should cover things up. This was early in her prime ministership. I think she wanted to tell the civil service that the politicians decide policy, not the system. She wanted them to know who was boss."
It is now becoming quite clear to me why Saville managed to survive prosecution throughout his life.
He was not only being protected, but his freedom protected others.
I think you are being a little unfair.....investigations into phone hacking and bringing those to justice.....rumours and known of to some degree since 2002 and nothing done until the current administration......Hillsborough nothing done until under Camerons time (not done under previous Labour or tory governments).......and these are off the top of my head....certainly not something that was easy to do....did Labour do them? nope....
Well the HIP into Hillsborough was set up under a Labour Government and a Labour MP helped to get the Government files released but the panels findings were announced under a Tory Government, having said that, am a Labour voter but i have to agree with you. the Tory Government reaction shocked me, Cant criticize them for anything, Terresa May has been true to her word making sure things happen and nobody can evade scrutiny. never happened with the 97 Labour Government.
It is now becoming quite clear to me why Saville managed to survive prosecution throughout his life.
He was not only being protected, but his freedom protected others.
Our governments look more like the Mafia everyday: above the law, the omerta, helping friends get elected or get positions in high government, rigging contracts, protecting certain businesses from competition, etc.
I think it won't be long until one of the newspapers goes big on a long standing rumour.
Lets hope if it is a deceased person that they make sure of their facts before destroying people reputations when they are not here to defend themselves , rumours alone are not good enough reason to go to print in cases such as this only provable facts should be used.
You have to look at the way things were in those days, being gay was illegal & also massively stigmatised, so many men who had same sex attraction wouldn't have been able to have healthy adult relationships. If you had a job that gave you access to children or got access to children via friends or by dint of being famous that might be a way of satisfying same sex feelings.
Of course that's not what I'm saying, but you have to be aware that the past was a very different place.
I know what it was like then, as I was alive then.
But it reads like you are saying that if a gay man didn't have access to other gay men ( as it was illegal) he just might go after a child to full fill his sexual needs ( That was also illegal )
Only those who like children in that way would go after a child, even if other gay men were available.
I'm surprised no one else pulled you up on that post.
Comments
If you are talking about Dickens then yes he did make copies, 3 afaik. Home office may have one now ,nobody is sure, that's what needs to be investigated, Dickens sent another copy to the Home secretary Leon Brittain.
No action ever taken even after being assured it would be investigated.
Dickens died in 95, his wife burnt the files as they were too sensitive.
Cant blame her, 2 copies with the government for 12 yrs and nothing happened except her husband receiving numerous death threats, house burgled a few times, she must have been scared to keep them.
Of course that's not what I'm saying, but you have to be aware that the past was a very different place.
Yes, all the allegations centre around children's homes around the country and Kincora in Ireland too. So, that old gay chestnut that even Cameron trotted out with regards to the McAlpine fiasco doesn't wash. Both Heath and Mountbatten were mentioned with regards to Savile bringing children from homes to them on their yachts. Apparently, the media abroad reported about Heath and a Sunday newspaper over here reported about Mountbatten back in the 80s.
Cameron has less guts than most think. It's much easier for him to make announcements which are little more than soundbytes, knowing that a major expose is about to take place. In other words, better write a get-out clause before the cacky hits the fan. As for not being around back then, he knows what he inherited, some are still alive. Anyone would thing matters like this are never spoken of, when the reality is they get round the corridors of power like they were strapped to a whippet.
For the 99.999% of the population who weren't wearing red braces and doing a bit of insider trading, society was pretty much the same as it was before and after the 80's.
Sorry to disappoint.
I agree; it would not need to be politicians doing any covering up. Peter Hayman was a very senior civil servant. Civil servants are capable of losing documents and "suitably" advising ministers.
Going by the length of time involved it is more than likely a civil service cover up.
Thanks Dan. I heard about Savile and Heath around 15-18 years ago, when living in the Netherlands.
There was a forum member in GD a few years back who started threads with linked photocopied documentation on child abuse in homes, unfortunately, the mods deleted them as soon as they were started. It was these threads that reminded me of the earlier stories about Savile, Heath, and a couple of others, but I can't remember their names. I had the impression that the OP of those threads was a victim.
I think quite a few of them were an open secret around London - pub talk, etc.
I just dont see anything would take place in the forces without the COs being aware, and condoning it.
It was a very senior Civil Servant Tom Watson was referring to and payments made during both Labour and Tory governments of the past to the PIE by said Civil Servant
I find it interesting that Norman Tebbit has crawled into the light, to make it known that while he does not agree with the obvious cover-up, he nevertheless understands that it was done to protect the almighty establishment of which he was a major player. Saying something along the lines of 'if things happened here and there, it was considered more important to protect the system.'
This attitude shows what the rest of us were - and I believe still are - up against. A system that actively places 'important' people above the law, no matter what they do or who they do it too. It isn't hard to understand how a police force and judiciary that turned literally hundreds of blind eyes to the evil doings of Saville, Harris and fat old Cyril might also fail to deliver justice to those with real power.
Most insulting of all, to the victims and to people simply asking for the truth, is the current government stance that there will be no public enquiry. This is off the scale corruption and depravity, which shows the utter contempt with which politicians hold the rest of us. And what can we do about it..... sod all.
I think you are being a little unfair.....investigations into phone hacking and bringing those to justice.....rumours and known of to some degree since 2002 and nothing done until the current administration......Hillsborough nothing done until under Camerons time (not done under previous Labour or tory governments).......and these are off the top of my head....certainly not something that was easy to do....did Labour do them? nope....
all forms of the 'establishment' seem to have the same 'shield' with anything serious that goes with many forms of corruption and not just child abuse......and this goes to policitians also ....whether its to do with Iraq or other injustices things never come to light and when blame finally is laid ....its either after people have forgot about it or those responsible are beyond justice......
Sign the petition by Tom Watson : Establish a national inquiry into allegations of organised child abuse
In some ways Tebbit and Thatcher were not part of "the almighty establishment". Allegedly the establishment were furious with Thatcher for revealing the traitor Anthony Blunt and the massive cover-up that had happened. To quote the wikipedia entry on Blunt,
He was not only being protected, but his freedom protected others.
Our governments look more like the Mafia everyday: above the law, the omerta, helping friends get elected or get positions in high government, rigging contracts, protecting certain businesses from competition, etc.
Lets hope if it is a deceased person that they make sure of their facts before destroying people reputations when they are not here to defend themselves , rumours alone are not good enough reason to go to print in cases such as this only provable facts should be used.
I know what it was like then, as I was alive then.
But it reads like you are saying that if a gay man didn't have access to other gay men ( as it was illegal) he just might go after a child to full fill his sexual needs ( That was also illegal )
Only those who like children in that way would go after a child, even if other gay men were available.
I'm surprised no one else pulled you up on that post.