Alleged No 10 links to paedophile ring

[Halibut]

Wondered how long it would take you to surface for a feed Halibut.

Knew youd not be long.

I didnt suggest a link.

I asked a question, hence the questionmarks.

And it wasnt a link between Ken Clarke and peadophilia! It was a link between Ken Clarke and legislation regarding joint enterprise, which i suspect he knows will go through despite his opposition of any reform, hence the no confidence comment.

How is that silly to ask peoples opinions on an article that was published.

 

If youre going to start trolling me again at least dont resort to using snippets of quotes highlighted to suit your argument, or completely misquoting me.

If youre going to do that then i request you dont bother interacting with me.

Thanks.

 

Could you repeat that please? Didn't quite catch it.

[annbaker]

Yellowperil of course we get fed all sorts of rubbish via the media - What else are papers like the Sun and the Mail for after all?

 

However until there is someone appointed to head the enquiry, it does what it has to do no-one can tell how 'honest' it will actually be until the reports comes out. I suspect there will be police involved and most likely CPS will take some to court but who that will be is not for anyone to speculate.

 

And as for Cabinet re-shuffle - it was known well before today that it was happening this week. Well before the press release that has led to this enquiry so I don't think the events are related at all.

[yellowperil]

Yellowperil of course we get fed all sorts of rubbish via the media - What else are papers like the Sun and the Mail for after all?

 

However until there is someone appointed to head the enquiry, it does what it has to do no-one can tell how 'honest' it will actually be until the reports comes out. I suspect there will be police involved and most likely CPS will take some to court but who that will be is not for anyone to speculate.

 

And as for Cabinet re-shuffle - it was known well before today that it was happening this week. Well before the press release that has led to this enquiry so I don't think the events are related at all.

 

Its not just papers like the sun and the mail that do it!

I admire your faith in the system Ann but im afraid i dont share it.

Its right that we wont know how honest it will be until the outcome but please realise that the enquiry could take 5-10 years and some of the accused will be old already seeing as some of these accusations go back 50 years plus.

I dont think we can take the risk that it "might" be honest,we owe it to the victims to make sure its done correctly the first time.

As for speculation well im not aware that i have aired any, just a question of whether Kenneth Clarke has stepped down because he may not agree with the reform that may occur regarding joint enterprise, nothing more.

It something he doesnt think should be changed and he has spoken publicly about his views on it.

Do you think police involvement and any findings by them can be relied upon given that a quick websearch will reveal that some of those allegedly involved were high up in the ranks? I know thats based on speculation as you have pointed out but youll see the same names given time and time again on multiple blogs and forums if you look into it, you cant ignore that there may be an element of truth in there.

Thats why i said i thought it should have more than one head so no one person could cover anything up (that is if indeed there is anything to cover up).

 

You say the re-shuffle was known about well before the press release that led to this enquiry, can you clarify whether you mean the enquiry into alleged abuse being covered up or the enquiry into any reforms to be made to joint enterprise prosecutions?

In either case they both came well before the reshuffle im afraid.

The accusations of child abuse are a revisiting of an enquiry that seems to have been buried a long time ago according to reports and will have been talked about in the corridors of power long before the press release or official reveal.

As for joint enterprise being looked at by the parliamentary select comittee, well that will have been discussed already too before we knew, especially as its a continuation of being looked at previously in 2012 !.

 

Both predate the cabinet reshuffle announcement considerably im afraid.

Plenty of time for descisions to be made regarding the "re-shuffle".

 

All i ask you to do is question what you are told and have an open mind.

A previous poster has commented on the "unbelievable" nature of the accusations that have been made, its well known that sometimes thats used as a defence against any accusation,the more outlandish something sounds then the better for the accused.

Just because something sounds improbable it doesnt mean its impossible.

 

From what ive read a few of the accused (no names here!) were allegedly part of the paedophile infomation exchange or PIE as it was known.

An orginisation that was very open at the time regarding what they were about.

One of the propositions put forward by them was to lower the age of sexual consent to four! Yes thats four years old!

Now that sounds unbelievable doesnt it? Unfortunately its true im sorry to say.

 

Please feel free to look into things as i do, dont get me wrong, i dont believe everything i read or hear but when its backed up with articles and statements then it does tend to make you think about things a little differently.

Edited July 16, 2014 by yellowperil

[Anna B]

Apparently, in the 1980's Barbara Castle, (firebrand Labour MP, and later elevated to the House of Lords,) drew up a 30 page dossier naming 16 MPs, along with senior policemen, clergy and headmasters, which she then handed to Don Hale, the Editor of her local newpaper.

 

Mr Hale claims he was then visited by Cyril Smith who tried to convince him it was all nonsense and not to publish, and when he refused he got a visit from the 'Heavy mob' (his words,) of Special Branch officers, several plainclothes policemen and three uniformed officers with warrent cards, D notices and a document signed by a senior judge, who then raided his office, taking the dossier, all his notebooks and everything else he had about the case. They threatened him with 8 - 10 years imprisonment if he resisted, they said he was a threat to National Security, and warned him not to tell anyone anything about it or he would be charged and arrested for breaking the Official secrets act. This all happened before 8am so no one else was in the office and was all over within half an hour.

 

Barbara Castle, who died in 2002, later said she wasn't surprised as a lot of very unsavoury things were being covered up and apologised to him for any trouble she'd caused, but she was horrified at the speed with which PIE was able to infiltrate the system, it being funded by the government, and was totally opposed to their plan to bring the age of consent down to four. She was also shocked at the prominent and powerful names it had garnered in support.

 

I wonder how many boys Cyril Smith and his friends went on to abuse because of the actions of Special Branch that day.

[annbaker]

Its not just papers like the sun and the mail that do it!

I admire your faith in the system Ann but im afraid i dont share it.

Its right that we wont know how honest it will be until the outcome but please realise that the enquiry could take 5-10 years and some of the accused will be old already seeing as some of these accusations go back 50 years plus.

I dont think we can take the risk that it "might" be honest,we owe it to the victims to make sure its done correctly the first time.

As for speculation well im not aware that i have aired any, just a question of whether Kenneth Clarke has stepped down because he may not agree with the reform that may occur regarding joint enterprise, nothing more.

It something he doesnt think should be changed and he has spoken publicly about his views on it.

Do you think police involvement and any findings by them can be relied upon given that a quick websearch will reveal that some of those allegedly involved were high up in the ranks? I know thats based on speculation as you have pointed out but youll see the same names given time and time again on multiple blogs and forums if you look into it, you cant ignore that there may be an element of truth in there.

Thats why i said i thought it should have more than one head so no one person could cover anything up (that is if indeed there is anything to cover up).

 

You say the re-shuffle was known about well before the press release that led to this enquiry, can you clarify whether you mean the enquiry into alleged abuse being covered up or the enquiry into any reforms to be made to joint enterprise prosecutions?

In either case they both came well before the reshuffle im afraid.

The accusations of child abuse are a revisiting of an enquiry that seems to have been buried a long time ago according to reports and will have been talked about in the corridors of power long before the press release or official reveal.

As for joint enterprise being looked at by the parliamentary select comittee, well that will have been discussed already too before we knew, especially as its a continuation of being looked at previously in 2012 !.

 

Both predate the cabinet reshuffle announcement considerably im afraid.

Plenty of time for descisions to be made regarding the "re-shuffle".

 

All i ask you to do is question what you are told and have an open mind.

A previous poster has commented on the "unbelievable" nature of the accusations that have been made, its well known that sometimes thats used as a defence against any accusation,the more outlandish something sounds then the better for the accused.

Just because something sounds improbable it doesnt mean its impossible.

 

From what ive read a few of the accused (no names here!) were allegedly part of the paedophile infomation exchange or PIE as it was known.

An orginisation that was very open at the time regarding what they were about.

One of the propositions put forward by them was to lower the age of sexual consent to four! Yes thats four years old!

Now that sounds unbelievable doesnt it? Unfortunately its true im sorry to say.

 

Please feel free to look into things as i do, dont get me wrong, i dont believe everything i read or hear but when its backed up with articles and statements then it does tend to make you think about things a little differently.

 

Who says I have faith in the 'system' ? I actually didn't say that. What I said was no-one should be pre-judging and speculating on the outcome especially before the enquiry has even started. There are bad apples in every walk of life - not just what most people would term establishment but then again there are equally decent people yet you would appear to tar them all with the same brush as part of some proposed cover up. That's not to say there isn't going to be one.

 

I am assuming you read todays news ? Doctors and teachers I would say are part of the establishment yet they haven't been spared and rightly so. A good outcome for public confidence I would say.

 

Nothing is going to get influenced from posting on here alone I'd suggest but every has the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty by law - even if they are bottom feeding scum.

[yellowperil]

There are that many cover ups that have preceeded this enquiry and that much covered up and evidence destroyed that it will never be "honest".

 

You should search the web as i suggested and then see what you think.

[annbaker]

I already have and maintain my stance that we should nor pre-judge that that has not actually happened and reported yet. There is no proof - just suggestion and sorry justice isn't carried out by gossip and inuendo. Cases such as those reported in the news today do demonstrate that there was no cover up. Therefore I strongly believe it is not for anyone other than the law to be judge and jury.

 

Let's face it the amount of commentary this has had plus the news today - it's hardly something people are ignorant of. We have a Govt who just happened to be those in office when this happened. They want to be re-elected next year so they are not that stupid especially after Baroness Sloss's recent debacle to try and pull a fast one. Whether they get back in or not (and I personally would rather not) it's in no-one's interests for them not to do this properly. Will they? well that remains to be seen.

 

This forum isn't going to influence the outcome one way or the other nor should it sit as judge and jury as I have already said.

[yellowperil]

By the news today im assuming you mean all the ex-police, teachers and doctors that have been questioned or are under investigation?

 

Your faith in the system seems upheld by this happening to people who are regarded " the establishment.

 

Do you not find it strange that now members of " the establishment" are being investigated they are refusing to name any of them!

When it was just lowly dj's,actors and entertainers we were allowed to know who, supposedly so more potential victims could come forward!

Why not now?

Do you still think this will be "open and honest"?

Im questioning whether it ever can be personally.

[ronthenekred]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28326128

 

660

suspected paedophiles arrested

 

only 39 suspects were registered sex offenders

 

"Joined-up approach

The investigation involved 45 police forces across England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland and an unprecedented level of co-operation, the NCA said."

 

So, an unprecedented level of cooperation by 45 police forces nationwide (establishment). Will this be considered to be a cover up? Apparently this is the tip of the iceberg.

[yellowperil]

Do you think its ok for the police to investigate the police when it comes to it?

Is it ok for the government to investigate the government?

Its been shown not to work in the past.

 

Why are the rules different for this batch that have been arrested than the celebrities with regards to being named?