VIP paedophile ring

[Eric Arthur]

You are only proving that Watson didn't need to mention it publicly using parliamentary privilege to avoid being sued while getting his name in the papers.

[harvey19]

That's news to me. And again, off the point.

 

Not all conspiracy theories are equal in validity. Some have been proved to be true, some are miles off the mark and hardly worth considering. There's loads of links to reports by police officers and other perfectly respectable people that gives rise to perfectly sane conjecture This is from the opening remarks in Wiki and can be verified and sourced from the footnotes, in particular footnote 8, sourced from the BBC.

 

"Assistant Chief Constable, Steve Heywood, said there was overwhelming evidence that young boys had been sexually and physically abused by him. In April 2014 there were 144 complaints against him, some from youngsters as young as 8, but attempts to prosecute him had always been blocked.

 

Public Authorities including Rochdale Council, the Police and Intelligence Services have been implicated in covering up Smith's crimes.

 

In 2015 it emerged that Smith had been arrested in the early 1980s in relation to the offences but a high level cover up reportedly lead to him being released within hours, the evidence destroyed, and the investigating officers prevented from discussing the matter under the Official Secrets Act."

 

There is more in the footnotes from the BBC and much else from verified sources. l

 

Have you heard the phrase "Not in the Public Interest" when decisions are made regarding prosecutions ?

[Anna B]

You are only proving that Watson didn't need to mention it publicly using parliamentary privilege to avoid being sued while getting his name in the papers.

 

Really. Is that all you care about? Or do you care about children being harmed?

 

Watson did the right thing in bringing this to public attention and keeping it in the limelight until something is done about it. The authorities just want it to go on the back burner until we all forget about it.

[drummonds]

That's news to me. And again, off the point.

 

 

if you and all your mates get talking about it down the pub and ring tom watson it could become fact.

[Hesther]

Have you heard the phrase "Not in the Public Interest" when decisions are made regarding prosecutions ?

 

Yes and those words are synonymous with"absolutely in the public interest" and "not in the establishment's interest". Or do you think the repeated, organised abuse of children is not in the public interest?

[harvey19]

Yes and those words are synonymous with"absolutely in the public interest" and "not in the establishment's interest". Or do you think the repeated, organised abuse of children is not in the public interest?

 

I was responding to alleged offences committed by Cyril Smith highlighted by Anna B. and providing an aspect of the considerations taken when deciding to bring prosecutions.

Not my opinions but an attempt to shed light on why the man was possibly not prosecuted.

How do you think prosecution was avoided ?

[Eric Arthur]

Really. Is that all you care about? Or do you care about children being harmed?

 

Watson did the right thing in bringing this to public attention and keeping it in the limelight until something is done about it. The authorities just want it to go on the back burner until we all forget about it.

 

Rubbish. Where's Watson in Rotherham? Nowhere to be seen is where. It's all just politics to him, not kiddies.

[Anna B]

Rubbish. Where's Watson in Rotherham? Nowhere to be seen is where. It's all just politics to him, not kiddies.

 

Again, nothing whatsoever to do with this particular issue and you know it. What exactly is it that you find 'rubbish'?

 

Cyril Smith is just an example of how the Establishment close ranks to protect themselves from the laws of the land, leaving them free to commit any foul deed, and task those that should be protecting us, the public, with protecting them, so they can get away with it.

 

You, for some reason, obviously want this state of affairs to continue. Why I can't imagine.

[Eric Arthur]

You're avoiding the key questions that lots of people have put to you. Why did Watson pick political targets and why did he do it in public?

[Anna B]

You're avoiding the key questions that lots of people have put to you. Why did Watson pick political targets and why did he do it in public?

 

I thought a lot of this would be obvious even to you, it's certainly in the public domain.

 

First of all Tom Watson didn't pick political targets, they were named to him . They accused political targets not him. However he believed them and did what was necessary.

 

He brought it up in Parliament because it had to be made public. He needed to protect himself using Parliamentary Privilege otherwise he could have been sued. It had to be made public because other victims who had suffered similarly, would be encouraged to come forward, knowing that, this time, they would be taken seriously.

 

This has been the method deemed necessary ever since the Jimmy Saville case highlighted the fact that famous, well-connected people have a certain level of deference and protection, that ordinary people don't have, and that must be overcome. Jimmy Saville was able to hide in plain site for years because no one would believe his accusers, in fact the accusers were often threatened by the police if they didn't go away. So in certain cases it was made public that certain high profile people had been accused, and they were able to defend themselves in court.

 

Politicians and Establishment figures are on a higher level even than that. As they are also the ones who make the law, and are generally considered to be above suspicion. They also command the services of the police force and Secret Service, and can order those services to hide evidence etc via the official secrets act. Declaring certain names in Parliament meant they could no longer do that so easily.

 

According to Chief Constable Simon Bailey, Head of Operation Hydrant, (tasked with co-ordinating the different historic VIP inquiries, and reporting to Justice Lowell Goddard,) he says that there are 76 politicians accused, plus 43 from the music industry and 135 from Film, Radio and TV, (although there are also over 216 dead.) The size of the operation has stunned police who estimate there may be tens of thousands of victims. People are still afraid to come forward for fear of not being believed, and repercussions when they are.

 

So it's a big problem. Extremely complex, and by its very nature often a crime committed in privacy and without witnesses, so difficult to prove. But in this case we may be dealing with a paedophile network so victims might be able to corroborate evidence. Dealing with these very important and powerful people adds layer upon layer of difficulty. But personally I'd say there's no smoke without fire, and enough evidence to know that something very dark is going on. It needs very careful and clever handling to get at the truth. The upper echelons of society are very close, interconnected and influential, with friends in extremely high places, so will be very hard to pin down. However there has to be a solution or it will continue, and the victims deserve justice.

Edited October 16, 2015 by Anna B