Mister M Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 I agree. Tin foil under hat stuff. But, it doesn`t take much objective thought about most of this stuff to realise it`s mostly about making trouble for anyone not on the "same side" politically The Janner enquiry had/has lots of verifiable evidence. The same cannot be said of any of the people involved in the so called "Nick" enquiry. In fact there is more and more evidence that he is a fantasist. Except that Geoffrey Dickens was a Conservative and the evidence he presented included prominent Tories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanner Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 Except that Geoffrey Dickens was a Conservative and the evidence he presented included prominent Tories. That is true. There are exceptions. But the point I`m making is that the investigation into Leon Brittan and others linked to him in the so called "nick" inquiry seems, after all this time with no hard evidence, like a smear campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Arthur Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 If there are criminals and evidence of their criminality they should be prosecuted regardless of their political persuasion, but I agree that the Leon Brittan case looks like a smear for political gain, or more accurately, an amateur sleuth (Tom Watson) trying to make a name for himself without having the tools or knowledge to do it. Can't have Simon Danczuk getting all the headlines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanner Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 If there are criminals and evidence of their criminality they should be prosecuted regardless of their political persuasion, but I agree that the Leon Brittan case looks like a smear for political gain, or more accurately, an amateur sleuth (Tom Watson) trying to make a name for himself without having the tools or knowledge to do it. Can't have Simon Danczuk getting all the headlines. That`s a valid point. It doesn`t matter what party one supports. The rule of Law should be upheld by EVIDENCE. Not innuendo`s filtered through talk shows, media whispers, or gossip. Nuff said, for me anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 Interesting snippet from Ann Diamond on the 'Wright stuff' this morning, (18.01.16) Apparently, the men who did the Hatton Garden Bank job, found photographs of a well known politician doing unspeakable things to children, in a bank safety deposit box. They were so disgusted that they left the photographs out in a prominent position where they would be seen by the investigating police. They were surprised when nothing was seen or heard of them again. Obviously the Hatton Garden mob are a very trustworthy group whose evidence you can trust... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hesther Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 And why keep them in a safety deposit box? Blackmail? IF it is true, they wouldn't want them lying around the house would they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 Obviously the Hatton Garden mob are a very trustworthy group whose evidence you can trust... can the same be said of certain mps/police officers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANGELFIRE1 Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 The establishment looks after its own, always has, always will. Angel1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 But this is the problem. Why oh why is there never anything concrete? I know the media will almost certainly try to cover it up, but if they had such damning evidence why not find a way to get it out into the public without putting themselves at risk of getting caught? It does make you wonder if that picture was really there or if they are just trying to make themselves appear like caring wonderful grandfathers rather than thieves. Evidence doesn't become concrete until it is tested in a court of law. The 'victims' are desperate for their cases to come to court so they can prove what they say. The Establishment are equally determined to keep it out of courts for their own reasons. Even when the Police say they had all the evidence they needed to prosecute Janner, it never saw the light of day in court, and was subsequently dropped without being exposed. As for getting it into the public domain, how do you do it when the police, the government, the media, and the Law have all been implicated in cover ups?When evidence regularly goes missing and people die. The only way left is through internet sites like Exaro, which has been done extensively, (and is the main reason much of this has come to light in the first place,) but isn't considered reliable information by many, even though they are often written by respectable, mainstream, investigative journalists. Let's hope the investigation by New Zealander, Justice Lowell Goddard, is able to uncover some truths (including Lord Janner's case,) when she finally reports in about 5 years. Or maybe it will go the same way as the Chilcott enquiry.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arrowhead Posted January 19, 2016 Author Share Posted January 19, 2016 The inquiry being killed off slowly. I suspected as much but at least others are saying it. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/18/vip-paedophile-inquiry-being-killed-off-claims-harvey-proctor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now