ARTICLE: How Chilcot will whitewash the Iraq War

Hat tip: http://www.thecanary.co/2016/07/05/heres-chilcot-will-whitewash-iraq-war/

The long awaited report from the UK government’s inquiry into the decision to go to war in Iraq is going to be released on Wednesday.

But make no mistake: the process was designed from the start to let decision-makers off the hook for their roles in an illegal invasion that has destroyed a country and paved the way for the rise of the Islamic State.

A hint at the report’s findings were revealed by Lord Butler, who led a previous 2004 Iraq inquiry, which concluded that while Tony Blair had been “wrong” about Saddam Hussein’s WMD capacity, he did not deliberately deceive anyone:

“You can see the mistakes that deceived the intelligence community into thinking Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. I have talked to the agencies and I hope that they have learnt the lessons from that,” said Butler.

Conflict of interest

Sir John Chilcot, who chairs the current inquiry, was a member of Butler’s team for that previous inquiry. The secretary of the current inquiry is Margaret Aldred, who was previously deputy head of Defence and Overseas Secretariat (subsequently Foreign and Defence Policy Secretariat).

According to the Cabinet Office Annual Report and Resource Accounts for 2004/5, when Aldred began her role:

The Defence and Overseas Secretariat (DOS) has been at the forefront in coordinating the Government’s policy in Iraq following the end of the conflict with regular meetings of ministers, senior officials and video conferencing with officials in Iraq. Over the past year, DOS has coordinated policy development on Iraq.

Yet Aldred herself, despite being someone involved in the government’s Iraq policy, has not been called as a witness to the inquiry – although her successor in the same post was.

Chilcot and his aides refused to disclose information on Aldred’s own role in government policy on Iraq. As noted by Chris Ames, editor of the Iraq Inquiry Digest which has tracked the inquiry since it began:

The Inquiry’s willingness and ability to reveal the extent of her role is clearly compromised by the fact that she is its secretary. In concealing the conflict of interest, the Inquiry is concealing the truth of what happened.

Ames noted that the inquiry would have “little credibility” if it refused to come clean about its own connections to the government’s Iraq policy.

The first casualty

This should not be a surprise given that the first inquiry by Lord Butler was already a bankrupt whitewash of the highest order.

Butler’s report (6.4 para, p. 499), for instance, claimed it was “well-founded” that Saddam Hussein was trying to illegally obtain uranium for his so-called advanced nuclear weapons programme, from Niger and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The allegation was based on forged documents, which Butler claimed the British had no idea were forged.

Butler’s pathetic, fantastical version of events is so astonishingly absurd that it is not taken seriously by any journalist or historian who actually understands the Niger uranium intelligence scandal. Yet somehow in legitimate public discourse, it is still considered credible – and Butler receives ample air time with a straight face, without a single question about his role in obscuring the facts.

Don’t worry, you’re not going mad. This is the exceptional state of British journalism today.

In 2012, I and a team at the Institute for Policy Research & Development conducted our own peer-reviewed independent investigation into the public record data concerning Saddam’s alleged efforts to get uranium from Niger.

In our report, Executive Decisions: How British Intelligence was Hijacked for the Iraq War – which was submitted to Chilcot’s inquiry – we pointed out that Britain’s White Paper on Iraqi WMD made the uranium claims, despite the British having being warned by George Tenet, head of the CIA, not to include them.

The claim traces back to ‘intelligence’ that was examined and discredited way back in 1999. Falsified documents were discovered in the form of written correspondence between officials in Niger and Iraqi agents. The documents had been submitted to the CIA by British officials.

But the documents were quickly dismissed at the time and found to be crude forgeries containing laughable errors: names and titles not matching individuals in office at the time; the Niger government’s letterhead being obviously cut and pasted, and the signature of a government official who had retired long ago having been forged.

Senior officials from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) described the documents as “so bad” that he could “not imagine they came from a serious intelligence agency.” The IAEA confirmed the forgery within hours.

But years later, this rank bullshit still made it into Britain’s official ‘intelligence’ assessment of the state of Iraq’s WMDs. It was then conveniently quoted by President Bush in his State of the Union address to Congress in 2003, helping to rile up public support for war.

Sadly, you won’t find the self-righteous pundit class lambasting the venal culture of self-serving power that allowed the systematic concoction of such “conspiracy theories” against official enemies to flourish in the heart of Whitehall.

Lies? What lies?

And here lays bare the methodology of vindication to be deployed by Chilcot and his friends: admit real failures, loudly condemn officials for failing, but contextualise the decisions leading up to the failures as entirely unintentional, then ultimately blame the failure on faulty systems across government.

The most that Blair and his warmongering friends can be accused of, then, is bad management.

But here’s the reality: the regurgitation of discredited forged nonsense as ‘British intelligence’ – which had already been rejected by the CIA and IAEA – speaks not to ‘faulty intelligence’ but to the deliberate ‘politicisation of intelligence.’

But false intelligence did not make its way inexplicably into the intelligence system because our intelligence agencies are underfunded and badly organised, and really, really believed what they were saying, poor darlings.

It made its way in, because political leaders made pre-conceived, ideological decisions about going to war.

Those decisions were untenable if the intelligence wasn’t there to back their decisions. So they exerted massive pressure on the intelligence community to find or make that intelligence.

Cherry picking

In leaked UK government memoranda between March and July 2002, references are repeatedly made to “poor” intelligence about WMD, and the “thin” case for war that it presented.

Indeed, then head of MI6, Richard Dearlove, confirms that “the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy” of regime change, “justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD.”

Senior intelligence officers in MI6 and the CIA also confirmed that intelligence was being deliberately manufactured to support “the opposite conclusion from the one they have drawn.”

One MI6 officer said:

You cannot just cherry-pick evidence that suits your case and ignore the rest. It is a cardinal rule of intelligence. Yet that is what the PM is doing.

And a CIA official concurred:

We’ve gone from a zero position, where presidents refused to cite detailed intel as a source, to the point now where partisan material is being officially attributed to these agencies.

Chilcot’s abject failure to get to the bottom of this reveals the extent to which our democratic checks and balances in foreign policy decision-making are fundamentally broken – and confirms the institutional lack of accountability that allows this broken system to continue unabated.

The Chilcot report will be used to let the people who lied their way into war off the hook. It will also reinforce the idea that they did so with unquestioned benevolence, despite terrible and regrettable failures of management and judgement.

Don’t be surprised to find much of the pundit class – who, by the way, overwhelmingly and shamelessly clamoured for the invasion – chorusing in agreement.

They have blood on their hands too.

(2016) Liberal Democrat Clement Freud -PAEDOPHILE

Sir Clement Freud, the former broadcaster and politician, was exposed on Tuesday night as a paedophile who sexually abused girls as young as 10 for decades.

Freud, who died in 2009, spent years abusing a girl who he brought up as a daughter, and violently raped a teenager while he was an MP.

His widow, Lady Freud, has apologised to his victims, saying she is “shocked, deeply saddened and profoundly sorry” for what her husband of 58 years did to them.

Detectives investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann have been alerted to the fact that Freud had a villa in Praia da Luz, Portugal, the resort where the three-year-old went missing in 2007.

He befriended the McCanns in the weeks after their daughter went missing, entertaining them at his house on two occasions and keeping in contact by phone and email.

The McCanns are said to be “horrified” by the discovery that Freud was a paedophile.

His family, who include the PR executive Matthew Freud, have said that Freud was not in Portugal at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance and that they have not been contacted by police.

Read on:

VIDEO: Liverpool Mayor Joe Anderson Forcefully Confronted on the Streets by Public

ARTICLE: Oppression Finally Arrives in the British Police State

Hat-tip: http://www.westernspring.co.uk/gagging-camerons-counter-extremism-measures/

“Over generations, we in Britain have built something extraordinary: a successful multi-racial, multi-faith democracy. Our country today is more vibrant, buoyant and diverse than ever before in our history.” These are the opening words of our Prime Minister David Cameron’s forward to the document presenting his government’s ‘Counter Extremism Strategy’, and all people grounded in reality will recognise at once how delusional they are. While the population of Britain are indeed more ‘diverse’ than ever before, no-one outside of a funny-farm, and certainly no-one with first-hand experience of life in our inner cities, could possibly describe our society as currently more vibrant, or more buoyant than ever before.

David Cameron then goes on to talk about the ‘British values’ of freedom, inclusivity and democracy that we have, according to him, come to cherish.

One might think that with all the ‘vibrancy’ and ‘buoyancy’ that our increased ‘diversity’ has brought us that we British people would be falling over ourselves to welcome even more ‘diversity’, and that there would be no need for duress on the part of the Government to persuade us that we must accept more. All is not as David Cameron pretends however, because the ‘Counter Extremism Strategy’ aims to prevent the polarisation of our society in which disparate communities and disparate individuals reject the government’s insistence that we must all live happily, cheek-by-jowl with people who are alien to our way of life. In short, the Counter Extremism Strategy is intended to intimidate communities into accepting the imposition of multiculturalism and multiracialism that few people actually want.

If we truly had built something ‘extraordinary’, a ‘successful multi-racial, multi-faith democracy’, with greater ‘vibrancy’ and ‘buoyancy’ than ‘ever before in our history’, there would be no need for the government’s Counter Extremism Strategy. This whole issue therefore, and the government’s position is predicated on a lie.

David Cameron goes on, “One of the greatest threats we face is the scourge of extremism from those who want to divide us. We see it in sickening displays of neo-Nazism, Islamophobia, antisemitism and, of course, Islamist extremism”, oh, of course!

David Cameron says, “… of course, Islamist extremism”, in order to emphasise the only form of extremism that the indigenous British are actually concerned about. His focus here on ‘Islamist extremism’ is intended to distract us from the real intention of the legislation being proposed and to provide the Draconian measures planned with an element of ‘sugar coating’, making them easier to swallow.

Cameron states that government has in the past been “too tolerant of intolerance”, and with regard to Islamic extremism he is right, however with three Race Relations Acts, in 1965, 1968 and then 1976, and finally the Equalities Act of 2010, each act ratcheting-up the restrictions on our freedom of action and freedom of speech regarding race, government have already taken very oppressive steps where so-called right-wing extremism is concerned.

At any time over the last sixty or seventy years government could have almost completely defused the race issue in this country, by simply halting mass immigration from the Third World and by allowing people the freedom to discriminate as we see fit. This would have significantly limited the impact of non-White immigration on our society and by not forcing disparate peoples into contact with each other, public resentment would have greatly diminished. This would have been the response of a moderate government, but sadly, successive governments have not been moderate, they have sought to flood our country with non-White immigrants and to force us to interact with them at every step and turn of our lives. We have been governed by a succession of extremist governments, with the extreme aim of forcibly creating a multiracial society and inducing our people miscegenate.

The Race Relations Act 1965 represents the measures that the Labour government of Harold Wilson thought appropriate in 1965. The measures contained were considered the limit of what could be achieved in terms of coercing the British people forcing us to submit to the presence of a significant non-White population in this country. By 1968 however, the Wilson government thought they could get away with more and they introduced more extreme measures, and by 1976 the Labour government of James Callaghan introduced even more extreme measures.

Finally, came the Equalities Act 2010, which creates an onus on every government department and every public body to take active steps to promote ‘diversity’ and suppress any expression of opposition. The race relations regime established by the Equalities act creates a rigid legislative framework making discrimination virtually impossible and making public dissent from the ostensible goals of tolerance and diversity so costly as to be untenable.

The measures incorporated within the Equalities Act however, were thankfully only designed to punish those who break the law, and this is where the governments proposed counter extremism measures go right off the ‘Richter scale’ of law enforcement measures as far as civilised Western nations are concerned. The new measures include measures to ‘disrupt’ the lives of people who have not broken the law, but who are judged by the authorities to hold and disseminate views with which the government disagrees.

“We will disrupt extremists, aggressively …” says David Cameron, “We will disrupt all those who seek to spread hate and we will prosecute all those who break the law”, adds the Home Secretary Theresa May. Let us be clear, when a government imposes measures that disrupt the lives of its citizens simply because those citizens hold beliefs that are contrary to those of the government, and in circumstances where the citizens concerned have neither employed violence nor broken the law, this is not ‘law enforcement’, it is not ‘protecting the people’, it is not ‘good government’, it is out-and-out oppression!

Illustrating the hypocrisy of these new measures, the government document detailing the proposed counter extremism strategy begins Chapter One with the words: “Life in our country is based on fundamental values that have evolved over centuries, values that are supported and shared by the overwhelming majority of the population and are underpinned by our most important local and national institutions. These values include the rule of law, democracy, individual liberty, and the mutual respect, tolerance and understanding of different faiths and beliefs”.

It does not seem to have occurred to David Cameron or Theresa May that ‘the rule of law’, means that government does not act outside of the law by persecuting with disruption orders, those who have been law abiding. It does not occur to them that a central tenet of ‘democracy’ is the right of freedom of expression, a freedom that successive rafts of so-called hate-speech legislation has already substantially curtailed, or that ‘individual liberty’ confers upon people, freedom of belief, and freedom of conscience. That is, the freedom to hold beliefs not shared by the government and in some instances directly opposed to those of the government, providing the people holding those beliefs act within the law.

In Chapter Two of the government document, it states under the heading ‘Disrupting Extremists, “We will create new targeted powers, flexible enough to cover the full range of extremist behaviour, including where extremists sow division in our communities and seek to undermine the rule of law”. Furthermore, in Chapter Five, dealing specifically with ‘Disrupting Extremists’, it continues, “there remain extremists in our society who cause an immense amount of harm, while being careful to stay just the right side of the law. In addition to strengthening our use of existing powers against such extremists, we will introduce new, carefully targeted powers to challenge the most active and persistent individuals and groups”.

Bear in mind here, the government are not talking about terrorist groups being targeted for disruption, nor are they talking about criminal organisations that break the law, they are talking about ‘disrupting’, that is, persecuting people for simply holding and disseminating dissident beliefs. These are the sort of tactics which a generation ago, and perhaps even a decade ago would only be associated with totalitarian regimes, or autocratic governments in Africa or Asia.

The government document continues: “The police have a range of powers to deal with extremists. However these powers are neither comprehensive nor are they always flexible enough to respond to the risk. For example it is not currently possible to ban groups which stir up racial hatred, or to stop the activities of extremists who deliberately set out to sow divisions between communities and encourage young people to reject the fundamental values and institutions on which our society is based.

“We will therefore introduce new powers to: ban extremist organisations that promote hatred and draw people into extremism; restrict the harmful activities of the most dangerous extremist individuals; and restrict access to premises which are repeatedly used to support extremism.”

When we realise how low the threshold is becoming in terms of the authorities deciding what is considered to be racial hatred, the implications of the above two paragraphs become frighteningly clear. The ‘working definition of anti-Semitism’, which is currently being promoted in government circles by Jewish groups, asserts that, “Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations”, amounts to anti-Semitism, and as we all know, in the minds of Judeophiles, anti-Semitism is the most heinous form of racism. Therefore, we can expect to see certain nationalist organisations banned under the government’s new measures.

The measures that have already been vested in the Home Secretary under the Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011, include:

House arrest;
Travel restrictions and/or denial of passport;
Exclusion from certain geographical areas;
Denial of banking or other financial services;
Banning from buying or selling property;
Banning the use of computers or telephones;
Banning association with certain other individuals;
Proscribing certain kinds of work or study; or
Electronic tagging and/or curfews.

Refusal to comply with such a disruption measure would of course be an arrestable criminal offence.

Most importantly, we must make as many people as possible aware of these new measures and the way in which they deviate into naked oppression in a way that the law in the UK has not done for hundreds of years or more. These measures will undermine democracy in the name of protecting democracy; they will undermine the rule of law while professing to do the opposite and they will similarly undermine freedom of belief and freedom of conscience, and we must make our people beyond the nationalist community aware of this. We must make them understand that if government find they can behave in such a cavalier fashion without any adverse repercussions, this kind of crude and lazy law enforcement will increase, sweeping aside the civil rights of everyone and sooner or later we will all find ourselves living in a police state.

(2016) Conservatives: David Cameron’s former aide Patrick Rock guilty of making child sex abuse images

A former aide to Prime Minister David Cameron has been found guilty of five counts of making indecent photographs of children.

Patrick Rock faced 20 charges of making an indecent photograph of a child, including downloading pictures of girls as young as 10 in sexual poses.

The 65-year-old, of Fulham, London, had claimed the 20 images downloaded on to his iPad over three days in August 2013 were not indecent.

The jury at Southwark Crown Court took more than eight hours to convict Rock of five counts. He was acquitted of three similar charges.

Jurors have been unable to agree on 12 other counts and were discharged, meaning the charges will lie on file.

The court heard the youngest of the girls in the pictures was aged 10 years and four months when he downloaded the image, meaning she was even younger when it was taken.

None of the girls were naked in the pictures, but prosecutors claimed they were in “sexualised” poses in revealing clothing, including swimwear and bras.

Rock is due to be sentenced at a later date.

Read on:  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/david-cameron-former-aide-patrick-rock-guilty-of-making-child-sex-abuse-images-a7059966.html

Referendum Fraud: EU Citizens Given Polling Cards

Multiple reports are emerging that EU citizens have been sent polling cards despite not having a vote in the referendum. Jakub Pawlowski, a Polish citizen living in Kingston, Surrey, tells Guido:

“I have been living in UK since 2006 but never applied for British citizenship. I recently bought a house and in December 2015, right after completion, filled the form to get registered on electoral roll. I have selected there that I’m a Polish citizen. I could therefore vote in London mayoral elections this month, however recently I got a polling card for the upcoming referendum on EU membership.”

Non-British EU citizens do not have a vote in the referendum…

Kingston council told Jakub that he was erroneously in their database as a British citizen. But this appears to be a widespread problem:

Another stunning success for the Electoral Commission…

UPDATE: Kingston council say:

“When applying to be included on the Register of Electors the elector in question indicated his nationality as British and, thus, was issued with a polling card for the Referendum. Instances such as this are taken extremely seriously and we are working closely with, and under the guidance of, the Electoral Commission.”

Read on:  http://order-order.com/2016/05/31/eu-citizens-sent-referendum-polling-cards/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+guidofawkes+%28Guy+Fawkes%27+blog+of+parliamentary+plots%2C+rumours+and+conspiracy%29

14/6/15: ARTICLE: U.K. Squanders £5.2 million of YOUR Money on Foreign Celebrity Jolly

• Former foreign secretary spent four days hosting London summit last year But no summit on the 1,400 children who were raped and sexually abused in Britain.
  
• Food bill came to £299,000 while taxis, hotels and transport cost £576,000 This amount totals £875,000 that could be spent on investigating the 1,400 children who were raped and sexually abused in Britain. 
  
• Foreign Office annual budget to tackle sexual violence in conflict is £11m What about spending £11million on tackling rape and sexual abuse in the U.K.?
  
• American Bar Association in Congo said rape prosecutions had fallen They are falling in the U.K., too, because the government, judiciary, and police are actively covering up the crimes and wasting money elsewhere to deflect attention.
  

ABOVE: 1,400 Child Victims of Muslim Rape Gangs Discovered in Rotherham, UK

This is what YOU are voting for.

William Hague faced criticism as it emerged that a high-profile summit he held with Angelina Jolie about rape in war zones cost more than £5million.The former foreign secretary spent four days hosting the lavish summit in London last summer, which he said would help to eliminate the scourge of sexual violence in conflict.The food bill alone came to more than £299,000 while spending on taxis, hotels and transport for dignitaries came to £576,000, according to figures obtained under Freedom of Information laws.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3123755/William-Hague-s-three-day-global-rape-summit-Angelina-Jolie-London-summer-cost-5-2million-host-rate-sexual-violence-conflict-zones-increasing.html#ixzz3d4vgPO8n

(Tue 9/6/15) Article: Expenses and sex scandal deleted from MPs’ Wikipedia pages by computers inside Parliament

 

The Expenses Scandal 2009: Remember all these crimes committed that we the People would have been imprisoned for? http://eotp.org/expenses-09/

References to ‘chauffeur-driven cars’ and a criminal arrest wiped from online biographies in run-up to election

Expense claims and a Westminster sex scandal were deleted from MPs’ Wikipedia pages by computers inside Parliament before the election, The Telegraph has found.
Details of a police arrest, electoral fraud allegation and the use of “chauffeur-driven cars” were also been wiped by people inside the Commons.
The revelation will raise suspicion MPs or their political parties deliberately hid information from the public online to make candidates appear more electable to voters.

More than a dozen online biographies of sitting MPs were doctored from computers with IP addresses owned by the Houses of Parliament in the run-up to the election.
Requests for comment were made to all the MPs in question via their party press offices, but just a handful replied to say the changes had nothing to do with them.

Anyone can edit Wikipedia, an online encyclopaedia kept up to date by users. However each change is tracked and linked to an IP address – a unique string of numbers that identifies each computer using an internet network.

By looking at the changes made by computers with IP addresses owned by the Houses of Parliament it is possible to see what edits are being made from inside the Commons.

The Telegraph has discovered persistent changes to MPs’ biographies made from Parliament in what appears to be a deliberate attempt to hide embarrassing information from the electorate.

(Mon 8th June, 2015) ARTICLE and VIDEO: MI5 blackmailed politician child sex abusers

Some reports suggest that the British Security Service, MI5, shielded pedophile politicians from prosecution to blackmail them back in the 1970s.

 “There’s now substantial evidence that the Security Service were condoning that, they knew of it and made use of it so as to blackmail the abusers and prevent some of the abusers being brought to book at the time,” Belfast Telegraph quoted a lawyer for one of the child abuse victims as saying.

The revelation was made in Belfast High Court during the hearing of the Kincora Boy’s Home case.

The victims of the abuse at the Kincora boys’ home in Belfast have filed the legal action with the aim to force a full independent probe that would have the authority to compel the secret service to hand over documents and witnesses to give testimonies.

‘Utterly scandalous’

Meanwhile, Amnesty International announced that investigation into child abuse at Kincora Boys’ Home in east Belfast should be investigated by the UK parliament.

Read on and watch the video:  http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/06/03/414199/MI5-BLACKMAIL-PEDOPHILE-SEX-ABUSE

ARTICLE and VIDEO: ‘Britain may call off Westminster child sex abuse inquiry’

Reports say the British Home Secretary has considered disbanding an investigation into allegations of child sex abuse by Westminster lawmakers.

A confidential letter from the Home Secretary, Theresa May has revealed that she was considering disbanding the current panel, and that May outlined three possible plans to give further powers to the historic abuse inquiry, only one of which did not involve its dissolution, RT reported on Monday.

The inquiry has already begun investigations, but is currently without a chairperson after May’s top choices, Fiona Woolf and Baroness Butler-Sloss, both stood down.

This is while survivors of alleged Westminster child sex abuse have called on the government to replace the current inquiry with a more powerful body.

Now Human Rights Activist Lee Jasper says: “The government’s unwillingness can be understood in terms of the vested interests of the rich, the powerful, the judiciary, the policing, the Westminster and the military… some of whom will be determined to ensure that such an inquiry doesn’t go ahead. The government along with MPs are…slow and unwilling to launch a timely and professional investigation into these accusations, because the whole of Westminster will be affected.”

Jasper also pointed out to Press TV’s UK Desk that “the perpetrators should be brought to justice, but in this case what we are witnessing, is a wealthy powerful elite who were involved in the routine sexual abuse of children, particularly young people in children’s homes, and they’ve conspired to make sure that no successful investigations have taken place today, even though these allegations stand from the mid-1970s.”

Meantime, a spokesperson from the Home Office has reportedly claimed that Secretary May was torn between pressure to make progress and “the need to get this right.”

The Home Secretary has been heavily criticized by the Labour Party for her alleged lack of progress.

The inquiry is already investigating three murders in relation to the historic sex abuse scandal, and reports suggest they are looking into five separate pedophile rings which operated at the heart of Westminster and included many “highly influential” figures.

Read on http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/12/22/391390/uk/

ARTICLE and VIDEO: Two more ministers accused in the VIP child abuse scandal: MP wants Secrets Act lifted to let police speak out

 

• Two politicians join 22 others named in allegations of abuse in 1980s
• Form part of powerful ring of Westminster paedophiles, it is claimed
• MP John Mann said he was approached by victim who says he was abused 
• Called for retired detectives to be granted amnesty from Secrets Act 
• Scotland Yard is investigating allegations made by handful of ‘victims’
• The men, all now adults, say they were routinely abused by politicians 

 

Scotland Yard has been handed the names of two more former Government ministers accused of sexually abusing children.

Campaigning MP John Mann said he was approached last week by a victim who claims to have been abused by the politicians – one a peer – in the 1980s and has passed the detailed allegations to detectives.

The latest phase in his search for the truth about a suspected Westminster child sex ring came as he called for retired detectives to be granted an unprecedented amnesty from the Official Secrets Act to help lift the lid on alleged VIP abusers.

Allowing former Special Branch officers who witnessed the alleged events to speak out could be central to bringing prosecutions, said Mr Mann. He has now called on Home Secretary Theresa May to lift Official Secrets Act restrictions.

The new allegations of child abuse emerged after the Bassetlaw MP handed a carefully-researched dossier about five paedophile rings to police with the names of 22 MPs. It includes 13 ex-ministers, at least two of whom are claimed to have gone to ‘abuse parties’ held at Dolphin Square, the luxury riverside estate in Pimlico which has been home to dozens of MPs.

However, Mr Mann said the latest claims, which involve two former politicians who are still alive, are ‘entirely separate’. ‘Someone has contacted me with some very precise allegations – not just the names but the basis of the allegations – and it is going straight to the police,’ he said.

He said the key to unlocking the truth behind the saga lies with retired Special Branch detectives who witnessed events and could be ‘absolutely critical’ in providing information to an investigation.

He said ‘a number’ of officers have contacted him, including one who has read a 50-page dossier of evidence amassed by Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens which is now said to be missing.

He added: ‘It is clear there are a lot of people who could provide a lot of information, potentially vital information, to support ongoing criminal investigations.

‘But they are not doing so because of the Official Secrets Act. They are fearful of not only breaking the law but the potential effect on their pension. This is absolutely crucial if we are to get some of these ex-officers coming forward and to get prosecutions of some of the former MPs.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2889020/Two-former-ministers-accused-sexually-abusing-children-30-years-ago-alleged-Westminster-paedophile-ring.html#ixzz3NQEX4ajh
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

VIDEO: While ‘Government$’ Lead, our Arses Bleed

The Lib-Lab-Con is stealing from you and your family and from families yet to come. Remember this at the ballot box in May 2015 and retaliate by clearing out these parasites.

 

GOVERNMENT: “PARASITE: A creature which obtains food and physical protection from a host which never benefits from its presence.” (Chambers English Dictionary)

 

 

ARTICLE: VIP child abuse whistleblowers were ‘murdered’: MP says men were poised to lift lid on scandal

• MP says two VIP child abuse whistleblowers may have been ‘murdered’
• John Mann passed detectives information about two suspicious deaths
• The men were allegedly poised to lift the lid on Westminster sex abuse
• Breakthrough comes a day after Mr Mann handed dossier to the police
• Document named 22 politicians suspected of involvement in abuse ring 

A campaigning MP sensationally claimed yesterday that two whistleblowers who threatened to expose an alleged VIP paedophile ring may have been murdered.

John Mann has passed detectives information about the suspicious deaths of the men who were allegedly poised to lift the lid on child sex abuse at the heart of the Establishment.

The development comes as the Labour MP told the Daily Mail yesterday that a key witness has come forward providing the address of a Dolphin Square flat which was used for ‘abuse parties’ by a network of high-profile figures including politicians and leading members of the judiciary, military and security services.

The potential breakthrough, which could help detectives identify the alleged perpetrators, comes a day after it emerged that Mr Mann had handed detectives a dossier naming 22 politicians – including six serving MPs and members of the House of Lords – suspected of involvement in a Westminster paedophile ring.

The Bassetlaw MP has since spoken to a victim who has provided a specific location where it is claimed that boys from care homes in Lambeth, South London, were taken to be abused – the apartment in the luxury block of 1,250 flats at Dolphin Square in Pimlico.

Mr Mann alerted police to allegations of child abuse at the prestigious block in 1989 when he was a Lambeth councillor, but nothing was done. The two whistleblowers he claims may have been killed are said to have been ready to expose powerful figures preying on teenage boys from children’s care homes in Lambeth.

The information Mr Mann has given police concerns the suspicious deaths of a Lambeth Council caretaker in 1989 and a social worker in 1993 who allegedly threatened to expose a paedophile ring linked to a future minister in Tony Blair’s government.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2884471/VIP-child-abuse-whistleblowers-murdered-MP-says-men-poised-lift-lid-scandal.html#ixzz3MkIj1NZL

ARTICLE: Fury as May announces she’ll disband child sex abuse inquiry panel – Exaro News

Home Secretary Theresa May is to disband the panel for the overarching inquiry into child sex abuse, according to Exaro News.She wrote to each member of the panel at the end of last week to say that she is considering turning it into a statutory inquiry, or setting up a fresh statutory inquiry or a Royal Commission.

But her move has prompted fury among panel members. They are urging May to convert the inquiry to statutory status and keep the current panel.

You can read the rest of the article on the Exaro News website.

It seems Theresa May is saying she’ll get rid of the panel’s members in response to concerns about those members, raised by abuse survivors – but panel members have accused her of listening to a vocal minority set against the inquiry instead of the majority of those who have survived abuse.

Who could this minority be?

Well, in a leaked letter to Theresa May, panel member Sharon Evans states: “I was… informed by three men who did not know each other and all who described themselves as having no political axe to grind, that a senior politician has been having sex with young boys and his marriage is a sham.”

Hmm.

Source: http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2014/12/21/fury-as-may-announces-shell-disband-child-sex-abuse-inquiry-panel-exaro-news/

ARTICLE: Westminster paedophile ring: David Cameron is ‘dismissive’ of sex abuse allegations, MP Simon Danczuk claims

This site is obviously no friend of politicians. However, we are fair-minded and will recognise and congratulate sterling work undertaken by any politician of whatever party. To that end we applaud the work of Simon Danczuk MP and Tom Watson MP for their efforts in exposing the Westminster and Establishment paedophile ring. We recognise that they are are risking a certain amount of opprobrium and defensive attacks by those who are guilty.

An MP heading the campaign to uncover sexual abuse allegations involving politicians has accused David Cameron of being “dismissive” of the issue.

Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk, who helped to expose his predecessor Sir Cyril Smith as a child abuser, said he believes there is “schism” in the Cabinet regarding sexual abuse allegations.

Speaking to Sky News, he accused the Prime Minister of being “dismissive” and “[wanting] to move on from [the allegations]”.

He went on to praise Home Secretary Theresa May for recognising that “we’re talking at the tip of the iceberg” and said she appears to be “very serious about wanting to pursue this”.

There was “no doubt” that “very high profile people” who assisted each other in the abuse of children would be unmasked, he warned.

Read more: Child abuse inquiry: Met Police investigate alleged murders of three young boys

Mr Danczuk’s damning assessment of Mr Cameron’s attitude comes after the Prime Minister said earlier in the year that there will be “no stone unturned” during the inquiry into allegations of historic sex abuse in Westminster and other institutions.

Since then, Scotland Yard has launched a further investigation, known as Operation Midland, into allegations that young boys were killed by members of the establishment after being sexually abused.

Today, police said a “credible” witness has come forward to detail his abuse at the hands of a Conservative politician.

The man – known only as Nick –has claimed that a Conservative MP murdered a boy during a sex attack, and a second boy was killed by a ring of abusers active in the late 1970s and 80s.

He claims that a third boy was deliberately run down in a car, which he said was a direct warning to him to keep quiet, according to an account given to investigative journalism website Exaro.

MANY VIDEOS: Victim Shows Sky News Where MPs Abused Him

Watch the videos here: http://news.sky.com/story/1394123/victim-shows-sky-where-mps-abused-him

The man says he was raped as a young boy and that “MPs” and “Hooray Henrys” plied him with alcohol and molested him.

17:39, UK, Thursday 18 December 2014

By Tom Parmenter, Sky News Correspondent.

A survivor of VIP sex abuse parties in the 1980s has revealed to Sky News the area of London where he says “part of him died”.

‘Michael’ was abused growing up in care in North Wales but he and other children were also taken on a minibus for weekend trips to Pimlico in central London in the early 1980s.

Over two years ago Michael spoke exclusively to Sky News about the abuse and described how it felt like a “privilege” to be taken to London.

His life growing up in a brutal care home system meant that the trips to the capital were seen as exciting and that children used to fight for a seat on the minibus.

He was just 11 or 12 when he was taken there to be raped.

‘Michael’ says it felt like a privilege to go on trips to London

Back on the streets of Pimlico three decades later, Michael said: “I was brought down these streets. Could be any of these streets. But this is where the flat was, this is where we were brought as kids.

“To us they were kind of good days out because we’d be taken into London afterwards and kind of spoilt.

Video: Nov 2012: ‘Michael’ Talks To Sky

“And we were kids from North Wales, we’d never seen London, or Regent’s Park zoo, or Hyde Park or Big Ben and all that stuff.

“And we had to put up with some nonsense that people did at night-time in a flat.”

Michael has described how the children were plied with alcohol, taken into bedrooms and forced into sexual acts with various older men who he described as “Hooray Henrys”.

He said: “It’ll be covered up because MPs were involved, you know.

“Ministers were involved, Cabinet ministers. I know they were. I haven’t exactly followed their careers. They’ve always been in the public eye.”

Three years after he first spoke to Sky News, Michael has seen other survivors come forward with similar allegations.

Video: 5 Dec: New Hope For Abuse Probe

He’s seen the first conviction in the police-led re-examination of the north Wales care home scandal, and he’s seen politicians consistently vowing to uncover the truth.

He is, though, disillusioned: “I just feel that as many people are coming forward, as many drop out, and I’ve got no faith in the Home Office or the Government to protect us, you know, the victims.

“This’ll just be another story and that’s sad you know.

“It should come out, because the people that did this to me, they’re still walking around. Maybe round here. Maybe they live here.”

Michael has been interviewed by police officers investigating claims of sexual abuse in London.

He travelled with officers to Pimlico to identify the property where he says the parties took place but has had to pull out of the police process due to his health problems.

Video: Abuse Survivor Slams Govt Inquiry

He knows other survivors who have since died or in some cases have taken their own lives.

Travelling back to Pimlico was a difficult process but Michael wanted to speak out on camera to remind people that the truth still has not been uncovered and that the abusers still have not been arrested.

Michael, who is receiving some professional support, added: “Part of me died here. Definitely. We shouldn’t have been brought here, and made to do the things we did.

“In a perfect world they’d be caught with fingerprints or CCTV, but it’s going to be my word against theirs, and they’re going to win hands down.

“But they won’t even be arrested – they won’t even be arrested.”

ARTICLE: New blow for May’s sex abuse probe as Diana inquest QC agrees to lead rival investigation because of government’s ‘serious shortcomings’

• New investigation established to look into historic child abuse claims
• It is to run in competition with the Home Secretary’s troubled inquiry
• Theresa May’s inquiry beset by problems since it was first formed
• Michael Mansfield QC has been appointed judge of the rival investigation

Theresa May’s troubled child abuse inquiry suffered a fresh setback last night as it emerged that a rival investigation is to be held by a top human rights lawyer.

Michael Mansfield QC, who represented Mohamed Al Fayed at the inquests into the deaths of Princess Diana and Al Fayed’s son Dodi, has been appointed as the judge of a new ‘people’s tribunal’ on historic abuse claims.

The Home Secretary’s official inquiry has barely started, even though it was launched several months ago.

First, ex-judge Baroness Butler-Sloss and then corporate lawyer Fiona Woolf had to resign from chairing it because of their links to figures alleged to have been involved in a cover-up of VIP paedophile rings.

But just like the Government’s inquiry, the new tribunal – set up by child abuse campaigners – has been beset by problems.

Only weeks after the steering committee was appointed, four members resigned, citing attacks on social media.

+2

Home Secretary Theresa May’s (pictured) troubled child abuse inquiry has now suffered a fresh setback with the formation of a rival investigation

Among them was ex-social worker Liz Davies, a leading child protection expert.

Organisers insist it is not in conflict with the Government’s inquiry but will instead complement it.

However, its website suggests that there will be an element of competition. It says: ‘This tribunal is necessary because the Government initiative has serious shortcomings.’

Questions have also been raised about its funding. Organisers say they hope to raise money from the public, partly by selling wristbands carrying the slogan ‘sweep away the secrecy’.

The tribunal will hold public hearings across Britain at which abuse survivors will tell their stories, and will produce a report within a year that will be submitted to Theresa May’s inquiry as well as other institutions.

As it is entirely unofficial, it has no legal powers requiring witnesses to come forward.

Mrs May will face questions from MPs tomorrow on the lack of progress with the investigation and the struggle to find a suitable chairman.

At least 100 names have been put forward after Mrs Woolf had to step down, following The Mail on Sunday’s revelation that she has close links to former Home Secretary Leon Brittan.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2873053/New-blow-s-sex-abuse-probe-Diana-inquest-QC-agrees-lead-rival-investigation-government-s-shortcomings.html#ixzz3M0fPlMMH

(2014) Tory party donors are handed NHS contracts worth £1.5BILLION under health reforms

                                                                        

ABOVE: £692,592 donor: Paul Ruddock’s firm has profited from NHS contracts

Private health care firms with Tory links have been awarded NHS contracts worth nearly £1.5billion.

Circle Health landed £1.36billion worth of health service work after several ­of its investors gifted about £1.5million to the Conservatives.

And Care UK has contracts worth another £102.6million. Its chairman John Nash was made a peer after boosting Tory coffers by £247,250.

Labour’s Shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham, who ­uncovered the figures, fumed: “Nobody gave David Cameron ­permission to sell the NHS to his friends.

“It’s shocking the same Tory donors who ­bankrolled the development of their NHS reorganisation policy are now ­profiting from the sell-off of NHS services.”

Labour’s research shows Circle Health’s parent company, Circle Holdings PLC, is owned by a series of hedge funds.

Lansdowne Partners, with a 29.2% stake, was founded by Sir Paul Ruddock, who donated £692,592 to the Tories.

David Craigen, who gave the party £59,000, is also involved in Lansdowne.

Invesco Perpetual owns 28.7% of Circle Holdings. It was set up by Sir Martyn Arbib, who donated £466,330.

Read on:  http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fury-tory-party-donors-handed-3123469

Ace in the Pack? A Card Game Featuring Establishment Paedophiles

This is a difficult issue to grapple with. Infantilising the subject of paedophilia by, ahem, playing it down with a card game seems somewhat inappropriate. However, if the gift is given to many households throughout the U.K. then the weighty evidence and information on paedophilia in the British Establishment will be seen by, and in the possession of, many people. (This information needs to be on the streets -not hidden away on the internet.) I think this constant reminder of a taboo subject outweighs any accusation of making fun of such an national outrage that the Establishment is trying to sweep under the carpet.

Jonathon Blakeley over on the Deliberation website raises a very important point: “It [the card game] features all those well known celebrities from, the BBC – Jimmy Savile, Rolf Harris and many politicians too. It’s collection is also interesting for the many omissions of people still living and very powerful.” -Ed.

Source: Cathy Fox:

The more information we have the better chance we have of preventing child abuse.

I am not entering the debate about whether cards should be on sale or not, as that would be a distraction from my intention of providing the information that is on the cards. I do however provide some links about it below.

Apologies for the first few reading right to left. Click on them to enlarge.

Please note that victims of abuse may be triggered by reading this information. The Sanctuary for the Abused [A] has advice on how to prevent triggers.  National Association for People Abused in Childhood [B] has a freephone helpline and has links to local support groups. Other useful sites are One in Four [C] and Havoca [D]. Useful post on triggers [E] from SurvivorsJustice [F] blog.

Links

[1] 2014 Nov 23 Deliberation.info British Nonces Card Games Controversy http://www.deliberation.info/british-nonces-card-game-controversy/

[2] UK and Eire Database for crimes agaisnt children. Paedophile Top Trumps  http://ukpaedos-exposed.com/

[3] 2014 Nov 24 Metro https://metro.co.uk/2014/11/24/british-nonces-tasteless-top-trump-style-game-rating-famous-perverts-and-paedophiles-4960611/

[A] Sanctuary for the Abused http://abusesanctuary.blogspot.co.uk/2006/07/for-survivors-coping-with-triggers-if.html

[B] NAPAC http://www.napac.org.uk/

[C] One in Four http://www.oneinfour.org.uk/

[D] Havoca http://www.havoca.org/HAVOCA_home.htm

[E] SurvivorsJustice Triggers post http://survivorsjustice.com/2014/02/26/triggers-what-are-they-and-how-do-we-work-through-them/

[F] SurvivorsJustice Blog http://survivorsjustice.com/

This is all written in good faith but if there is anything that needs to be corrected please email cathyfox@bigfoot.com.

cathyfox the truth will out, the truth will shout, the truth will set us free

VIDEO: We’re at War!

ARTICLE: Convicted paedophile tells judge he knows the names of alleged Westminster child sex ring

A CONVICTED paedophile dramatically had his sentencing adjourned yesterday after he told a judge he “knows the names” of the alleged Westminster child sex ring.

Serial sex offender Michael McAuliffe, 50, threatened to shout out the names before being bundled back to his cell by prison guards.

Judge Peter Benson, sitting in Bradford Crown Court, West Yorks, had seconds earlier adjourned the case to give police six weeks to investigate the claims.

Judge Benson had earlier passed the defence and prosecution council a letter from McAuliffe’s solicitors before the case was heard and as the paedophile was being led into the dock from cells
His barrister James Bourne-Arton, after reading the letter, told the court: “He has a desire to provide relevant information into investigations into those which concern the 1970s in the Westminster area.

“He has details and information, and more, there are other instances of child abuse and a paedophile ring, which he is willing to provide information on.”

Mr Bourne-Arton admitted McAuliffe’s motivation for helping police is to do a deal and get a more lenient sentence.

The court heard that West Yorkshire Police would need a “scoping interview” for officers to assess the degree of usefulness to their inquiries.

McAuliffe had fled to London from West Yorkshire because he was a closely monitored sex offender in his home town of Haworth following a conviction for possessing child pornography.

But he was brought back to justice after being spotted by an eagle-eyed Bradford police officer who was enjoying a break in the capital.

VIDEO: So Bad it Should be Illegal

ARTICLE: MPs to escape expenses investigations after paperwork destroyed by Parliament

Lets take a look at the rap sheet of the parasites in power: The Expenses Scandal 2009. Had we the public done the same we would have been imprisoned for theft, fraud, and tax evasion. Welcome to the two tier system where the parasites are by any objective measure evidently above the law.

A CLOSER LOOK AT THE CONCEPT OF GOVERNMENT: “PARASITE: A creature which obtains food and physical protection from a host which never benefits from its presence.” (Chambers English Dictionary)

House of Commons authorities have destroyed all evidence of MPs’ expenses claims prior to 2010, meaning end of official investigations into scandal.

 

MPs accused of abusing the unreformed expenses system will escape official investigation after the House of Commons authorities destroyed all record of their claims, the Telegraph can reveal.
John Bercow, the Speaker, faces accusations he has presided over a fresh cover-up of MPs’ expenses after tens of thousands of pieces of paperwork relating to claims made before 2010 under the scandal-hit regime were shredded.
Members of the public who have written to Kathryn Hudson, the standards watchdog, to raise concerns about their MP’s claims have been told there can be no investigation due to lack of evidence.
Under the House of Commons’ “Authorised Records Disposal Practice”, which is overseen by Mr Bercow’s committee, records of MPs’ expenses claims are destroyed after three years. The move is necessary to comply with data protection laws, a Commons spokesman said.
However, under that same set of guidelines, the pay, discipline and sickness records of Commons staff are kept until their 100th birthday. Health and safety records are kept for up to 40 years, while thousands of other classes of official documents on the day-to-day running of the House are stored indefinitely in the Parliamentary Archive.

Read on:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/11204405/MPs-to-escape-expenses-investigations-after-paperwork-destroyed-by-Parliament.html

 

 

 

ARTICLE: ‘Westminster pedophile ring may have murdered my 8yo son’ – ex-magistrate

The father of an eight-year-old boy who died in the 1980s has alleged that his son may have been abducted and murdered by members of a Westminster pedophile ring. He claims Scotland Yard were complicit in “covering up” the crime.

Vishambar Mehrotra, a retired magistrate, said he recorded a male prostitute saying in a telephone call that Mehrotra’s son Vishal may have been abducted in the notorious Elm Guest House in southwest London in 1981.

Mehrotra also said despite playing the recording for police officers, they refused to investigate allegations that high-profile judges and politicians were involved in the kidnapping of his son.

Read on: http://rt.com/uk/206879-uk-pedophile-murder-westminster/

(2014) Tory or Lib-Dem MP “drugged and abused me when I was 14”

The former pupil who claims he was molested by a Coalition minister revealed the alleged attack left him suffering a lifetime of depression and suicide attempts.

And he accused police of being scared to quiz the politician because of his position in today’s Coalition after they revealed they had no plans to investigate – a year after his allegation was made.

The alleged victim, who we are calling Thomas, told officers investigating historical sex abuse at his school that he was drugged by the minister when he was 14. He woke up naked in bed.

He added: “I felt something that made me feel I had been assaulted.

“I had been assaulted previously and the feeling reminded me of that.

“He gave me a pill wrapped in wax paper. I didn’t ask him what it was. He said, ‘Suck that for a few minutes then chew and swallow it’.

“I went to bed and felt bloody awful. I don’t remember anything after that. The police asked me if I was of the opinion that he abused me while in that condition and I said yes.”

Asked if he had been to the school, the minister only said: “Not only have I never been investigated, but there has been no allegation made and nor are there any grounds for any allegation.”

Thomas said he is furious the police told him they will not be quizzing the political figure as a suspect.

He added: “It’s as if the police are treading on egg shells and they don’t want to upset the ­Establishment and after 12 months they still haven’t spoken to him about this. It’s a bit much really.

“They said they may want to speak to him at some time in the future but have no plans to at the moment.”

Thomas, who lives in the Midlands, claimed the officer leading the inquiry told him that as he had no memory of the alleged attack they would not quiz the politician and he may have been assaulted by someone else.

He said: “They said they aren’t going to arrest or question him under caution because I’ve not made a complaint against him but that’s not true.”

Last November, the alleged victim gave a statement to police investigating accusations of historical child abuse.

During a recorded interview with specialist child abuse detectives he claimed he had been attacked on a number of occasions – but only once by the Minister, the other alleged assaults were by two other men.

He accused one of raping him and subjecting him to sadistic abuse before the alleged assault by the politician, and the other tried to rape him.

Thomas claimed he had attempted suicide three times since the alleged abuse, suffered trauma throughout his life and had been unable to have sexual ­relationships.

He also suffered from depression and a sleeping disorder. The alleged victim added: “I decided to come forward because I have spent a considerable amount of time trying to forget but it plays on your mind and I have ­nightmares and sweats.

“I’ve been told it’s frightening to see me having one of my nightmares, I go raving mad. I have also told a friend what happened and hopefully by bringing this to the surface I can move forward.”

Labour MP Tom Watson, who has spoken at length to Thomas, said he will write to Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders calling for the minister to be ­quizzed.

Read on:  http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/westminster-child-abuse-scandal-coalition-4576718

AUDIO: Investigative Reporter Don Hale on explosive child abuse dossier

Veteran investigative reporter, Don Hale, who saw a dossier in the 1980’s that alleged child abuse offences were committed by establishment figures, tells James O’Brien what he knows. Listen here.

 

ARTICLE: Government gave money to notorious Paedophile Information Exchange on the orders of Special Branch, claims Home Office whistleblower

• Former government employee says he saw evidence PIE was given grant
• He claims the money was paid to group under orders of Special Branch
• Insider says he thought funding was ‘inappropriate and outrageous’ but his pleas were shrugged off by his boss at the time 
• Follows report which found that abuse ring ‘might have been covered up’

A Home Office whistleblower today repeated his claims the government department funded the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) on the orders of the police.

Former civil servant Tim Hulbert said money was transferred to the organisation on the orders of the Metropolitan Police’s Special Branch.

Mr Hulbert worked in the Voluntary Services Unit of the Home Office which approved grants to various outside organisations in the late 1970s and early 80s.

He said he went to his manager after seeing that funding was being given to PIE – the lobby group formed in the 1970s to campaign for a reduction in the age of consent – but his concerns were shrugged off.

Former Home Office employee Tim Hulbert said the department provided funding to the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), on the orders of the Metropolitan Police’s Special Branch

The retired government worker told Radio 4’s Today programme: ‘Every quarter, the list of current grants that were up for consideration for financial support would be circulated through the office and I believe that I saw a copy of that which referred to the re-funding of PIE.

‘It was an organisation that was campaigning for the reduction of the age of consent to four. I thought that was inappropriate and outrageous and for a government department to be funding it, I thought was wrong.

‘I went to see my boss and he told me, firstly, that PIE was a legitimate campaigning organisation and it did have significant links to the National Council for Civil Liberties and other organisations that were recognised.

‘Secondly, I was told that it was being funded a the request of Special Branch.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2831219/Government-gave-money-Paedophile-Information-Exchange-group-says-Home-Office-whistleblower.html#ixzz3JDJnk9GZ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

ARTCILE: Cameron attacked by sexual abuse victims after calling claims of Home Office cover-up a ‘conspiracy theory’

Oh, a ‘conspiracy theory’ is it? The evidence suggests not. Ca-moron’s exercise in damage limitation. -Ed.

 

 

 

• NSPCC boss Peter Wanless calls the Prime Minister’s comments ‘wrong’
• National Association for People Abused in Childhood says it’s ‘appalling’
• Came as the Home Secretary admitted there may have been a cover-up

Campaigners for survivors of child sexual abuse have savaged David Cameron after he called claims of a Home Office paedophile cover-up a ‘conspiracy theory’.

Referring to the findings of a review into allegations of a VIP paedophile ring, the Prime Minister said on the campaign trail in Rochester that ‘conspiracy theorists’ would have to ‘look elsewhere’.

Last night the author of that review flatly called Mr Cameron’s comments ‘wrong’, while the National Association for People Abused in Childhood said his intervention was ‘appalling’.

It seemed to directly contradict an extraordinary admission by Theresa May, the Home Secretary, that there ‘might have been a cover-up’ of an Establishment paedophile ring by her department in the 1980s.

The comments by Mrs May and Mr Cameron came after the publication of a report into how her department handled papers relating to alleged child abusers at Westminster.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2831025/Cameron-attacked-sexual-abuse-victims-calling-claims-Home-Office-cover-conspiracy-theory.html#ixzz3JDCFF7F1

(2014) Conservative MP “Throttle[d] 12-year-old [boy] to death”

• Victim of VIP sex abuse says he saw Conservative MP murder a young boy 
• Boy says he also saw victim deliberately run over by depraved paedophiles
• A third abused boy was also killed in front of a Tory MP, victim claims
• Detectives launch probe into three murders linked to abuse, it was reported

A victim of the VIP paedophile abuse scandal claims he saw a Conservative MP murder a young boy at one of their sick orgies.

Detectives are investigating three murders linked to the child sex ring, it was reported last night, days after the Metropolitan Police revealed they had launched a probe into a killing connected to the historical abuse.

A victim of the sickening sex parties says he was in the same room as a boy, aged 12, was strangled by a Tory MP.

The boy, known as Nick, told the Sunday People: ‘I watched while that happened. I am not sure how I got out of that. Whether I will ever know why I survived, I am not sure.’

Now a grown man, he has also told detectives that he saw a 10 or 11-year-old deliberately run over by a car.

As well as this, Nick claims he saw two unknown men murder a third boy in front of another MP 18 months later.

Nick said that he and another abuse victim were taken in a chauffeur-driven car to a luxury townhouse in central London ‘to be sexually abused by powerful men’.

Still traumatised by the harrowing events, he gave a graphic description to police of what took place inside the building.

He said: ‘The MP was particularly nasty, even among the group of people who sexually abused me and others. I still find it difficult to talk about these incidents after all these years.’

Nick also told detectives about the death of another boy during a sexual assault in front of a Conservative minister – different to the one involved in the first killing.

Nick says his father handed him over to the VIP abusers at Dolphin Square in Pimlico, near the Houses of Parliament, as well as other London locations.

Dolphin Square was last week named as one of the locations where abuse was carried out by powerful individuals.

He says he was raped over and over again by the minister, who also sexually assaulted other boys who were younger than 14 years old.

His claims are being investigated by police under Operation Midland, part of Operation Fairbank – the large scale investigation into allegations of abuse by high-placed public figures.

A statement from the Metropolitan Police said: ‘Detectives from the child abuse investigation command are working closely with colleagues from homicide and major crime ­concerning this information.’

HOW THE PAEDOPHILE SCANDALS MUSHROOMED 

September and October 2012: Jimmy Savile abuse scandal breaks.

October 2012: Labour MP Tom Watson claims at Prime Minister’s Questions there is ‘clear intelligence suggesting a powerful paedophile network linked to Parliament and No 10’ and that a ‘senior aide to a former prime minister’ had links to a child sex gang member.

November 2012: Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk uses parliamentary privilege to claim Cyril Smith sexually abused boys.

November 2012: The CPS reveals it considered Smith allegations in 1970, 1998 and 1999. It admits Smith should have been prosecuted.

December 2012: Operation Fairbank set up to examine allegations that VIPs, including politicians, abused young men at Elm Guest House in Barnes, south-west London, in the 1970s and 1980s .

February 2013: Operation Fernbridge begins investigating the alleged paedophile ring linked to Elm Guest House. The Mail reveals Peter Hatton-Bornshin – allegedly abused there as a teenager – killed himself in 1994, aged 28.

December 2013: Ex-Labour MP Lord Janner’s home searched by police investigating historical child sex abuse. He is not arrested.

June 2014: Lord Janner’s Westminster offices searched by police. Again, he is not arrested.

July 3, 2014: It emerges Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens’ dossier on suspected Establishment paedophiles – sent to then Home Secretary Leon Brittan in 1983 – disappeared. But the Home Office could find no record of it, fuelling claims of a cover-up. Lord Brittan amends his story twice over his dealings with the original document.

July 5, 2014: More than ten current and former politicians reported to be on list of alleged child abusers held by police investigating Westminster paedophile ring claims. The Mail reveals the Establishment protected diplomat Sir Peter Hayman, a member of the Paedophile Information Exchange, when police found child porn at his flat in 1978.

July 6, 2014: Home Office permanent secretary Mark Sedwill reveals 114 files relating to historical allegations of child sex abuse, 1979 to 1999, have disappeared from the department.

July 7, 2014: Home Secretary Theresa May asks NSPCC’s Peter Wanless to head inquiry into Home Office handling of historical sex abuse cases. She also announces overarching inquiry. Chairman Baroness Butler-Sloss is forced to step down amid questions over the role played by her late brother, Lord Havers, who was attorney general in the 1980s.

October 2014: Replacement Fiona Woolf resigns amid criticism over her ‘Establishment links’, most notably in relation to Lord Brittan.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2836357/Victim-VIP-abuse-scandal-says-saw-Conservative-MP-kill-young-boy-police-launch-probe-THREE-deaths-linked-depraved-sex-ring.html#ixzz3JD4962qu

ARTICLE: Children’s homes were ‘supply line’ for paedophile politicians, says ex-minister

Lord Warner says an inquiry he conducted in 1992 showed how children’s homes were targeted by powerful people.

Powerful people in the 1980s targeted children‘s homes that served as a “supply line” for paedophiles, a former health minister has claimed.

As a former child protection manager warned that a “powerful elite” of at least 20 prominent figures carried out the “worst form of abuse”, the former health minister Lord Warner described the sexual abuse of children as a “power drive”.

Warner, a health minister in 2003-07 who conducted an inquiry into child abuse in Birmingham in 1992, spoke out after the home secretary, Theresa May, announced a national inquiry into how the authorities may have ignored child abuse at Westminster.

The Labour leader, Ed Miliband, said the government’s approach had been dilatory and piecemeal. He said: “The inquiry needs to recommend child protection measures for the future. If the government does all those things, we will support them.”

He said: “They have been slow and piecemeal getting to this point. I think victims and others need to be able to give testimony and give their evidence.

“It is vital that the inquiry is sufficiently comprehensive and over-arching. The important thing is to get at the truth to get at justice, to get what happened in institutions, and to get the right answers for the future. The appalling examples of child protection abuse we have seen must never be allowed to happen again.”

MPs on the home affairs select committee will question Mark Sedwill, the home office’s permanent secretary, on Tuesday afternoon over the loss of 114 potentially relevant files on child abuse dating back to the 1980s.

ABOVE: Lord Warner, the former health minister. Photograph: Graham Turner for the Guardian.

Warner said his inquiry in 1992 showed how children’s homes were targeted by powerful paedophiles. He told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4: “Some of these children’s homes were targeted by people in power, powerful people. Indeed, sexual abuse of children is a power drive. That’s what a lot of it is about.

“It is possible that people who were authoritative, powerful in particular communities did sometimes have access to children’s homes. We know for historical purposes that children’s homes were a supply line sometimes.”

Warner, a director of social services in Kent in the 1980s, said insufficient action was taken to deal with child abuse in that decade because there was “disbelief in the public mind”.

He said: “It is pretty distasteful stuff. Society has found it difficult to come to terms with this … We still had an air of deference about people in authority.

“A cover-up means something is very organised. I think much more of this is about people being insensitive to some of these concerns and not being as preoccupied with protecting vulnerable people – children and adults.”

Peter McKelvie, a former child protection manager whose allegations about child abuse led to a police inquiry in 2012, claimed that at least 20 prominent people abused children.

McKelvie told BBC2’s Newsnight: “I believe that there is strong evidence – and an awful lot of information that can be converted into evidence if it is investigated properly – that there has been an extremely powerful elite amongst the highest levels of the political classes for as long as I am alive, and I am 65.

“There has been sufficient reason to investigate it over and over again, certainly for the last 30 years. There has always been the block and the cover-up and the collusion to prevent that happening.”

He added: “For the first time I have got a belief that survivors will come forward and justice will be served for a lot of survivors. Unfortunately it has been left so late that a lot of the abusers are now dead.

“We are looking at the Lords, we are looking at the Commons, we are looking at the judiciary, we are looking at all institutions where there will be a small percentage of paedophiles and a slightly larger percentage of people who have known about it but have felt that in terms of their own self-interest and self-preservation and for political party reasons it’s been safer for them to cover it up rather than deal with it.”

McKelvie, who served as a child protection manager in Hereford and Worcester, worked on the conviction of Peter Righton, a founding member of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE). Righton, who has since died, was convicted of importing child pornography. McKelvie told police in 2012 that West Mercia police had seven boxes of evidence including letters between Righton and other alleged paedophiles.

On Monday, May told the Commons she was establishing a public inquiry into how complaints of sexual abuse were treated, and sometimes ignored, in public bodies over several decades.

Ministers had been holding out against such a sweeping inquiry, but, facing charges of an establishment cover-up, succumbed and promised there would be no no-go areas for the investigation.

The inquiry will be able to examine the files of the security services and allegations that the Tory whips’ office in the 1970s may have suppressed allegations of child abuse by members of the parliamentary party. It is also expected to take some evidence from victims.

Labour MPs pointed to a 1985 BBC documentary in which a former government whip between 1970 and 1973 said the Tory whips’ office, when faced by an MP involved in “a scandal with small boys”, would get him out of trouble, partly so the MP then felt obliged in the future to carry out the bidding of the whips.

May said she would look at plans, backed in principle by the Labour MP Tom Watson, to require public servants to report allegations of child abuse to officials in a form of mandatory whistleblowing. A duty to report would place some form of culpability on a public official if they knowingly withheld information concerning suspected child abuse.

(VIDEO) Prime Sinister David Cameron Offensively Lashes out against Americans

VIDEO: Thomas Sherridan Joins Ian R Crane to Discuss Widespread Vote-rigging in the Scottish Referendum

THIS EPISODE :
– SCOTLAND … Arising from the Ashes of a vote fix?
– CAMORON says “Non-Violent Extremists as dangerous as Islamic State”!
– Were UK MP’s bullied into supporting another illegal war?
– Australian Government introduces Orwellian Surveillance Laws
– Dr David Ray Griffin : 9/11 – A New Pearl Harbour
– The Global Political Awakening …. Bring it on!

ARTICLE: Prime Minister David Cameron Says “Non-Violent Conspiracy Theorists” Are Just As Dangerous As ISIS

..So if we send our enemies flowers and not bombs we are, by our dissident mindset, still ‘terrorists’ and will therefore feel the full wrath of the State? Welcome to post-Modernity, people… WE ARE ALL ‘TERRORISTS’ NOW.

 

David Cameron told the U.N. that “non-violent extremism” is just as dangerous as terrorism and must be eradicated using all means at the government’s disposal.

He references 9/11 and 7/7 Truthers as examples of the type of extremism that must be dealt in a similar fashion to ISIS.

If you thought Obama’s War is Peace speech to the U.N. was creepy, wait until you get a load of this.

Cameron is officially announcing a the plan to use a full assault on dissenting views.

 

Hat tip: http://www.globalresearch.ca/david-cameron-says-non-violent-conspiracy-theorists-are-just-as-dangerous-as-isis/5404412?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=david-cameron-says-non-violent-conspiracy-theorists-are-just-as-dangerous-as-isis

 

 

ARTICLE: House of Perks: MPs claim record £103mn in expenses

MPs’ staff, travel and accommodation costs reached £103 million last year, up from £99 million the previous year and £95 million in 2009 – the peak of the parliamentary expenses scandal.

More than £80 million was spent on staff salaries and £11 million on office costs. The bill for accommodation, covering hotels, rented homes and utility bills, was £6.9 million, while £4.5 million were claimed for travel and subsistence.

The Democratic Unionist Party’s Jim Shannon had the biggest claim at £229,262, including £38,215 on travel and £12,126 on hotels.

The bill for MPs’ expenses reached record levels last year, as more politicians put their spouses and children on the public payroll.

A total of 170 MPs employed relatives, at a cost of more than £4 million. The previous year, 150 MPs had family members on the payroll.

Senior Conservatives who employ relations include Defence Secretary Michael Fallon and Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond. Laurence Robertson, the MP for Tewkesbury, employs his ex-wife and his wife. Anne Adams is paid £40,000 to £45,000 as a senior parliamentary assistant, while his ex-wife Susan Robertson gets paid £25,000 to £30,000 as a senior secretary.

Andy Silvester, from the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “Taxpayers will be deeply concerned that the cost of Westminster is going up again.

“David Cameron pledged to reduce the cost of politics after the excesses of the expenses scandal. Politicians must be held accountable for their promises. Combined with the ever-increasing number of peers, that promise looks increasingly difficult to keep.”

He added that there was “nothing wrong with employing family members if they’re qualified for the job, but there needs to be total transparency whenever that’s the case.”

The details were released in an annual report by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) on Thursday, which was set up to handle MPs’ pay after the 2009 expenses scandal.

In 2009, the Telegraph revealed that MPs misused their allowances for private purposes for years, causing public outrage. The political scandal resulted in arrests, resignations and dismissals, as well as public apologies and the repayment of expenses. Former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, who claimed back expenses for her husband’s adult movies, was one of the high-profile politicians that were exposed.

IPSA chairman Sir Ian Kennedy said reforms to the system had saved £58 million over four years. He said: “Such is the progress made since the scandals which came to light in 2009, our work is attracting the attention of parliaments around the world.”

This week, Marcial Boo, IPSA’s chief executive, proposed that MPs should get a 9 percent pay rise next year, arguing that MPs did an important job and should not be paid a “miserly amount.” David Cameron, whose basic salary as prime minister is £142,500, has opposed the salary increase for MPs.

The basic annual salary for MPs currently stands at £67,060, two and a half times the UK average salary of £26,500.

Source: http://rt.com/uk/187252-mps-claim-record-expenses/

STATE CRIME: Videos and Analysis of Vote-rigging in the Scottish Referendum

RON PAUL SUSPECTS FOUL IN SCOTLAND REFERENDUM!

Scottish referendum: Police investigate electoral fraud probe in Glasgow

PETITION: We the undersigned demand a revote of the Scottish Referendum, counted by impartial international parties.

VOTE FRAUD IN SCOTTISH REFERENDUM?

 

ARTICLE: COVER-UP IN PROGRESS! New boss of investigation into VIP child abuse claims is linked to Leon Brittan –the SECOND inquiry chief with the ex-MP accused of abuse file cover-up

 

• Fiona Woolf, the Lord Mayor of London, appointed to carry out role of investigating claims of an Establishment cover-up of VIP paedophile rings 
• The previous chairman Baroness Butler-Schloss stood down because her brother, Michael Havers, tried to dissuade a Tory MP publicly naming a paedophile
• Home Office last night refused to answer questions about what it had known about Mrs Woolf’s links to Lord Brittan

 

The new chairman of a long-awaited Government inquiry into historic child sex abuse was facing calls to resign last night after The Mail on Sunday discovered her astonishing links to Leon Brittan – a key figure embroiled in the scandal.

Fiona Woolf, the Lord Mayor of London, was appointed to carry out the important role of investigating claims of an Establishment cover-up of VIP paedophile rings on Friday, two months after the original chairman was forced to step down over conflicts of interest.

But this newspaper has found that the top corporate lawyer is also closely linked to Lord Brittan – who is likely to give evidence to her inquiry. It can be revealed that she:

• Sits on the board of a City of London conference with Lord Brittan, who is accused of overseeing an Establishment cover-up when he was Home Secretary;
• Judges an annual City award scheme alongside Lord Brittan’s wife, Diana;
• Gave Lord Brittan’s wife a £50 donation and a friendly good-luck message when she took part in a charity fun run last year;
• Has been a neighbour of Lord and Lady Brittan in the same exclusive London street for the past decade;
• Is a governor of the elite Guildhall School of Music where pupils are said to have been abused;
• Is a patron of a body for female lawyers along with Labour’s Harriet Harman, whose National Council of Civil Liberties once had links to a notorious paedophile group

Last night Labour MP Simon Danczuk – who has led calls for a public inquiry into historic child sex abuse in the wake of revelations about high-profile figures such as Sir Jimmy Savile – questioned Mrs Woolf’s appointment. ‘If it’s found that Fiona Woolf is close to the Brittans, her position is untenable and she needs to be clear about what her relationship is with Leon Brittan, who is one of the most significant figures in terms of suggestions of a cover-up,’ he said. ‘Surely the Home Office was aware of this before they suggested appointing her?’

Read more to uncover how they are all connected in this obvious cover-up: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2746370/Revealed-New-boss-investigation-VIP-child-abuse-claims-linked-Leon-Brittan-The-Mail-On-Sunday-exposes-family-friendship-SECOND-inquiry-chief-ex-MP-accused-abuse-file-cover-up.html#ixzz3CeJ17txS

ARTICLE: HOW THE STORY UNFOLDED: CHILLING CLAIMS THAT SEX ABUSE RING MAY HAVE OPERATED IN BRITISH ESTABLISHMENT DATE BACK TO 1983

HOW THE STORY UNFOLDED: CHILLING CLAIMS THAT SEX ABUSE RING MAY HAVE OPERATED IN BRITISH ESTABLISHMENT DATE BACK TO 1983

The chilling claims that a paedophile ring may have been operating within the British establishment first emerged in an investigation by campaigning Conservative politician Geoffrey Dickens.

In November 1983, the MP for Littleborough and Saddleworth in Greater Manchester sent a 40-page document to then Home Secretary Leon Brittan detailing alleged VIP child abusers, apparently including former Liberal party chief whip Cyril Smith and other senior politicians.

In a newspaper interview at the time, Mr Dickens claimed his dossier contained the names of eight ‘really important public figures’ that he planned to expose, and whose crimes are believed to have stretched back to the 1960s.

November 1983:

Geoffrey Dickens produces a huge dossier detailing allegations of sexual abuse against prominent figures in the British establishment. He tells his family the claims will ‘blow apart’ the VIP paedophile ring.

March 1984:

Home Secretary Leon Brittan tells Mr Dickens that his dossier has been assessed by prosecutors and passed on to the police, but no further action is taken. The dossier is now either lost or missing.

May 1995

Geoffrey Dickens dies. A short time later his wife destroys his copy of the paedophile dossier. The only other copies – one received by Mr Brittan and another allegedly sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions – are believed to have been lost or destroyed.

September 2010

The 29-stone Rochdale MP Sir Cyril Smith dies aged 82 without ever being charged with sex offences.

2011/2012:

Following the death of Sir Jimmy Savile, dozens of claims of historic child abuse emerge – including a number of alleged victims of Smith, who is said to have spanked and sexually abused teenage boys at a hostel he co-founded in the early 1960s.

October 2012

During Prime Minister’s Questions, Labour MP Tom Watson claims there is ‘clear intelligence suggesting a powerful paedophile network linked to Parliament and No10’.

November 2012

Lancashire Police announced they will be investigating claims of sexual abuse by Smith relating to incidents before 1974, while Greater Manchester Police will investigate claims after 1974.

November 2012

The Crown Prosecution Service admits Smith should have been charged with crimes of abuse more than 40 years earlier. The CPS also admitted Smith had been investigated in 1970, 1974, 1998, and 1999 but rejected every opportunity to prosecute him.

November 2012

A former special branch officer, Tony Robinson, says a historic dossier ‘packed’ with information about Smith’s sex crimes was actually in the hands of Mi5 – despite officially having been ‘lost’ decades earlier.

December 2012

Scotland Yard sets up Operation Fairbank to investigate claims a paedophile ring operated at the Elm Guest House in Barnes, southwest London, in the 1970s and 80s. Among those abusing children are said to have been a number of prominent politicians.

February 2013

Operation Fernbridge is established to investigate the Elm Guest House alleged paedophile ring.

February 2013

It is claimed a ‘paedophile ring of VIPs’ also operated at the Grafton Close Children’s Home in Richmond, Surrey.

February 2013

Two men, a Catholic priest from Norwich, and a man understood to be connected to Grafton Close, arrested on suspicion of sexual offences and questioned by Operation Fernbridge officers.

June 2013

Scotland Yard claims that seven police officers are working full time on Operation Fernbridge and are following more than 300 leads.

June 2013

Charles Napier, the half-brother of senior Conservative politician John Whittingdale, is arrested by Operation Fairbank officers.

December 2013

Some senior Labour party politicians linked to pro-paedophile campaign group the Paedophile Information Exchange, which was affiliated with the National Council for Civil Liberties pressure group, now known as Liberty, in the 1970s and early 1980s.

December 2013

Police search the home of Lord Janner as part of a historical sex abuse investigation. He is not arrested.

February 2014

Current deputy leader of the Labour Party Harriet Harman, who was NCCL’s in-house lawyer at the time of its affiliation with PIE and even met her husband Jack Dromey while working there, is forced to deny she supported the activities of the pro-paedophile collective.

February 2014

Patricia Hewitt, Labour’s former Secretary of State for Health who was NCCL’s general secretary for nine years, later apologised and said she had been ‘naive and wrong’ to consider PIE a legitimate campaign group.

June 2014

Lord Janner’s Westminster office is searched by police. Again the peer is not arrested.

July 3, 2014

Labour MP Simon Danczuk called on Leon Brittan to say what he knew about the Dickens dossier. It emerges the dossier has now been either lost or destroyed and the Home Office admits it can find no evidence of any criminal inquiry relating to it.

July 5, 2014

More than 10 current and former politicians are said to be on a list of alleged child abusers held by police investigating claims of an alleged paedophile ring.

July 6, 2014

Home Office permanent secretary Mark Sedwill reveals that 114 files relating to historic allegations of child sex abuse, from between 1979 and 1999, have disappeared from the Home Office.

It is also revealed that former Home Secretary Lord Brittan was accused of raping a student in 1967. The 2012 allegation was not investigated until Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders ordered the Met Police to re-open the case in June this year.

ARTICLE: Thatcher’s bodyguard says he warned her about underage sex rumours about close aide amid claims senior ministers were named in dossier

• Barry Strevens says he told Iron Lady about rumours about Peter Morrison 
• Thatcher listened during No.10 meeting, but went on to promote her aide
• New claims emerged about dossier handed to Home Secretary Leon Brittan
• Reports ministers Keith Joseph and Rhodes Boyson were named 

Margaret Thatcher and her ministers were warned of child abuse claims against senior Tory figures in the 1980s, it was claimed today.

A former bodyguard to the Iron Lady revealed he told her to her face about rumours about one of her closest aides holding parties with underage boys.

And it was claimed a dossier on Establishment abuse handed to then-Home Secretary Leon Brittan named senior ministers Sir Keith Joseph and Sir Rhodes Boyson.

Westminster has been rocked by claims of senior politicians involved in sex abuse, and allegations of a cover-up.

Home Secretary Theresa May ordered a wide-ranging inquiry into how successive governments, charities, political parties, the NHS, the BBC and the Church failed to protect children from paedophiles.

But its chairman Baroness Butler-Sloss was forced to quit over criticism that her brother, Sir Michael Havers, had been attorney general in the Cabinet in the 1980s, and was accused of a ‘cover-up’ over a refusal to prosecute Foreign Office diplomat Sir Peter Hayman, who was a member of the Paedophile Information Exchange.

Two weeks on, there is still no sign of a new chairman being appointed, but the tide of allegations about child abuse at the highest levels of the Establishment continue to emerge.

Barry Strevens, who worked as Mrs Thatcher’s personal bodyguard, said that he passed on allegations about her confidant Sir Peter Morrison.

He said that Lady Thatcher appointed Sir Peter deputy party chairman of the Conservatives despite learning of the rumours.

Mr Strevens said that he ‘immediately’ passed on the information to Lady Thatcher and her private secretary Archie Hamilton at a meeting in Downing Street.

‘A senior officer in Chester had told me there were rumours going around about under-age boys – one aged 15 – attending sex parties at a house there belonging to Peter Morrison,’ he told the Sun on Sunday.

‘After we returned to No10 I asked to go and see her immediately. It was unusual for me to do that, so they would have know it was something serious.

‘When I went in Archie Hamilton was there. I told them exactly what had been said about Peter. Archie took notes and they thanked me for coming.

‘There was no proof but the officer I spoke to was certain and said local press knew a lot more.’

Responding to the claims, Mr Hamilton said that he remembered that the officer had been at No10 but could not recall any mention of under-age boys.

‘I don’t remember him saying they were under-age,’ he said. ‘There may have been but the point he was making to her was that there were only men involved.

‘She listened to what he said and that was it. It was merely a party and men were there.’

It has been claimed a dossier of sex abuse claims against senior politicians named former Tory minister Rhodes Boyson

Sir Peter, an Old Etonian who died of a heart attack in 1995 at the age of 51, has since been linked to claims of sex abuse at children’s homes in North Wales.

Mr Strevens, an ex-detective chief inspector, said: ‘I wouldn’t say she (Lady Thatcher) was naive but I would say she would not have thought people around her would be like that.

‘I am sure he would have given her assurances about the rumours as otherwise she wouldn’t have given him the job.’

Tory grandee Lord Tebbit has previously stated that he confronted Sir Peter over the allegations and received a flat denial.

Former Conservative MP Edwina Currie also described him as a ‘noted pederast’ with a liking for young boys.

Educated at Oxford and elected as MP for Chester in 1974, Sir Peter came from a wealthy political dynasty who own the whisky-producing island of Islay in the Hebrides.

His father was close friends with Lady Thatcher while his sister Mary is one of the Queen’s most senior ladies-in-waiting.

Knighted in 1988, he later became the prime minister’s parliamentary secretary before running her 1990 re-election campaign, which saw her lose office.

Meanwhile, fresh claims have emerged about the controversial dossier handed to Leon Brittan by Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens.

The Home Office says it cannot find the file, along with more than 100 relevant files dating from 1979 to 1999 which have been destroyed or lost.

However parts of the file were referred to in papers compiled by Labour’s Barbara Castle who investigated allegations linking MPs, peers, the National Council for Civil Liberties and the Paedophile Information Exchange.

It is claimed Sir Keith Joseph and Sir Rhodes Boyson were both named.

A source told the Sunday Mirror: ‘A lot of Baroness Castle’s file was made up of Geoffrey Dickens’ dossier.

‘She’d been leaked files because the feeling was it was all being hushed up and Dickens was getting nowhere with his campaign to expose this.’

Two weeks ago former Tory activist Anthony Gilberthorpe says he was handed cash and told to ‘fetch entertainment’ – code for young boys – by members of Mrs Thatcher’s government.

He named former former-Education Secretary Keith Joseph and ex-local government minister Rhodes Boyson. Both are now dead.

Lord Brittan, who was Home Secretary from 1983 to 1985, said earlier this month: ‘It has been alleged that when I was Home Secretary I failed to deal adequately with the papers containing allegations of serious sexual impropriety that I received from Geoff Dickens. This is completely without foundation, as evidence from the Home Office’s own report supports.

‘I passed this bundle of papers to the relevant Home Office officials for examination, as was the normal and correct practice. I wrote to Mr Dickens on 20 March 1984 informing him of the conclusions of the Director of Public Prosecutions about these matters.’

SOURCE: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2707333/Thatcher-s-bodyguard-says-warned-underage-sex-rumours-close-aide-amid-claims-senior-ministers-named-dossier.html

ARTICLE: Four new historic child abuse cases referred to police by Home Office

An internal review of hundreds of thousands of Home Office files found 13 previously undisclosed “items of alleged child abuse” last year. Four had not been referred to the police.

Four previously unknown cases of historic sex abuse have been referred to the police by Home Office officials in recent months, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

An internal review of hundreds of thousands of Home Office files found 13 previously undisclosed “items of alleged child abuse” last year.

The Home Office said that nine of the 13 cases had been reported to the police – including four which involved the department’s officials.

However, the remaining four were overlooked by civil servants – and have now been reported to the Metropolitan Police.

The cases were unearthed by an internal review ordered by the Home Office’s permanent secretary Mark Sedwill in February last year, months after the scandal involving former Liberal MP Cyril Smith broke.

 

The review – which was carried out by an independent investigator from HM Revenue and Customs – trawled through 746,000 files between 1979 and1999, and uncovered the 13 instances of alleged child abuse.

A summary of the review, which was made public after a Freedom of Information request, said: “This work identified 13 items of information about alleged child abuse, including 4 cases involving Home Office staff.

“Nine of these items of information, including all of the cases involving Home Office staff, were either already known to the Police or were reported to them by the Home Office at the time.

“The Investigator considers that the remaining 4 items of information are likely to be of limited value, as they are either of doubtful credibility or involve the use of a single profile indicator to identify a potential offender.

“However it is recommended that the information is passed to the Police for a proper assessment as this falls within their remit.”

The Home Office said that all the recommendations had now been implemented, which meant they have been referred to the Police.

The review also said that it had “identified 11 centrally recorded files from the 1980s relating to the Paedophile Information Exchange, all of which had been destroyed”.

It added: “The recorded file titles, together with media reports of events at the time, give some indication of the probable contents of these files from which the Investigator has concluded that their destruction was consistent with applicable record retention policies.”

It concluded: “The independent investigator is satisfied that the Home Office did pass on to the appropriate authorities any information received about child abuse in the period 1979 to 1999 which was credible and which had realistic potential for further investigation.

“The investigator believes that the risk of any undisclosed material remaining in files form that period is extremely low.”

Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP for Rochdale who has been campaigning on historic child abuse, questioned why the Home Office had not passed on the cases to the police earlier.

He said: “It’s never the job of the Home Office to try and determine what constituted potential evidence, that’s the job of the police and the Crown Prosecution Service.

“The public will think that people in the Home Office were withholding information from the police which could have led to the successful prosecution of child sex abusers.

“Had the evidence been passed to the police at the time they might have been able to link it to other information in their possession and build a case against someone.”

He added: “The public are left wondering why the Home Office didn’t pass on the four cases to the police when they initially received the information, some years ago.

“The more we delve into historic child sex abuse and the role of the Home Office the more concerns are raised. This is why we now need an independent overarching enquiry into historic child sex abuse.”

A Metropolitan Police spokesman said it was considering a request for comment from The Daily Telegraph, but could not comment at the time of going to press.

A Home Office spokesman said: “In response to concerns raised in Parliament and the media relating to the handling by the Department of historical allegations of abuse, the Permanent Secretary commissioned an independent review of all relevant papers received by the Department between 1979 to 1999 to identify any information received and the outcome.

“The review concluded the Home Office acted appropriately, referring information received during this period to the relevant authorities.

“The Department has now received a request for further information from the Chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee, Keith Vaz.

“It would be inappropriate to comment further until we have responded to the Chair’s request. We will respond in due course.”

SOURCE: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10944421/Four-new-historic-child-abuse-cases-referred-to-police-by-Home-Office.html

ARTICLE: UK minister rejects bid for probe into historic abuse

The British policing and criminal justice minister has dismissed a proposal by a number of MPs calling for an independent official probe into cases of sexual abuse that occurred in the past.

Damian Green told the UK’s House of Commons on Tuesday that a decision on such an inquiry should wait for the outcome of other criminal investigations that are currently underway into the abuse allegations.

More than 120 British lawmakers from all parties backed a call demanding a wider national inquiry into the abuse cases in Britain, which have come to police notice for years but the culprits have never been prosecuted.

Those MPs behind the move cited cases in which young working-class victims were not considered as credible witnesses where suspects were former officials and well-connected.

“Is it not now time that we had an overarching inquiry into the culture at that time of these historical sex offences so that we can both bring closure to that and actually learn lessons from the future?” said British Liberal Democrat MP Greg Mulholland.

Several high-profile figures have been arrested in connection with the multiple investigations into the abuse scandal surrounding Jimmy Savile, a disgraced former TV host with the state-funded British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). He died in 2011, but, following his death, hundreds of allegations of sex abuse and rape of minors became public.

In January 2013, in a report by police and the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC), Savile was branded as one of the UK’s most prolific known sexual predators, who used his celebrity status to “hide in plain sight.”

 

SOURCE: http://presstv.com/detail/2014/07/02/369556/uk-minister-rejects-bid-for-abuse-probe/

 

ARTICLE: Head of paedophile inquiry’s own brother accused of protecting VIP paedophiles

(not satire – it’s the UK today)

There has been some criticism of Theresa May’s decision to appoint Lady Butler-Sloss as chair of the VIP paedophile inquiry.

Most of the criticism has centred around the fact Lady Butler-Sloss sits in the House of Lords and may have to criticise her fellow peers in the inquiry.

Personally, I think much more worrying is the little mentioned fact that Butler-Sloss will most certainly have to investigate a close member of her own family.

Her brother is former Tory MP and Attorney General Sir Michael Havers – who also happened to be one of the establishment figures alleged to have argued for the protection of the identities of VIPs accused of child abuse.

But don’t just take my word for it.

Just 4 days ago – before it was announced Butler-Sloss would head the inquiry – the pro-establishment Daily Mail had this to say about Havers:

View original 152 more words

(2014) Tory Cabinet: Tory child abuse whistleblower: ‘I supplied underage rent boys for Margaret Thatcher’s cabinet ministers’

 

Whistleblower and former Conservative party activist Anthony Gilberthorpe says he provided child prostitutes for a sex and drugs party with top politicians

Senior Tory cabinet ministers were supplied with underage boys for sex parties, it is sensationally claimed.

Former Conservative activist Anthony Gilberthorpe said he told Margaret Thatcher 25 years ago about what he had witnessed and gave her names of those involved.

His allegations that he saw top Tories having sex with boys comes after David Cameron launched a Government inquiry into claims of a cover-up.

Anthony, 52, said: “I am prepared to speak to the inquiry. I believe I am a key witness.”

Trawling seedy streets during a Tory conference, Gilberthorpe says he was asked to find underage rent boys for a private sex party at a top hotel.

Today, more than three decades later, he claims he was acting on the orders of some of the most senior figures of Margaret Thatcher’s government.

Anthony says he was a ­full-time ­political activist when he helped procure the “youngest and prettiest” boys for several cabinet ministers after being told to find “entertainment”.

In a series of explosive claims about conferences at Blackpool and Brighton in the 1980s, he alleges boys as young as 15 indulged in alcohol and cocaine before they had sex with the powerful politicians.

He says one person who attended a party is a current serving minister.

Others said to be present at the parties included Keith Joseph, Rhodes Boyson, Dr Alistair Smith and Michael Havers

As a young aspiring politician, Mr Gilberthorpe admits being in awe of the men, but now insists: “They ­manipulated and groomed me to do their bidding.”

He said: “I was just 17 when I first went to a conference in Brighton in 1978. I couldn’t believe I was rubbing ­shoulders with all these important people and I couldn’t believe that they were taking such a keen interest in me. I would have done anything for them because I was so desperate to make it in politics.

“During the years I was attending conferences between 1978 and 1985, I was a full-time political activist. At the same time I was running for office in district and county council elections.”

Read on:  http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987#ixzz37LoOxuVn

(2014) 1983 Tory Party Chairman Alistair Smith -“ASKED FOR YOUNG BOYS”

 

Mr Gilberthorpe claims that at the 1983 Blackpool conference he was asked by Dr Alistair Smith – the Tory Party Chairman in Scotland – to arrange for young rent boys to have sex with two high-profile cabinet ministers, who we are not naming today.

Other MPs at that party were said to include Rhodes Boyson and Keith Joseph.

In that week he presented the ­then-Prime Minister Mrs Thatcher with a cake to mark her 58th birthday. But he says he also had a more sordid role – using his young looks to find these underage boys for her ministers.

At the time, the age of consent made it illegal to have gay sex with anyone under 21-years-old.

He said: “Dr Smith, who I looked up to at the time and was the most ­important Tory in Scotland, told me to go and fetch some ‘entertainment’, which was code for young boys and handed me a handful of bank notes. There was about £120.”

Mr Gilber-thorpe claims he was not shocked by the request.

He said: “It was a norm and an open secret that these older members of the Tory party, like Dr Alistair Smith, paid for young men to join them at sex parties.

Source: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987#ixzz37LFDmPhw

ARTICLE: The U.K. Political Pedophile Ring Scandal is Just The Tip of the Iceberg – The Full Story is Much More Disturbing

Numerous high ranking British politicians are being investigated for their involvement in an extensive pedophile ring, however the full scope of this scandal can’t be fully appreciated without looking at the other side of the Atlantic

It wasn’t that long ago that those who claimed that there was a massive pedophile ring involving officials in the highest levels of government were written off as conspiracy theorists and kooks. That is no longer the case, at least in the U.K. It turns out that this so called conspiracy theory was true, and is finally being officially investigated. The coverup isn’t going well at this point. The British government is even coming under heat for the convenient disappearance of key files regarding the allegations. At least forty British MPs are implicated, but this is really just the tip of the iceberg.

The scandal, which initially centered around rape and child abuse accusations against the well connected BBC presenter (and knight) Jimmy Savile (who died in 2011) expanded in scope after victims testified that the abuse involved an organized pedophile ring which was operated out of the BBC. This organized pedophile ring apparently involved at least 40 British MPs. Another aspect of this scandal involves a close friend of Savile, former British MP Cyril Smith (also a knight). Police claim to have “overwhelming” evidence that Cyril physically abused young boys in the 1960s. It’s worth noting that Savile wasn’t just well connected, he was known to rub shoulders with the royal family itself.

Whether those involved actually get brought to justice or not is another story altogether. It’s too late to bring down Jimmy Savile and Cyril Smith. They’re both dead already. The question now, is whether the rest of the ring will be prosecuted. This is a scandal that has been successfully suppressed for decades in spite of testimony from numerous victims. Indeed the BBC fired the reporter who first attempted to expose the abuse in 2012. Once you look at the profile of those involved it’s easy to see why. This time however, the internet seems to be making it a bit harder to sweep under the rug.

Regardless of how far the investigation goes officially, the fact that this nastiness is getting brought into the sunlight in England is a good thing. It establishes precedent, and opens up a range of possibilities that most people are unwilling to even consider until a story gets mainstream coverage. It might even prepare people psychologically for the full extent of this scandal.

You think this high powered pedophilia network only operated in the U.K.? I’ve got news for you, the United States government has been covering up their own pedophile network for decades. As in the U.K. case, the evidence surfaced years ago but nothing was ever done.

Exhibit A: This documentary was produced for the Discovery channel, but what it uncovered was so damaging that was never allowed to air in the U.S. Watch it and you’ll understand why.

Read the full article at: scgnews.com

ARTICLE and VIDEO: UK Establishment Closes Ranks as Organised Child Sex Abuse Network Leads Back to No. 10

Hat tip: http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/2013/12/18/uk-establishment-closes-ranks-as-organised-paedophile-network-leads-back-to-no-10/

(Former Home Secretary Leon Brittan alleged as ‘Tory Ex Minister’ in recent coverage)

For decades, vulnerable children from care homes and other institutions were booked to order by rich and powerful men, for sex.  This is the allegation put forward in ‘Nightmares at Elm Guest House’, in an interview with Chris Fay of the National Association for Young People in Care.  As another significant member of the Conservative party is about to be outed this weekend, we take a closer look at these allegations and ask: how much longer can the UK establishment keep this story suppressed?

Child Sex Abuse and the UK Establishment

 

In 1974, a group of child sex abusers launched the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE).  This group was legal at the time, and sought to promote the rights of ‘paedophiles’.  The group espoused the view that children had the right to indulge in their sexual feelings with adults, and argued the age of consent should be lowered to four years old, or abolished altogether.

This was not some fringe group, hidden away.  They had thousands of members, many from senior positions in the media, the security services, politics and other establishment positions.

The members were public and built affiliations with the Gay Liberation Front, the Campaign for Homosexual Equality, mental health charity Mind, and even human rights organisation Liberty (previously named The National Council for Civil Liberties).  The leaders of PIE shared platforms with Harriet Harman, Patricia Hewitt, and others.

PIE members had been using the ‘Contact’ page of their magazine The Magpie, to connect and network with each other.  They also used it to introduce consumers of child pornography to suppliers.  In 1978, the homes of PIE members were raided and they faced charges of conspiracy against public morality.  One person however, was not tried.  He was referred to as “Mr Henderson” until the Private Eye outed him as Sir Peter Hayman, a senior diplomat and former British High Commissioner to Canada.  While other PIE members who indulged in the same activity as Hayman were sent for trial at the Old Bailey, Hayman was sent home by the Attorney General and carried on regardless.

PIE was dissolved in 1984, but not before it had allowed for the creation of a powerful network of paedophiles within the most senior ranks of the UK establishment.

In the documentary Nightmares at Elm Guest House, former National Adult Advisor of the National Association for Young People in Care (NAYPIC) Chris Fay, attests that this paedophile ring was widely known, but that the membership of such senior figures had a double lock effect.  Firstly, the members were in positions of such seniority that they had the political and financial power to keep stories suppressed, close down police investigations and keep members out of jail.  Secondly, the members were such significant establishment faces that the potential impact of their exposure incentivised those around them who knew to keep quiet.

The Elm Guest House

 

The Elm Guest House was a B&B in Barnes, West London, run by Harood and Carol Kasir.  The guest house pitched itself as gay-friendly, but such a description does a great dis-service to the gay community.  On or around the Queen’s Silver Jubilee in 1977, it began to host ‘Kings and Queens’ parties for paedophiles, whereby members of PIE and another group promoting the sexual abuse of children, The Spartacus Club, could fulfil their desires.

It is alleged that from 1977 onward, rich and powerful men were provided with a menu of children’s photographs and school reports, by members of Richmond Social Services.  Once chosen, the child would be sourced from their children’s home (most commonly Grafton Close, just 8 miles away), and taken to Elm Guest House.  On arrival, the children would be drugged and abused, sometimes on camera in the ‘video facilities room’, sometimes in the sauna, sometimes at sex parties in a back room.

Carol Kasir claimed to have kept names from the guest register of Elm Guest House, pictured above, which include major establishment figures. The full list is below:

• Anthony Blunt, Royal Connections, MI5, traitor, Russian spy deceased.
• Harvey Proctor, Monday Club, well known convicted paedophile.
• Sir Peter Bottomley. Worthing MP and Monday Club
• Charles Irving
• Leon Britton, Lord, ex Thatcher Minister (likely the Tory ex minister referred to anonymously in recent newpaper reports)
• Peter Brooke, Life Peer
• John Rowe, MI5, former MP
• Cyril Smith, deceased, ex Rochdale MP
• Ron Brown
• Colin Jordan, ex National Front Leader
• George Tremlett, Former GLC Leader
• Peter Campbell, Monday Club
• Gary Walker, Sinn Fein
• Cliff Richard,aged  Pop Star, known at Elm Guest House as ‘Kitty’
• Jess Conrad, aged ex Pop Star.
• Ron Wells, aged Musician, aka ‘Gladys’ at Elm Guest House.
• Richard Miles, Monday Club
• Chris Denning, ex BBC DJ, convicted paedophile.
• R Langley, Buckingham Palace Equerry
• Terry Dwyer
• Patrick Puddles
• Louis Minster, Head of Richmond Social Services
• Colin Peters, QC – a convicted paedophile sentenced to 8 years in 1989
• Steve Everett, Senior Westminster Social worker
• Ray Wire, so called expert on Paedophile therapy
• Peter Glencross, editor of Monday Club newsletter
• Guy Hamilton Blackwell, son of Westland Helicopters Chairman

The plight of one particular boy illustrates the horrific nature of this network of abuse.

Peter Hatton-Bornshin (pictured) and his brother David were put into care after their mother committed suicide in the 1970’s.  They were 12 and 13.  One day, they were told by senior workers at Grafton Close Children’s Home that they were going ‘a treat’.  Their treat was a visit to Elm Guest House.

Peter, his brother and other boys were made to dress up as fairies, encouraged to become drunk, and invited to play a game of hide and seek.  The boys were told to hide, and when caught by the adult men, would be sexually abused by their captor.  Some of the men who raped, tortured and sexually abused Peter and David have been named as Liberal MP Cyril Smith, Catholic Priest Father Tony McSweeney (who officiated at the wedding of Frank Bruno), and Deputy Manager of Grafton Close Children’s Home John Stingemore (who also supplied the boys).

Peter never got over the abuse he received at the hands of these men.  He later complained about his treatment and received compensation from Richmond Council, while the story remained suppressed.  He fell into poor mental health, and was treated at Broadmoor.  In 1994, just days after his 28^th birthday, he killed himself with a fatal drug overdose.  His suicide note included the words “I will get those bastards.”

The Elm Guest House was raided in 1982.  Police found five pornographic videos of children, evidence of the Kasir’s neglect of their son Eric, and other vice charges.  Over the next year, all charges related to the Elm Guest House were dropped and only the Kasirs faced charges of running a brothel, for which they received a suspended sentence.  The Elm Guest House closed shortly thereafter.

In 1990, with her husband dead and son Eric removed from her custody, it is alleged that Carole Kasir invited NAYPIC’s Chris Fay to view the contents of a box, which he claims contained a photograph of Leon Brittan (while he was a minister of government) dressed as a nurse, with a naked 14 year old boy on his lap.  Kasir had many other pictures of senior members of the UK establishment at the ‘Kings and Queens’ parties.  Kasir refused to give Fay the box, but agreed for him to return a few days later and take photograph the items.  Kasir was found dead on 17^th June 1990, aged 47, before this meeting could take place.

It was claimed she killed herself with an insulin overdose.  Chris Fay and his colleague Mary Moss believe she was murdered.  They argue:

• the last injection found on her body was 72 hours old, and it is unheard of for a person to receive an insulin overdose and live for 72 hours.
• The syringe mark was also on her posterior, when she normally injected into the arm.
• The only person to corroborate Kasir’s handwriting in the suicide note, was David Issit (a known paedophile with links to PIE and the Spartacus Club).
• Kasir had received threatening phone call and intimidation from the police prior to her death

The Open Secret of a Generation

 

(one example of earlier efforts to expose the network)

Even if not complicit, the child sexual abuse ring around Elm Guest House, Grafton Close and the UK establishment must have breathed a collective sigh of relief at Kasir’s death.

They had survived the police raid on PIE in 1978, which took out non-establishment members of PIE but left the wider network and establishment figures untouched.

Conservative MP Geoffrey Dickens repeatedly raised the issue of a London based network of sexual abusers of children between 1981 and 1985.  Dickens believed he had uncovered an establishment network with what he described as ‘big, big names’.  He held a 30 minute meeting with the Home Secretary in 1984, handing over a dossier of his evidence.  The meeting is captured in both Hansard and the media at the time, with Dickens describing himself as ‘encouraged’ following the meeting.  The Home Secretary of the day however, was none other than Leon Brittan – himself named as a frequenter of Elm Guest House on the registers in Kasir’s possession.  The dossier never surfaced, no action was taken, Brittan claims no recollection of this publicly recorded meeting, and the Home Office say they have found no trace of the dossier.

With both Carol and Harood Kasir dead, the Elm Guest House closed, and PIE disbanded – only the children and their alleged abusers remained to tell the story.  It seemed the establishment had won and the secrets would die with those who held them.

Key figures from the period were also starting to reach the natural end of their lives before the truth of the network could be uncovered.  MI5 and Special branch helped maintain the cover of Cyril Smith until his death in 2010.  Jimmy Savile had also been protected from prosecution for rampant rape and sexual abuse of children, from when rumours first began circulating in 1964, to his death in 2011, which meant another key name and holder of secrets had left the scene.  But immediately after his death (a sign of how open his secret must have been), BBC Newsnight began an investigation into the allegations….and the whole network began to blow up, by tracing Savile’s movements and interactions.

The latest series of press interest and police investigations was triggered by Labour MP Tom Watson, who timed judiciously a question to PM David Cameron at the height of the furore over Jimmy Savile.  Tom Watson requested a full investigation of allegations of a “powerful paedophile network linked to Parliament and No 10” at Prime Minister’s Questions on 24^th October 2012.

The Metropolitan Police launched Operation Fairbank shortly thereafter, and repeatedly denied such an investigation was underway when challenged by interested parties.  Since that time, Operation Fernbridge has undertaken to investigate and prosecute those associated with Elm Guest House.

The actions of Tom Watson MP have helped raise awareness, while NAYPIC’s Chris Fay and Mary Moss, reporters at ExaroNews and film makers such as Bill Maloney have investigated over decades and provided the necessary evidence to maintain the case in the face of overwhelming pressure to suppress it.

It’s Time to End the Networks

 

(Grafton Close Children’s Home celebrate the Royal Wedding in 1981, with alleged child supplier Neil Kier on BBQ duty)

I have long left this subject to others to write about.  I had a sense that I should remain quiet on the matter until the legal process had concluded.  I changed my mind after watching Nightmares at Elm Guest House and reviewing the litany of prior police investigations, court cases and media scandals on the matter.  It appears that however close it has seemed, justice has failed to be done for many decades.  The establishment has circled the wagons each time, sacrificed a pawn or two to sate the appetites of public and press, then carried on business as usual.

When one looks closer, we are facing the unfolding nightmare that politicians, pop stars and media figures have been supplied vulnerable children to rape and abuse, by members of the social services, over decades.  It is beginning to appear quite certain, that a significant number of children’s homes and institutions for young people, have been complicit in abuse on an industrial scale.  It is also apparent that a persistent cover up has meant people have been silenced, threatened and perhaps even killed to maintain the silence, and the networks of abuse.  The list is growing:

• Haut de la Garenne children’s home in Jersey
• A network of six children’s homes in and around Nottingham
• Long term and extensive abuse at a network of children’s homes in North Wales
• The abuse at a church run Edinburgh children’s home
• A series of allegations against staff at Cranbourne children’s home in Kent
• The Duncroft Approved School for Girls which provided Jimmy Savile with children with whom to engage in sex acts.

These are but a few of the scandals to emerge in recent years.  The reason for us all to pay attention and for independent journalists and parties to maintain the pressure on this story – is simple.  It is likely that the networks and foul individuals involved have been allowed to fester, largely unchallenged, by the institutions intended to hold them to account.  The police, parliament, the press – all compromised and capitulated.  When members of these institutions were brave enough to come forward, they faced the full force of the establishment.  So it’s on us to stand up and be counted, so that this time, justice is firmly and finally done – in honour of each of the children abused repeatedly by the so called great and good of the UK establishment.  We do not know the guilt of any of those suspected, but we must ensure claims are fully investigated and where guilt is found, appropriate consequences are delivered.

WATCH ‘Nightmares at Elm Guest House’

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

WARNING: Something terrible could be happening in Parliament on Monday

This is from Tom Watson MP. If he’s right, it’s vitally important that you read the following and act on it:

Last Thursday there was a curious announcement in the Chamber of the House of Commons. At the session to announce future business, Leader of the House, Andrew Lansley said this:

“Monday 14th July — consideration of a Bill, followed by a motion to approve the first report from the Committee on Standards on the respect policy”

If you look on Parliament’s web site tonight, you will not see the name, nor the text of the Bill to be considered.

None of your elected backbench MPs have been told what Bill is to be debated on Monday. It’s Wednesday evening. Tomorrow, MPs are on a ‘one line whip’ ie they can return to their constituencies this evening.

Imagine how outrageous it would be, if tomorrow, the government were to announce emergency legislation to an empty chamber. Imagine if that emergency legislation was to be introduced on Monday or Tuesday, with the intention of it slipping through the Commons and the Lords in a single day. Imagine if that Bill was the deeply controversial Data Retention Bill.

It’s a Bill that will override the views of judges who have seen how the mass collection of your data breaches the human rights of you and your family.

Regardless of where you stand on the decision of the European Court of Justice, can you honestly say that you want a key decision about how your personal data is stored to be made by a stitch up behind closed doors and clouded in secrecy?

None of your MPs have even read this legislation, let alone been able to scrutinise it.

The very fact that the Government is even considering this form of action, strongly suggests that they have an expectation that the few people on the Liberal Democrat and Labour front benchers who have seen this legislation, are willing to be complicit.

No matter what you think about this issue, if you care about democracy, make sure your MP does not walk through the chamber and vote for legislation nobody has had the chance to debate and question.

Hat tip: http://mikesivier.wordpress.com/2014/07/10/something-terrible-could-be-happening-in-parliament-on-monday/

NEW LABOUR PARTY: Police raid offices in parliament of Labour peer Lord Janner as part of inquiry in historic child sex abuse claims

• • Leicestershire police carry out search of office in Houses of Parliament
  • It was part of an ongoing inquiry into non-recent child sexual abuse
  • Greville Janner was a Leicestershire Labour MP from 1970 to 1997

 

The move came after police spent several days searching the 85-year-old politician’s home in Golders Green, north-west London, in December.

The widowed father of three, a Labour MP in Leicester from 1970 to 1997, has not been arrested in connection with the allegations and police have yet to send a full file of evidence to the CPS.

But preliminary papers have been served to prosecutors who are advising detectives on the progress of the investigation which started last year after a man came forward claiming he was abused as a teenager in the 1970s by Lord Janner.

The probe has been linked to pervert Frank Beck, who was found guilty of abusing more than 100 children in the 1970s and 1980s.

Beck, who ran three children’s homes in Leicestershire, was given five life sentences and died behind bars. Two hundred children complained they had been abused by him over 13 years to 1986.

In Beck’s 1991 trial, a 30-year-old man said he had been abused by Lord Janner, who was still an MP at the time, while he was in care aged 13. Lord Janner was not prosecuted and received cross-party support in the Commons when he said there was ‘not a shred of truth’ in the claims. Police rarely enter the Houses of Parliament because of the age-old principle of parliamentary privilege intended to guarantee politicians’ freedom of speech.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2665005/Police-raid-offices-parliament-Labour-peer-Lord-Janner-inquiry-historic-child-sex-abuse-claims.html#ixzz37CszXwjh

ALERT: Nottinghamshire Child Abuse Witness Taken By Police, Now Missing!

Please phone 101 and ask to speak to Nottingham Police. Inquire of the missing person and don’t let them brush you off. Get names and badge numbers of the cops. Apply pressure. You would hope that somebody, somewhere would do the same if you went “missing”. You know it’s the right thing to do.  –Watt.

ALERT: Nottinghamshire Child Abuse Witness Taken By Police, Now Missing

A key whistleblowing witness and victim of child abuse at Nottingham Beechwood Children’s Home is effectively missing after sending a text to the UK Column starting…”pls ring urgent, something has happened n I don’t trust the police and I may be locked up tomorrow…” Sent at 21:22 on Wednesday 9th July 2014 the UK Column has been trying to locate the witness ever since.

This witness has reported to us rape, intimidation, beatings, physical and emotional threats as just some of the abuses suffered by vulnerable young children at Beechwood, but some youngsters were also witnesses to ‘suicides’ – children ‘falling’ from upper windows. Other witnesses report that children’s bodies were hidden on the site.

Fearful for the physical safety of this highly vulnerable witness, who already alleges a police cover-up and is fearful of the police, we contacted Nottinghamshire Police via their 101 phone line.

After speaking to the civilian telephone operator and expressing grave concerns for the safety of the witness, Nottingham police were asked if the witness had been arrested and if they were safe. In a short return call the operator said that a police officer had said that the witness was safe. Unconvinced by the vague reply, we asked the name of the police officer and a shoulder number. The operator said they were unsure. They were also unsure as to whether the witness had been judged ‘safe’ at home, had been arrested and was ‘safe’ in custody, or was in a psychiatric facility.

The UK Column duly asked for clarification from a named police officer with their personal number and was promised a call from such an officer. No such call was received overnight. Our worst fear remains that the witness has been sectioned and held in a psychiatric unit in order to silence them.

Early this morning Friday, 11th July 2014 the UK Column again made contact with Nottingham police via their media team. Again requesting information as to the whereabouts and safety of the witness, Richard from the media team would only confirm that the witness was safe, but would not give their location, state if they had been arrested nor give details of the police officer or their official number. He also appeared unsure as to why the police refusal to give full and proper details about the location and safety of a vulnerable child abuse witness would be in the public interest.

The UK Column has also expressed concerns for the safety of this individual to Bassetlaw Nottingham Labour MP John Mann. Mr Mann has recently spoken out about child abuse in Westminster stating that ”there was a cover-up with regard to child abuse investigations in Nottingham.” He also reported on his Twitter post:

On Monday Nottm court Beechwood children’s home abuse. No prosecutions for 100 victims. County Council denying liability.

Further posts state:

No answer yet on how many files destroyed by Notts County Council involving child abuse..Notts County Council offering [£]9000 to child abuse victims but admitting no liability.

BBC Nottingham news team who have previously reported on the horrific child abuses at Beechwood, were also informed by the UK Column of the witness safety concerns, particularly in light of increasing reports from across UK of police forces failing to investigate paedophiles, and reports by witnesses of police harassment and threats to silence them.

To date Nottingham City and Nottingham County Council, holding joint responsibility for the now closed Beechwood home, have paid out some £250,000 in compensation to 17 victims. It is believed the payouts included gagging orders. Nottingham police have previously stated to UK Column that over 92 victims of Beechwood abuse have come forward, but there is no murder investigation.

Again, because of the sensitivity of this case we are extremely concerned for the safety of this witness. We would like to ask that members of the public contact Nottingham Police about the Beechwood child abuse witness via their local 101 telephone number and ask for more information.

ACTION NEEDED! Are you against the state investigating the state?

Please help by signing and spreading the word. We defend our kids and combat our enemies by taking ACTION: https://twitter.com/JU5TLAW/status/487123354156294145?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=fb&utm_campaign=JU5TLAW&utm_content=487123354156294145

ARTICLE: BBC “investigates” SS child-snatching

Hat tip: http://www.christianvoice.org.uk/index.php/2014jan14ss/?fb_action_ids=10154413491120595&fb_action_types=og.comments

The BBC’s flagship current affairs programme has investigated child-snatching by social services.

In a landmark edition of Panorama screened last night (13/01/2014) entitled ‘I want my baby back’, a number of cases of horrific injustice were revealed.

The programme is available to watch on BBC iPlayer for a year and is required – and sobering – viewing for anyone interested in families and justice in the United Kingdom.

According to the write-up: ‘Panorama reporter John Sweeney investigates the secretive world of the family courts and asks whether some parents may have unfairly lost their children forever’.

Presenter Sweeney traveled to Spain to interview one mother who fled the country after her elder daughter was taken and ‘freed’ for adoption in the secret family courts.

Like other parents in the film, and many others whose stories were not told, her child was taken after X-rays showed multiple bone fractures, leading to accusations that she or her partner had physically abused the infant.

But new evidence is linking fragile bones with vitamin D deficiency.  In the landmark case of baby Jayden Wray, his death from multiple fractures led to his parents being charged with murder and having their surviving child taken ‘into care’.

But a post-mortem carried out by paediatric pathologist Dr Irene Scheimberg, interviewed for Panorama by John Sweeney, revealed that Jayden’s bones were so brittle they snapped in her fingers.

All charges were dropped by the police, and a judge ruled that Jayden’s bereaved parents should have their other child returned.

Some very uncomfortable details emerged during the Panorama programme.

Firstly, parents like those of Jayden Wray who protest their innocence are looked upon as uncooperative and ‘in denial’ by social workers, value-judgments which lessen their chances of being re-united with their child.  However, if they admit any kind of guilt, they won’t have their baby returned anyway.

Secondly, the programme revealed something of the merry-go-round of medical experts who are paid to present evidence on behalf of social services departments in the family courts.  Thousands of pounds are paid out for preparing evidence and presenting it at a hearing.  The experts find themselves depending on social services for a considerable income which they know will only continue if they present evidence which supports the position of social services, which appears always to hang on to a child until the bitter end.

One qualified expert radiographer even told a court that cases of vitamin D deficiency were unknown in white children of Caucasian parents, something which is blatantly untrue.

What the programme did not investigate was the huge sums paid to social services and adoption agencies in the event of a successful adoption.  This successor to targets, which also had financial rewards for being met, mean that a single baby is worth £27,000 in adoption grants to somebody.

That might explain why children’s charities always seem so keen on the present system and, put with panic over cases like that of ‘Baby Peter’ why SS departments are so eager to take children ‘into care’.

There are so many children in care now that a scheme to speed up the adoption process has recently been trialled.  This, according to the Guardian, has left parents reporting being ‘bulldozed’.

The only bit of possible good news is that Sir James Munby, president of the Family Division of the High Court, said in November last year that parents of children taken into care should no longer be gagged by the courts and journalists should be allowed to report on proceedings.  Only the death penalty is more drastic than removing a child, he has said.

But opening up the family courts is not going to happen any time soon, and until it does, what John Hemming MP described last night to Mr Sweeney as ‘a tsunami of injustice’ will continue in the secret family courts with their retinue of tame experts and their backdrop of adoption payments.

Sir Peter Hayman – High level member and activist of Paedophile and Information Exchange

For article on Child-sex diary of a diplomat (17.03.81) click this link

Sir Peter Hayman was a British diplomat. He was British high commissioner in Canada from 1970-74. Knighted in 1971. Previously he was director general of British Information Services in New York 1961-64 and deputy commandant of the British military government in West Berlin 1964-66 and High level member and activist of the paedophile information exchange – Click this link for more on P.I.E and its members

In 1978 a packet containing obscene literature and written material was found on a bus. The subsequent police investigation revealed a correspondence of an obscene nature between Sir Peter Hayman and number of other persons. The papers involved an obsession about the systematic killing by sexual torture of young people and children.

Click this link for ; Ex envoy tied to child abuse images and links to pro-paedophile group which wants to legalize sex with children

Another cover up ?

A very dubious and defensive reply from the The Attorney-General when asked by the MP of Huddersfield in April 1981 whether the Director of Public Prosecutions gave special treatment to Sir Peter Hayman by taking steps to prevent his indentity being revealed in court.

Attorney-Generals reply : 

No special treatment was afforded to Sir Peter Hayman and no steps were authorised or taken to protect his identity in evidence given to the court during the trial of O’Carroll and other members of the executive committee of PaedophileInformation Exchange. I made this clear in answers I gave to the hon. Member for Lewisham, West (Mr. Price) on 6 April—[Vol. 2, c. 682–83.]—to which I refer my hon. Friend.

Furthermore, although the indictment in that case was amended before trial, this was because Treasury Counsel had doubts, following a preliminary hearing, as to whether the wording of the original charges might, as a matter of law, be open to objection. The amendment did not arise from any wish to protect the indentity of any person.

The material of a pornographic nature found in the possession of Sir Peter Hayman was not relied on by the prosecution at the trial. There was, so far as the Director of Public Prosecutions is aware, no evidence whatsoever of Sir Peter Hayman having received or sent by post any obscene photograph of a child or young person or of his having taken such photographs or of his having committed any other act which might have been an offence under section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978. The mere possession of obscene material whether relating to children or adults is not in itself a criminal offence.

The Director’s decision not to take proceedings under the Post Office Act against Sir Peter Hayman and others was taken in January 1979 before he received any papers relating to the activities of O’Carroll and other members of the executive committee of PIE.

Does UK justice still cover up for the establishment ? March 1981 – The Montreal Gazette

It was perhaps most notoriously summed up in the obituary posted after the death of Sir Peter Hayman in the Times of April 9, 1992: “…a distinguished diplomatic career… knighted in 1971… Deputy under secretary FCO… High Commissioner to Canada until 1974… retirement damagingly disrupted… police raided his flat… discovered he was a member of Paedophile Information Exchange… 45 volumes of diaries, entries relating to sexual experiences”

Will Great Britain’s paedophile scandal bring down Lord Carrington? December  13,  1983

Former PIE Chairperson and current pro-paedophile activist/pervert Tom O’Carroll (pic below) had this to say on his blog :

As for celebrities in PIE, there were none I know of, but there was certainly a very big fish who joined under an assumed name. This was Sir Peter Hayman, former High Commissioner to Canada. I had no idea about his membership until it was revealed byPrivate Eye in a story alleging an Establishment cover-up of his membership. Hayman was later “outed” in parliament by Geoffrey Dickens MP.

Hayman had also been deputy commandant of the British military government in West Berlin 1964-66, during the Cold War. Any member of a sexual minority in those days, gay or paedophile, would certainly have been regarded as a prime target for Soviet blackmail and hence a major security risk. Little wonder, then, that the government was less than keen for his name to come out.

The Sun 20th March, 1981

ARTICLE: Nick Clegg DISMISSES calls for inquiry into alleged Westminster paedophile ring

At odds with majority: More than 130 MPs have backed inquiry into historic child sex offending

Complacent Nick Clegg has dismissed calls for an inquiry into an alleged 1980s Westminster paedophile ring — as victims threaten legal action.

Ministers are under pressure to act after admitting an explosive dossier, handed to former Home Secretary Leon Brittan in 1983, has disappeared.

Labour today slammed the Home Office’s “lamentable” response and called for a full inquiry.

And shadow crime minister Diana Johnson insisted: “A proper investigation is needed into these allegations.”

Keith Vaz, chairman of the Commons Home Affairs Committee, has written to the Home Office demanding answers.

But Deputy Prime Minister Mr Clegg, who once worked for Lord Brittan in Brussels, ignored talk of an inquiry, saying said: “I just want the truth to come out and justice to be done.

“When we’re dealing with allegations of such a serious criminal nature, I don’t think there’s any surrogate for allowing the police to get to the bottom of what happened.”

More than 130 MPs back calls for an overarching inquiry into historic child sex offending in the UK.

Campaigning MP Simon Danczuk said this week there were “questions to answer” about the missing 50-page dossier on an alleged VIP paedophile ring.

Lord Brittan, now a Tory peer, insisted on Wednesday he passed the document to Home Office officials but heard nothing further.

Yet a Home Office probe last year found the dossier no longer exists.

Lawyers for alleged victims from the notorious Elm guesthouse in south-west London said legal action was being considered against the Home Office.

Alison Millar, from law firm Leigh Day, said: “My clients are incredulous.

“It seems inconceivable that a document of such importance can have simply disappeared.”

Downing Street insisted anyone one with information about abuse should go to the police.

Source: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nick-clegg-dismisses-calls-inquiry-3806172#ixzz36cm2KIAX

ARTICLE: ‘More than 10’ politicians on list held by police investigating Westminster ‘paedophile ring’

Whistleblower who prompted Operation Fernbridge says up to 40 MPs and peers knew about or took part in child abuse

More than 10 current and former politicians are on a list of alleged child abusers held by police investigating claims of a Westminster paedophile ring.

MPs or peers from all three main political parties are on the list, which includes former ministers and household names.

Several, including Cyril Smith and Sir Peter Morrison, are no longer alive, but others are still active in Parliament.

The existence of the list was disclosed by Peter McKelvie, the whistleblower whose claims prompted Operation Fernbridge, the Scotland Yard investigation into allegations of a paedophile network with links to Downing Street.

Mr McKelvie, a retired child protection team manager who has spent more than 20 years compiling evidence of alleged abuse by authority figures, said he believed there was enough evidence to arrest at least one senior politician.

 

It comes as David Cameron ordered the most senior civil servant at the Home Office to conduct a fresh investigation into what happened to a missing dossier on alleged paedophiles in Westminster in the 1980s.

The Prime Minister told Mark Sedwill, the Permanent Secretary at the Home Office, to “do everything he can” to clear up what happened to the file, which was handed to the then home secretary Leon (now Lord) Brittan by the late Geoffrey Dickens MP.

Separately Theresa May, the Home Secretary, said yesterday she would “examine the case” for a public inquiry into historical child abuse in public life, for which 139 MPs have now called –which means 511 MPs have not signed-up to this. Why not? (Ed.)

Mr McKelvie, who helped bring the notorious paedophile Peter Righton to justice in 1992 when he worked in Hereford and Worcester child protection team, said: “I believe there are sufficient grounds to carry out a formal investigation into allegations of up to 20 MPs and Lords over the last three to four decades, some still alive and some dead. The list is there.”

In a letter to his local MP Sir Tony Baldry last month, Mr McKelvie suggested that a further 20 MPs and Lords were implicated in the “cover-up” of abuse of children.

Mr McKelvie, who has compiled a dossier of evidence by speaking to alleged victims and care workers with whom they are in contact, does not suggest that any of the MPs and Lords colluded with each other.

It was as a result of information provided by Mr McKelvie that the Labour MP Tom Watson raised the issue of child abuse at Prime Minister’s Questions in October 2012. He spoke of “clear intelligence suggesting a powerful paedophile network linked to Parliament and Number 10” that arose from the Righton case.

Following Mr Watson’s intervention, the Metropolitan Police began Operation Fernbridge, an ongoing investigation into allegations of sex abuse at the Elm Guest House in Barnes, south London.

At least one witness is understood to have told police in the 1980s that he was abused by a Tory MP at the guest house when he was aged under 10, but the alleged victim has so far refused to give a sworn a witness statement to the police.

The Metropolitan Police has consistently said it is “not prepared to give a running commentary on Operation Fernbridge, which is an ongoing operation”.

Earlier this week it emerged that a dossier on an alleged Westminster paedophile network compiled by the late MP Geoffrey Dickens went missing after it was handed to the former home secretary Lord Brittan in 1983.

Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP who raised questions about the dossier, said yesterday he had received a dozen new allegations naming the same politician this week.

He and six other MPs have written to Mrs May demanding a public inquiry, and in her reply Mrs May said “nothing has been ruled out”, adding: “Once the criminal investigations have concluded, I will thoroughly examine the case for an inquiry into the matters you have raised.”

Speaking about the Dickens dossier, the Prime Minister said he understood the concerns about the missing file.

He said: “That’s why I’ve asked the permanent secretary at the Home Office to do everything he can to find answers to all of these questions and to make sure we can reassure people about these events.

“So it’s right that these investigations are made. We mustn’t do anything, of course, that could prejudice or prevent proper action by the police.

“If anyone has information about criminal wrong-doing they should, of course, give it to the police.”

Yesterday The Daily Telegraph disclosed that a senior Tory who is being investigated as part of Operation Fernbridge was allegedly stopped by a customs officer with child pornography in the 1980s.

The customs officer who made the seizure can now be named as Maganlal Solanki, 76, who said at his home in Leicester yesterday: “I don’t want to go over it all. It’s very disturbing for me. I’ve been told not to say anything by my department.”

Asked about the senior Tory, who was never arrested over the alleged child pornography seizure, Mr Solanki said: “Well, that is just a matter for him.”

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10947561/More-than-10-politicians-on-list-held-by-police-investigating-Westminster-paedophile-ring.html

ARTICLE: Government Passes a ‘Gagging Law’ to Outlaw Critics Ahead of 2015 Elections

Massive hat -tip to Scriptonite

In January 2014 the UK government passed the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill.  A bill gagging charities, NGO’s, bloggers, community groups and most attempts at organised opposition to the government in the year prior to a general election…and just in time for the General Election next year.

What is the Gagging Law?

 The Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill, or Gagging Law, was hailed as the UK government’s answer to the issue of commercial lobbying.

But, this bill does not take on the political power of wealthy corporate lobbyists.  Instead, it kneecaps any attempts at organised local and national opposition by civil society, so as not to influence the outcome of general elections.  It is a gagging law.  The law puts in place a range of bureaucratic and financial barriers amounting to a gag on free speech and effective opposition.  These include:

• The maximum that can be spent before groups have to be registered with the Electoral Commission £20,000 in England and £10,000 in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.

• Reduce the overall UK-wide spending limit before elections from £988,500 at present to a new limit of £450,000.  To put this in perspective – campaign group 38Degrees has 1.7m members, this would mean neutering their spending power on posters, staff, adverts and ancillary costs to just 26p per member.

• Putting in place a spending cap of just £9,750 in a particular constituency, in the year running up to a general election – while the local MP can spend as much as they like until just 4 months from the election.

The new spending limits will come into effect on 19^th September this year.

This is the state if affairs after a successful campaign of opposition put forward by the likes of 38Degrees, Oxfam and Caroline Lucas of the Green Party MP, along with concerned bloggers such as Another Angry Voice and Vox Political, and journalists like Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones.  This opposition won important concessions – but the bulk of the bill remains intact and now, law.

What Does this mean for Free Speech?

This means that groups across the political spectrum, find themselves in an unlikely alliance of  opposition to a bill that will silence them all.  Whether you want to bring back fox hunting or save your local hospital, the Bill will prevent you organising to do so.  As 38Degrees put it:

“It’s telling that so many groups who wouldn’t normally agree with each other have united to oppose the gagging law. Groups that speak out in favour of hunting, windfarms, HS2 or building more houses are joining together with groups who say exactly the opposite.”

The British Medical Association: “if the Bill is passed, its impact could be deeply disturbing, especially as it raises concerns about what this would mean for freedom of expression”.

The Trade Union Congress (TUC) Head of Campaigns Nigel Stanley called it a “chilling attack” on free speech.

Iain Anderson, the deputy chair of the Association of Professional Political Consultants said “The bill doesn’t capture the vast majority of what lobbyists do. We want all lobbying covered in a statutory register.”

Tamsin Cave, of pressure group SpinWatch called the Bill a “deliberate act of divide and rule, that has the signature of Lynton Crosby [the Conservative Party’s election strategist] all over it…This bill, as it stands, is worse than nothing. It is bogus.”

Liz Hutchins, senior campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said it was a “bad day for anyone wanting to protect the environment, save a hospital or oppose tuition fees”.

And Corporate Lobbying Remains Untouched

 It is beyond challenge that UK politics has become corrupted by commercial interests.  This is not a single party issue, but a systemic issue.  But it is not merely about commercial interests paying campaign donations – we have a broader system of revolving doors between politics and business, combined with patronage and favours that this Bill will not touch.  Here are just a sample of modern examples this bill will do nothing to prevent:

Osborne

In 1994, future Chancellor George Osborne was photographed at a party, with his arm around a sex worker called Natalie Rowe, sitting at a table full cocaine.  In October 2005, Natalie Rowe came forward to release the picture and her story to the press.  Rowe sold her story to the Sunday Mirror.  However, to the surprise of Rowe and the Mirror, Andy Coulson broke the story in a leader column in the News of the World.  Not only that, but the story was spun in a manner entirely sympathetic to Osborne, stating that he was ‘a young man when he found himself in a murky world’.  Rowe’s lawyers allege that Coulson stole the story by hacking her phone, and used it to gain leverage with the future chancellor.

And lo, on news of his resignation from the News of the World – Andy Coulson became Director of Communications at Downing Street, despite recently resigning in shame over phone hacking allegations.  He was recruited on the recommendation of none other than George Osborne.

Theresa May

Present day Home Secretary Theresa May’s husband is a director/shareholder in G4S. May has faced several conflict of interest allegations during her tenure.  One of the most egregious was the case of G4S winning a £200m contract to run Lincolnshire police operations.  G4S had recruited law firm White and Cade to support their bid.  In a stunning coincidence, May invited Tom Winsor, a lawyer from the same firm, to conduct ‘an independent review of police reform’ in the run up to the bid – giving the lawyer access to privy information and contacts.Stephen Green & HSBC

HSBC were found guilty in a court of law of funnelling the proceeds of crime through their books knowingly and deliberately.  This was not the act of some rogue trader.

HSBC set up a subsidiary firm with the specific intention of using it to launder the money of Mexican drug barons.  It spirited over $7bn of the stuff between 2001 and 2007.

Stephen Green, the Chairman of HSBC while all this took place, was appointed Trade Minister by David Cameron and now sits at the heart of UK government.

Philip Green

The owner of retail outlet Arcadia, which owns Topshop, is notorious for his tax avoidance schemes.  In 2005, he gave himself the biggest pay cheque in UK history, £1.2bn.  However, by putting Arcadia in his wife’s name (who lives in the tax haven of Monaco and hasn’t done a day’s work for the company) and channelling funds through a string of offshore accounts, Green managed to shift £300m out of the hands of the taxman.  This money could have paid the full £9,000 a year tuition fees for 32,000 students, or the annual salary of 20,000 nurses.  Instead, it sits in Green’s bloated wallet.

Furthermore, despite building a £5bn empire on the back of sweatshop labour – Green refused to sign a pledge to improve safety conditions for Bangladeshi workers after a series of avoidable accidents which left scores dead and injured.

Yet, the Tories appointed this man as their business tsar, leading an ‘efficiency review’ into government spending.  Therefore while Green refuses to pay his share into the pot of public money, he is given power to dictate how that public money is spent.

Libor

Despite persistent rumours about rate-rigging, and receiving information from several sources that an investigation was required – the UK regulator failed to act until it was forced into action by US regulators in 2012.  So why were the Tories so slow to act?

It might be coincidental of course, but some of the Conservative party’s most generous and powerful donors were involved in the scam.

Former Tory Party Treasurer Michael Spencer has donated almost £5m to the party.  This gave him access to dine with the Prime Minister at Chequers.

His firm iCap was fined £55m by regulators in the US and UK for LIBOR rate rigging, and three of his employees face up to 30 years in jail if convicted.  It is notable that while the US fine stood at £41m, the UK fine was a mere £14m (just 4% of their £330m pre-tax profits in 2008, the height of the rigging).  One might suggest this was a decent return on a worthwhile investment.

Lynton Crosby

Cameron has paid £500,000 to appoint Lynton Crosby as the Tory party election strategist.  Crosby is Cameron’s political compass, steering the Prime Minister to launch and ditch policies, and gain the party victory in 2015.

Crosby is an Australian strategist who helped John Howard to four elections victories, and was behind Boris Johnson’s successful campaign to gain re-election as London mayor.

Other items on Crosby’s CV include lobbying for tobacco firm Philip Morris, and he is reported to have signed a £6m deal to lobby on behalf of the firm just last November.  Crosby has also advised energy firms engaged in Fracking in Australia, championing shale gas over sustainable and renewable energy.

And in a remarkably unsurprising turn of events, this year the Tory party chose to ditch its policy on plain cigarette packaging, Osborne announced a raft of tax breaks on Fracking firms, and David Cameron went from promising “Vote Blue, go Green” to “get rid of all this green crap.”

The Bill will do the sum total of diddly squat to deal with these consistent and endemic abuses of power and privilege.

And don’t think Labour are coming to the rescue either.  I have previously covered the parallel issues for the Labour Party.  Labour will not overturn this legislation if they come to power, they have zero interest in doing so.

What Now?

One word: Resist.

Charities, campaigners, community groups and yes, bloggers like myself, will now figure out exactly what their legal standing is in this dark new age of restricted speech – we just don’t know.  But regardless of whether our opposition is legal or not, in coming months and years, we should not bow our heads in resigned acceptance of this most blatant attack on hard won democratic rights.  It is not enough for us to wave our hands, sigh and comply.  If opposing the government in a non-violent way such as organising a leafleting campaign, or transporting people to protests, or writing blogs and petitions calling on voters to act in their own interests is illegal – then let us break the law.  Thomas Jefferson once wrote: “If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.” Well, man or woman, our time has come.

ARTICLE: Pressure Builds in Parliament to Address Child Sex Abuse in the U.K.

So far 7 Conservative M.P.s, 9 Liberal Democrats, and 18 Labour, as well as others from other parties, have joined the campaign to persuade Home Secretary, Theresea May, to launch an inquiry.

One would think that all the 650 M.P.s would support such an inquiry. However, this issue could open a can of worms. For paedophilia in the Establishment –ignored and thereby assisted by the B.B.C.– is undeniable. 

This action serves as a shard of light in this dark and ugly world.

Has your M.P. signed up/ If not, why not? Something to hide? Check the list of those who have signed up.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5282/pressure-builds-in-parliament-to-address-child-sex-abuse-in-uk

 

The rank hypocrisy of Tony Blair: He threw open Britain to millions of immigrants, but now sneers at Ukip

One of the foremost enemies of the people is Tony Blair

There is a particular tone of voice that BBC presenters use when announcing that the airwaves are to be cleared for an interview with Tony Blair.

A solemn preamble conveys the sense that after that morning’s tawdry squabbling of contemporary pygmy politicians such as Nigel Farage, this is the main act.

In truth, very few of us outside BBC headquarters want to hear anything more from Mr Blair, apart, that is, from him uttering one single word. Which is why I stay tuned, in the forlorn hope that I might one day hear Blair say: ‘Sorry.’

That is, sorry for leading us into ill-judged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with thousands of casualties on all sides; sorry for permanently damaging our country’s diplomatic standing by fatuously endorsing President George W. Bush’s cack-handed statecraft; sorry for changing, through a purposeful policy of mass immigration, the cultural fabric of our country without first asking if there was a consensus to do so.
Gabble

Mr Blair is a man who will gabble silkily for lucrative corporate bonding sessions or cosy media interviews.

But he will never utter what we actually want to hear from him – the faintest hint of contrition to those of us living in the country that he seems effectively to have abandoned.

Presenter Jim Naughtie was full of credulous deference towards Mr Blair on yesterday’s Radio 4 Today programme.

Inevitably, Mr Blair was not actually in the BBC studio. On this occasion he was ‘joining us from Berlin’ – a change from Ramallah or Dubai or the other places between which he flits on private jets, and from which he tends to broadcast when taking a break from his crowded schedule of lectures delivered for a vast fee.

The most striking aspect of Blair’s performance yesterday was his assumption that the spectacular progress made by Ukip in last week’s local and European elections came out of the blue sky and had nothing – absolutely nothing – to do with him or the policies of the government he led.

‘I’ve always said you have to have proper controls in place on immigration,’ Mr Blair intoned, unchallenged.

This peculiar assertion is punctured by the research of Migration Watch, which estimates that immigration during the New Labour years added three million to our population.

It also ignores the account of a former Blairite speechwriter, Andrew Neather, that from late 2000 onwards the deliberate policy ‘was to open up the UK to mass immigration’.

More than that, New Labour’s open-door immigration policy was designed, Mr Neather said, to ‘rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date’.

Well, the consequences of that shamefully irresponsible politicking are now to be seen, both in the eastern European migrants crammed six to a room in East London, and in Ukip’s electoral progress.

Nigel Farage would not be grinning at us from the pages of our newspapers with an empty pint glass on his head were it not for Mr Blair’s policies.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2641199/Tony-Blairs-rank-hypocrisy-He-threw-open-Britain-millions-immigrations-sneers-Ukip.html#ixzz33i7mporI

ARTICLE: Paedophile Politicians Are Above The Law says EU!

By Ben Fellows of Before it is News

Also by Ben Fellows: (2012) Conservative M.P. Ken Clarke -”GROPED MY PENIS WITH HIS HAND…[THINKING] I WAS FIFTEEN AT THE TIME”

The question that I’ve been asking is, how can politicians be above the law? Well according to the European Union, all politicians of member states have immunity against prosecution for all criminal and civil offenses with the exception of hate crimes and parking offenses, which beggars belief!

Article 28 of the Treaty of 8 April 1965 establishing a Single Council and a Single Commission of the European Communities (the merger treaty) lays down that the European Communities shall enjoy in the territories of the Member States such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the performance of their tasks, under the conditions laid down in the protocol annexed to that treaty.

Articles 9 and 10 says…

Article 9

Members of the European Parliament shall not be subject to any form of inquiry, detention or

legal proceedings in respect of opinions expressed or votes cast by them in the performance

of their duties.

‘Article 10

During the sessions of the European Parliament its Members shall enjoy:

(a)    in the territory of their own State, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament;

(b)   in the territory of any other Member State, immunity from any measure of

detention and from legal proceedings.

(c)    Immunity shall likewise apply to Members while they are travelling to and from the place of meeting of the European Parliament.

(d)   Immunity cannot be claimed when a Member is found in the act of committing an offence and shall not prevent the European Parliament from exercising its right to waive the immunity of one of its Members.’

“UK POLITICIANS ARE IMMUNE FROM QUESTIONING OR PROSECTION”

So the only time a politician isn’t immune is when they are caught in the act of committing an offense. So if the Cook Report Tapes ever show up then perhaps Ken Clarke could be prosecuted for sexually assaulting me as he would have been filmed in the act of committing a crime. Unfortunately, the lawyers protecting these politicians have placed a time limit on even making a complaint, so Ken Clarke could escape questioning on those grounds if the tapes were found and made public. Effectively, the UK parliament and European Union have given members of parliments a license to get away with murder, literally. In general, this form of immunity is such that, unless the British Parliament or the EU gives its authorization, no member may be arrested or prosecuted for acts not carried out in the performance of their duties.

Of course unless politicians are filmed and recorded twenty four seven then there is no hope of bringing any prosecutions against any politicians within the European Union super state, which is why politicians get caught for minor offenses like parking offenses, speeding offenses or hate crimes. There have been the occasions whereby investigative journalists in recent months have filmed politicians and caught them in yet more “Cash for Questions” scandals but we can’t rely on mainstream media journalists all the time.

So why are Politicians Immune from Prosecution? Well to find out lets look back into the history of the parliamentary system.

In ancient Rome, the tribunes of the people enjoyed special protection in order that they should freely exercise their functions. Anyone who infringed that prohibition was liable to punishment and could even be executed.

Today’s right to immunity is based on the same basic idea, although, fortunatly for me, it does not incur the same penalty! The representatives of the people must enjoy certain guarantees to underline the importance of their office, but more importantly to give them the peace of mind they need to implement their mandate.

The origins of parliamentary immunity date back to a session of the English Parliament in 1397, when the House of Commons passed a bill denouncing the scandalous financial behavior of King Richard II of England. Thomas Haxey, the member who was behind this direct act against the King and his court, was put on trial and sentenced to death for treason. Following pressure applied by the Commons, however, the sentence was not carried out, and Haxey received a royal pardon.

This event prompted the House of Commons to review the right of members of parliament to discuss and debate in complete autonomy and freedom, without interference from the Crown. Freedom of speech, introduced into the House of Commons at the beginning of the sixteenth century was confirmed in the 1689 Bill of Rights, which expressly protected discussions and acts of Members of Parliament from any form of interference or objection from outside of Parliament.

ALL POLITICIANS HAVE IMMUNITY, EVEN WHEN THEY HAVE RETIRED!

Unlike inviolability, non-liability has an absolute quality, reflected in particular in the duration of its effects: the protection afforded is maintained even after the member’s mandate has come to an end. In other words all politicians have immunity even when they are no longer politicians and have retired. However, whilst there may well have been very good reasons to safe guard parliament from the interference of the crown. Its clear that these privillages are being abused along with the nations children.

When it comes to Paedophilia, child abuse and sexually motivated crimes should politicians still have the right to immunity?

After all how is abusing children part of their Parliamentary mandate? I have never voted for any politician to abuse children. It’s clear that after the Jimmy Savile case it appears that he had immunity from prosecution along with other powerful Paedophiles and child abusing celebrities. The Daily Star Sunday tells of police being told “Stop investigating if you want to keep your jobs” when investigating an alleged paedophile ring at the heart of Margaret Thatcher’s government. A teenage rent boy had alleged that a cabinet minister at the time, who is still alive, had abused him. He also named judges and civil servants. We now know that they were then and will always be, immune from any form of prosecution or questioning by the authorities.

I was informed by the Metropolitan Police that there were protocols in place that meant politicians are above the law and cannot be questioned. I guess they were referring to these EU rules which now govern us all.

Shouldn’t the public be informed of these EU rules? Where is the report on the BBC and other mainstream news outlets informing the public of the EU’s rules. Perhaps the BBC executives and board members are also immune from prosecution like all the other Paedophiles in the country it seems. Perhaps it’s time to change the EU and UK rules on paedophiles operating in and around Westminister. However, if you think that it’s just the Politicians who are immune from prosecution then think again. These privillages also apply to civil servants, their assistants, witnesses, experts and anyone who is involved in the meetings including private individuals in business .

Isn’t it time for politicians to stop being immune against prosecution in regards to child abuse or will we allow these paedophile politicians to continue to abuse parliamentary rules and our children? Not being immune from prosecution may not stop paedophilies but it will mean that “we the people” can have them arrested and prosecuted when witnesses are brave enough to come forward.

 

ARTICLE: Iraq Inquiry: why Sir Jeremy Heywood should be stripped of his role immediately

As the Telegraph reports today, Sir Jeremy Heywood, the Cabinet Secretary, is blocking the publication of correspondence between George W Bush and Tony Blair ahead of the Iraq War, together with later correspondence between Gordon Brown and Mr Bush – thus effectively stalling the already heavily delayed Iraq Inquiry.

No security issues are at stake. The blocking of the correspondence between Downing Street and the White House is an affront to democracy and prevents us from forming a judgment about the most disastrous war in recent British history. Sir Jeremy Heywood should now be removed from all decisions relating to the Iraq Inquiry, because he was himself deeply involved in the flawed government process in the run-up to and after the invasion of Iraq.

Sir Jeremy was appointed Tony Blair’s principal private secretary in 1999. Within a short space of time (as his senior colleagues have told me in detail) he became an intrinsic part of the collapse of the process of government which took place after 1997.

As Sir Robin Butler graphically described, the principles of sound, accountable administration were abandoned and replaced by “sofa government”. Decisions were made informally by a small coterie including Blair, Alastair Campbell, Jonathan Powell and Anji Hunter. Sir Jeremy was the only civil servant who was granted full access to the sofa.

The sloppiness of this new Downing Street machinery became manifest in the summer of 2003 when the Hutton Inquiry into the death of David Kelly tried to reconstruct the process which led to the release of the name of the MOD scientist in national newspapers. Lord Hutton learnt that four meetings, all involving senior officials and cabinet ministers, each chaired by the prime minister, took place in Downing Street to discuss Dr Kelly in the 48 hours before his name was released. In an amazing breach of normal Whitehall procedures, not one of these meetings was minuted at the time.

In the normal course of events it should have been the job of the principal private secretary to the prime minister – ie Jeremy Heywood – to draw up these minutes. Yet he did not do so.

This episode shows that Sir Jeremy Heywood is much too implicated in these matters to be permitted to make decisions of deep sensitivity concerning the White House/Downing Street correspondence.

David Cameron must now urgently intervene to strip Sir Jeremy of his role, and take control of the decision himself. If he fails to do this, the Prime Minister himself risks becoming complicit in what now looks more and more like a giant cover-up involving elements of the British establishment and political class to prevent the truth becoming known about how we became involved in the Iraq War.

Hat tip: Peter Oborne http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100244895/iraq-inquiry-why-sir-jeremy-heywood-should-be-stripped-of-his-role-immediately/

ARTICLE: Politician, paedophile and GP claim ‘right to be forgotten’

Google has already received several requests to remove links from its search results

An ex-politician seeking re-election, a man convicted of possessing child abuse images, and a GP who received negative reviews from patients have all asked Google to delete their internet histories, after the European Union’s top court ruled that data about individuals held by Google must be removed on request.

The European Court of Justice said earlier this week that an individual has the “right to be forgotten” when such personal data “appear to be inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant, or excessive in relation to the purpose for which they were processed and in the light of the time that has elapsed”.

The ruling only compels Google to remove the links to information, rather than the information itself. This means users of Facebook, Twitter and other social media can still share personal information about others, so long as it remains online.

EU Commissioner Viviane Reding described the decision as “a clear victory for the protection of personal data of Europeans”, and former shadow home secretary David Davis MP welcomed the ruling as “sensible”, claiming that this is “the first step in people having property rights in their own information”.

However, Dominic Raab, MP for Esher and Walton, called it “a draconian attack on free speech and transparency, totally at odds with Britain’s liberal tradition”, and the Open Rights Group said the ruling could pose a threat to free speech online.

ARTICLE: The Queen’s Speech and 12 words that insult every British voter

Buff the trumpets, polish the footmen, and marvel at all the pomp involved in pretending to be a democracy.

As the heralds pootle out a tune and the ladies-in-waiting hold Brenda’s ermine cloak, consider the fact that everything in her speech is politics.

As Phil the Greek tries to stay awake and glares at the plebs, consider the fact that Parliament has just been closed for 19 days because the government ran out of ideas.

And when the Queen peers through her thick plastic specs to announce her great reforming government will bring in a law to sack misbehaving MPs, try not to put a fist through the wall.

The Queen will say: “My ministers will introduce legislation on the recall of members of Parliament.”

At precisely the same moment, Nick Clegg’s carefully-scrubbed face will beam with self-righteousness and unimpeachable morality.

Because this is something every single party leader said they would support after the expenses scandal of 2009.

This plan was in the Coalition agreement in 2010, which said: “We will bring forward early legislation to introduce a power of recall, allowing voters to force a by-election where an MP is found to have engaged in serious wrong-doing and having had a petition calling for a by-election signed by 10% of his or her constituents.”

And here we are, after four years of government in which it has conspicuously not become law and we’ve been plagued by the likes of Patrick Mercer (disgraced, resigned, golden handshake), Eric Joyce (disgraced, resigned, still in a job) and Mike Hancock (suspended after “prima facie evidence” of “unwanted sexual advances”, still in a job).

And all of whom, if we had that power of recall, might well be down the Job Centre some time ago signing on for £70 a week rather than £67,000 a year with access to subsidised beer.

We’ve also got catastrophically low voter engagement with the political process, with a 15% turnout for the Police and Crime Commissioner elections, 36% for the Euros and just 65% for the last general election where everyone was so unpopular we ended up with “whoever isn’t Gordon”.

The man who runs the country today wasn’t voted into the job. He took it. A mere 36% of voters backed him and that doesn’t put him within screaming distance of a democratic mandate to, for example, hack about the welfare state.

So we need some Parliamentary reform. We need some of the turkeys in the House of Commons to tell one another that Christmas can be a time of fun and feasting.

The time is ripe, and the tide of public disdain is high. People want change.

So perhaps that’s why on February 13 the recall bill was unceremoniously dumped.

It had, as promised, given voters the right to recall a MP with a petition backed by 10% of voters to trigger a by-election.

The trouble with this is it would change stuff.

It would, specifically, switch the loyalty of MPs from their party to mainly their voters, who could yank them off the gravy train with little notice.

This would mean the party machinery – the concept of leader loyalty, voting with the whip, staying on-message to get promoted – would sail out of the window quicker than a potty full of yesterday’s crap.

And that would mean party leaders would find it harder to push through unpopular ideas like the bedroom tax, war, or increased taxes.

And in Coalition government, loyalty is in much shorter supply than rebellion.

Cabinet jobs that buy support have to go around more people, constituency associations put pressure on MPs over issues like gay marriage, and in the first three years of this Parliament Tory and Lib Dem MPs rebelled in 39% of votes.

So Dave and Nick looked at the recall bill and said to themselves: “Shit, no.”

Then they looked at their last year of government, a total lack of any ideas, and a desperate need for something they could say had cleaned up politics.

And then they reintroduced the recall bill for the Queen’s Speech, with the slight tweak that if 10% of local voters signed a petition it would trigger a meeting of MPs to consider whether to sack an MP.

You might want to read that bit again.

The new bill, so proudly announced with all the trumpets and gold twiddly bits, is going to give MPs the right to discipline MPs.

Which is something MPs already have, via the Standards and Privileges Committee, and which did such a marvellous job with Maria Miller’s expenses.

And this new bill, which will cost us taxpayers money in terms of Parliamentary time, food, heating, light, wages and clerical costs, will give them this right they already have while pretending it’s giving us that right.

This is not recall.

This is not democracy.

This is not on.

It’s like trying to stop child abduction by putting the Childcatcher from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang in charge of it.

You might as well go to London, stand at the gates of Downing Street, and laugh hysterically at every passer-by.

With this great reform, an MP will be able to take the money and never turn up at work for five years. They will be able to leave the party their voters chose, become a Communist, abandon their pledges, and commit any crime attracting a jail sentence of less than one year’s custody and there’s nothing anyone can do about it.

(And FYI, less than a year’s sentence would include assaults, £12,900 of expenses fraud, getting your wife to take your speeding points, and possession of child porn.)

Ask yourself this question: If your MP found in possession of child porn, admitted it and was sentenced to six month’s imprisonment, would you want to sack them?

WELL, YOU CAN’T.

In those parts of the world where recall takes place, it does not lead to politicians being wrongly removed from office by vexatious campaigns.

They have voters who feel empowered, and politicians who have a good reason to keep their noses clean.

We do not have recall.

We do not have voters who feel empowered.

We do not have politicians who are forced to behave themselves.

We just have Nick Clegg, who has this morning used the Queen to deliver the British voter a shattering insult.

You blow trumpets about that if you can. All I can hear is a giant raspberry, and the cynical cackling of people who know they’re safe.

* Contact your MP to demand proper recall here and sign Zac Goldsmith’s petition for the same here.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/queens-speech-12-words-insult-3643946#ixzz33ho6NvuU

ACTION: London M25 Blockade to Stop the Theft of Children by the SS (“Social Services”)

Find out more:  http://britainsroadblockadeforjusticejuly24th21014.yolasite.com

PARASITES: cast-off ministers given golden goodbyes of almost £90,000 including payment to richest MP in Commons

Tories and Liberal Democrats axed in the reshuffle will receive a total of £88,687 on ‘Money Monday’ in Whitehall.

Taxpayers face forking out almost £90,000 in “golden goodbyes” to reject ministers today.

Tories and Liberal Democrats axed in the recent reshuffle can pocket up to £17,000 apiece tax free on what has been dubbed Money Monday in Whitehall.

Conservative Richard Benyon – the richest MP in the Commons, who stands to inherit £110million – is in line for more than £5,000 of public money.

Officials say that the severance pay is a legal entitlement but Ireland is changing the law to end the cash for cast-offs scheme there as part of austerity measures.

Campaigning MP John Mann said that the UK should follow suit.

Labour’s Mr Mann said: “There is no basis whatsoever for paying this in Britain. We should follow their lead.

“These people are still getting generous MPs’ pay. It is an insult to people struggling across the country that they get a golden handshake.”

All departing ministers are entitled to three months pay if they do not get another job within three weeks.

That means that those dumped in the last reshuffle can claim the cash from today.

Former Cabinet minister Michael Moore is set to pocket £17,042 after he was sacked as Scotland Secretary.

Fellow Lib Dem Jeremy Browne is among five ex-Ministers of State who are in line for £8,086 after being axed.

Conservative Simon Burns can also pocket the huge sum even though he quit to stand unsuccessfully for Deputy Commons Speaker.

Benyon is one of three junior ministers who are entitled to £5,760 each. Three of his fellow Tories get £4,646 after leaving the whips office. Two of them, John Randall and Greg Knight, have also received knighthoods.

In all, taxpayers face paying out £88,687 to ex-ministers.

A Cabinet Office spokesman said: “Severance pay is widely used across both private and public sectors. Ministerial severance pay has been required under legislation since 1991.”

But low tax pressure group the TaxPayers’ Alliance echoed John Mann’s call for the payments to be axed.

Spokesman Jonathan Isaby said: “When money is so tight and David Cameron talks about wanting to reduce the cost of politics, it beggars belief that these golden goodbyes are still being doled out to ex-ministers.

“After all, having left these posts, they will all still get the MPs’ annual salary of more than £66,000.

“MPs taking on a ministerial role know full well that it’s no job for life and ought to be planning their finances accordingly.

“Taxpayers will be especially baffled that even those who resigned of their own accord still get these tax-free payments worth thousands: which of their constituents working in the private sector would get a bumper payday for quitting their job?”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/reshuffled-ministers-90000-golden-goodbyes-2648408#ixzz2xirtrG00

(2014) Ex-Tory minister ‘pictured in child sex abuse video’ confiscated by customs at Dover in 1982

MI5 –maintaining the criminal, corrupt, and decadent regime by protecting paedophiles in office. That is its raison d’être.

A probe by the Sunday People and investigative website Exaro uncovered evidence the tape is believed to be among a batch of films seized and handed to MI5.

A former Tory cabinet minister was pictured in a video allegedly featuring child sex abuse, it has been claimed.

The tape is believed to be among a batch of films seized by customs officials and handed over to MI5, reports the Sunday People.

No details about it have ever been made public.

But the customs officer who seized the haul is said to have identified the ex-minister in the footage.

However, he declined to say whether or not the politician was participating in the alleged child abuse.

A probe by the Sunday People and investigative website Exaro has ­uncovered evidence that the cassette was ­confiscated at Dover in 1982.

A seizure notice shows a customs ­officer took custody of three 8mm films, three video cassettes and an order form.

The notice said the items were “seized as liable to forfeiture upon the grounds that the said goods are indecent or ­obscene articles”.

Friends of the customs officer, now retired, have confirmed he told them this week that he recognised the minister in the film – but would not say anything else after his former bosses reminded him he had signed the Official Secrets Act.

This week the officer was too frightened even to open his front door, and said he was unwilling and unable to comment.

He said: “I am bound by all these regulations until I die.”

The existence of the video is likely to be seized upon by Operation Fernbridge cops investigating claims of a historical VIP sex abuse ring.

They are understood to have already spoken to the ex-minister about another video that places him at a sex party involving teenage boys three decades ago.

Now they are expected to speak to the customs officer.

The video was seized at Dover’s Eastern Car Terminal along with other child pornography.

It was being brought into Britain from Amsterdam by Russell Tricker, a British-born businessman based in the Dutch capital. He was held for two hours and officials confiscated the tape.

The customs officer then passed the case over to senior managers at Customs and Excise – since reorganised as part of HM Revenue and Customs.

They took no further action against Mr Tricker, and are understood to have passed the tape to MI5 .

The seizure notice gave brief details of some of the material, showing one of the videos was titled “GB10”.

A child abuse victim has told Exaro that this video showed boys, some of them “runaways”, who could be ­“ordered” by paedophile clients.

Another video was called “Amsterdam Tramway Museum” and featured images of boys from elsewhere in Europe who could be procured by perverts.

The video started with a few minutes of train footage before turning to ­pornographic images of boys.

Mr Tricker confirmed he was stopped by customs officials when travelling through Dover as a passenger in 1982.

But he claimed he did not know what was inside the sealed packages.

He said: “I have nothing to hide. I was asked to take some brown envelopes to England. They were seized by Customs. I did not know what was inside them.”

Mr Tricker said a business associate had asked him to take the packages into the country and then post them to an address in the UK.

Asked whether he was aware of claims that an ex-minister and child sex abuse featured on one of the videos, Tricker denied any knowledge of the content.

“They were just confiscated, and I was allowed to continue my journey. They detained me for two hours,” he said.

Mr Tricker confirmed he was convicted of a child sex offence in the Netherlands in 1992 and jailed for two-and-a-half years, but said he was cleared on appeal and released after five months.

His lawyers were able to show that the boy concerned had carried a false ­identity card and had pretended to be above age, Mr Tricker said.

The boy was later shot dead in Amsterdam, he said.

“It is a sad story,” he added.

Tricker denies being a paedophile but confirmed he was a personal friend of Peter Glencross, who was commercial manager of Spartacus International.

At the time, Spartacus International was used to attract new members to the Spartacus Club, an underground network for paedophiles.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ex-tory-minister-pictured-child-sex-3300248#ixzz2xYzQzBjd

(2014) Conservative Council to Ban Feeding the Homeless

THEY spent much of the run-up to the election trying shake off their image as the nasty party.

But a heartless group of Tories have ­revealed their true colours by banning charities from running soup kitchens for the ­homeless.

Conservative Westminster council in Central London also wants to make it an offence to sleep rough – while slashing £5million of funding to hostels.

Astonishingly, town hall chiefs claimed soup kitchens only “encourage” people to sleep on the streets.

Westminster council, one of the richest in the land, wants to bring in a bylaw making it an offence to “give out food for free”, punishable by fines. The twisted move blows apart David Cameron’s Big Society boast that an army of ­volunteers will flock to help those worse off.

And it sparked a storm of ­criticism. Reverend Alison Tomlin of the Methodist church in ­Westminster said: “The proposals are nothing short of disgusting. This bylaw punishes people solely for their misfortune and belongs in a ­Victorian statute book, not the 21st century.”

Labour’s London mayoral ­candidate Ken Livingstone added: “Only the Conservatives would try to make it illegal to give food to the homeless.

“With Tory mayor Boris Johnson cutting affordable housing to a trickle, the number of people sleeping on the streets is rising and cuts to housing benefit threaten ­thousands more with eviction and homelessness.”

Councillor Paul Dimoldenberg, leader of the Labour Group, said: “Nothing illustrates the cold-hearted and callous approach of the Conservatives than this attempt to criminalise those offering help to ­homeless people.

“I thought this was what the Big Society was supposed to be all about, generous-hearted people giving their time to those less fortunate, at no cost to the public purse. This is a nasty, mean move from a nasty, mean party.”

A consultation paper says rough sleeping and soup runs would be banned in the Westminster Cathedral Piazza and surrounding area. Labour said the cruel move comes as the council ­withdraws funding for three hostels in the borough and housing trust.

But Westminster’s Daniel Astaire risked provoking further fury by declaring free food “keeps people on the street longer”. He added: “Soup runs have no place in the 21st century. It is undignified that people are being fed on the streets. They actually encourage people to sleep rough with all the dangers that entails. Our priority is to get people off the streets altogether. We have a range of services that can help do that.”

A council spokesman said soup runs attract up to 100 people at a time, “making it a no-go area for residents, with issues around litter, urination, violence and disorder”.

3Tory councillor John Fareham has apologised after calling opponents of Hull council’s £65million cuts “retards” on Twitter. He said: “I got it wrong.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/feeding-homeless-to-be-banned-by-tory-run-westminster-113433#ixzz2xMikI0oV

VIDEO: How the Lib-Lab-Con is Destroying Britain

A five-minute synopsis of the threat you and your family face from the criminal, corrupt and decadent regime that the fools keep voting for. (See first 6 minutes.):

 

VIDEO: Conservative Party Ken Clarke M.P. -“PAEDOPHILE”

Article: Vote Labour -Get a Paedo for a Neighbour

Why now? Why after all this time –after patriots, nationalists, and the alternative media have been exposing this for years– does the Daily Mail suddenly cover the outrage?

Enemies of the People posted this story over 4 (FOUR) years ago:  (2009) LABOUR FIGURES’ BIZARRE LINK TO PAEDOPHILE GROUPS:

Will there be a public enquiry or a national cover-up? Will Harriet Harperson and her husband, Jack Dromey, be resigning as an M.P.s in disgrace?  

How three of the party’s most senior figures campaigned for a vile paedophile group now being probed by police for ‘abusing children on an industrial scale’

• Documents found by Mail show link between Left-wing and paedophiles
• Harriet Harman, Jack Dromey and Patricia Hewitt held senior positions at National Council for Civil Liberties before rising to top of the Labour party
• The NCCL was an ‘affiliate’ of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), whose members may have abused children on an ‘industrial scale’
• Paperwork reveals NCCL helped lobby Parliament for the age of sexual consent to be cut to as low as ten and called for incest to be legalised

ABOVE: “We’re all in this together.”

Appearing in the pages of a Left-wing magazine called Rights, it was, by any account, an extraordinary letter.

Written by one Mike Morten, who lived in London and described himself as ‘both a paedophile and gay’, the letter complained that laws forbidding him from having sex with children ‘interfere with my life and civil liberties’.

‘Consensual sex between adults and children is simply people of different age groups being nice to each other,’ it argued.

Morten then criticised recent newspaper articles which had described perpetrators of child sex offences as ‘molesters’.

‘This is a loaded and pejorative term,’ he declared. ‘It’s a totally inaccurate description of us, and a put-down, in much the same way that “pansy” is a put-down of gays and “n*****” a put-down of blacks.’

The letter was dated October 1982, and today his words seem so bizarre, so appalling, that a casual reader could be forgiven for wondering if they are a grotesque spoof.

No magazine, of any political persuasion, would dare to carry material that attempted to portray paedophiles as some sort of oppressed minority.

Neither would the oxygen of publicity be given to a self-confessed sexual predator who, like Morten, wanted to convince readers that small children might somehow ‘enjoy’ being abused by adults.

The publisher of a printed title which advanced such morally repugnant views, apparently in the name of political correctness, would surely be committing career suicide.

Yet Rights was no knockabout spoof. And the people behind its publication certainly didn’t sink without trace.

Quite the reverse, in fact.

The now dog-eared 1982 magazine, which I have unearthed in archives, was the quarterly journal of the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL), the well-known lobby group which is now called Liberty.

Known as a radical campaigning organisation, the NCCL was that year being run by three tub-thumping young Left-wingers who would rise to extremely senior positions in the Labour Party.

One was Patricia Hewitt, who as general secretary of the NCCL from 1974 to 1983 was at the helm of the organisation. She went on to become Tony Blair’s Health Secretary, and nowadays has a lucrative seat as a non-executive director on the board of BT earning £160,000 a year for a part-time job.

Another was Harriet Harman, the current Labour Deputy Leader. She served as its legal officer from 1978 until October 28, 1982, when she won a by-election and entered Parliament as the MP for Camberwell and Peckham.

A third was Jack Dromey, Harman’s husband, who sat on the NCCL’s executive committee for more than a decade.

Please read on for much, much more:  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2562555/Labours-child-sex-apologists-How-three-partys-senior-figures-campaigned-vile-

(1950-1966) Then-Labour Cllr. Cyril Smith -HOMOSEXUAL PAEDOPHILE

Homosexual Paedophile Cyril Smith molested and tortured children during his 16 years as a school teacher and Labour Councillor.

 

Although we have heard Constantly by the Labour affiliated media that Cyril Smith was aligned to the liberal Democrats, hidden evidence has shown his dirty deeds attacking boarding school children go way back into the 1960′s.

 

One of the Seven children who were attacked at the ‘Cambridge Boys Hostel’ which was funded by Freemasons, said that Cyril Smith who was employed by the hostel, pulled him into a secluded room and told the child he was to be punished. The child was made to pull down his pants and was made to bend over Cyril Smith’s knee while he had his bottom spanked and fondled. Another child was subjected to the homosexual paedophile’s torture because he had taken money from another boy. Labour councillor Cyril Smith made the second child remove his pants so he could fondle and squeeze the boys testicles.

 

Labour Councillor Cyril Smith attacked and raped at least 7 male children while at the Cambridge Boys Hostel. Cyril Smith was the local Labour councillor from 1950 to 1966. The  Cambridge Boys Hostel was closed down in 1965.

Hat tip:  http://labour25.com/2013/03/21/a-glutton-for-boys/

 

VIDEO: Labour’s Cyril Smith -PAEDOPHILIA BEFORE HIS TIME IN THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS WITH THE FULL BACKING OF THE ESTABLISHMENT

In the video Chris Marshall, one of many victims of Cyril Smith, makes the following uncomfortable points and asks some serious questions of the Establishment that is directly involved with your children.

…people knew about what he was doing, people that worked close to him. Why didn’t they come forward…why didn’t they open their mouths? They knew what he was doing. They were quite happy to go and watch him get knighted; they were quite happy for him to be an MP, a mayor or something… People knew what he was doing; why didn’t anyone say anything.

The answer is obvious and simple: because the Establishment is riddled with paedophiles, degenerates, criminals, traitors… who look after each other and who are a direct threat to you and your family.

ARTICLE: United Nations Finally Admits to Purposefully Killing off European Native Peoples

The EU should “do its best to undermine” the “homogeneity” of its member states, the UN’s special representative for migration has said.

Peter Sutherland told peers the future prosperity of many EU states depended on them becoming multicultural.

He also suggested the UK government’s immigration policy had no basis in international law.

He was being quizzed by the Lords EU home affairs sub-committee which is investigating global migration.

Mr Sutherland, who is non-executive chairman of Goldman Sachs International and a former chairman of oil giant BP, heads the Global Forum on Migration and Development, which brings together representatives of 160 nations to share policy ideas.

He told the House of Lords committee migration was a “crucial dynamic for economic growth” in some EU nations “however difficult it may be to explain this to the citizens of those states”.

‘More open’

An ageing or declining native population in countries like Germany or southern EU states was the “key argument and, I hesitate to the use word because people have attacked it, for the development of multicultural states”, he added.

“It’s impossible to consider that the degree of homogeneity which is implied by the other argument can survive because states have to become more open states, in terms of the people who inhabit them. Just as the United Kingdom has demonstrated.”

Read on:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18519395

VIDEOS: ‘Beheadings-R-Us’ by Cameron and Hague-backed Syrian “Rebels” (WARNING: Graphic Images)

http://www.barenakedislam.com/2013/07/18/syria-beheadings-r-us-by-obama-backed-and-armed-fsa-jihadist-rebels-warning-graphic-images/

ARTICLE: WARNING! John Cruddas MP -WANTS TO FORCE PARENTS TO DRUG THEIR KIDS OR LOSE THEIR BENEFITS

 

Cruddas’s previous rap sheet:

(2012) New Labour M.P. John Cruddas -BANNED FROM DRIVING AND FINED £300 FOR HAVING NO M.O.T. OR INSURANCE

Expenses Scandal Mark 2? New Labour Parasites Margaret Hodge and John Cruddas Suck Even More from the Taxpayer

Take a look at what they want to drug your kids with and its effects:

Vaccine Truth: Your Child, Your Choice

Hundreds of Articles Exposing the Lies of Vaccines by Dr Christina England

Dr. Andrew Wakefield reveals real story behind vaccines, autism and more

Fatal Auto-Immune Disorder Caused By Hepatitis B Vaccine

UK Drug Safety Agency Falsified Vaccine Safety Data For 6 Million – Millions of Children At Serious Risk

Premature ovarian failure 3 years after menarche in a 16-year-old girl following human papillomavirus vaccination

 

• Family would have to prove vaccination before handouts, says Cruddas
• Part of drive to link public goods to changing the behaviour of citizens
  
• But Labour quickly distanced itself from the idea of linking jabs to benefits

Parents should lose their child benefit if they refuse to immunise their children with the MMR jab, a senior Labour MP has suggested.

Families will have to prove their child’s vaccination records are up to date to qualify for handouts, said Jon Cruddas, who is leading the party’s policy review.

The MP for Dagenham & Rainham suggested the measure, which is already in place in Australia, could be a way to link behaviour with state benefits and services.

However, Labour rushed to dissociate itself from the idea last night, saying ‘it is not part of the policy review’.

Shadow chancellor Ed Balls said: ‘There is no question of a Labour government ever taking child benefit away or punishing parents for choices they make on vaccinations.

‘I don’t know where that came from. It is not our policy. It is on the front of the newspapers but it is not true.

‘We would never say child benefit is conditional on taking a jab,’ he told ITV’s Daybreak.

The idea emerged after the uptake of the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine has dropped to dangerously low levels in some areas.

The risks were underlined earlier this year when more than 1,000 people caught measles in Swansea. One victim, a man aged 25, died.

A senior party source said: ‘This is an example of the sort of measure which we want to see that ties public goods to how people behave as citizens.’

When he was still in power this summer, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced that people who did not immunise their children would be denied some benefits to boost vaccination rates for diseases such as whooping cough and measles.

Exemptions would only be made on religious or medical grounds, he said.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2429738/Cut-benefits-parents-fail-children-MMR-jab-says-Labour-policy-chief-Jon-Cruddas.html#ixzz2fjwcT8xX

ARTICLE: U.K. “Government” Refuses to Allow a Petition against White Genocide

This was recently emailed in to the site and I found it interesting so I re-publish it here:

I recently attempted to set up a white genocide petition on the UK Government’s website. Normally when a petition is rejected, they list the rejected petition and the reasons why it was rejected. However my petition was not listed as rejected and i never received any explanation as to why. So I decided to contact the Petition site for an explanation.

Here the email exchange I had with a House of Commons Assistant Secretary.

to me
Moderation decisions are taken in individual Government departments, and I was not involved in this decision. Having viewed the petition, I agree with the views of the moderators. We do not display e-petitions which are moderated as offensive, as made clear in the terms and conditions of the site.
Yours sincerely
Ben Sneddon
Assistant Private Secretary
Office of the Leader of the House of Commons
——————————————————–
to petitions
could you please explain to me how protesting the genocide of my people is OFFENSIVE?
——————————————————–
to me
We do not allow petitions which make accusations of criminality. As your petition accuses unspecified ‘anti-racists’ as genocide, this falls as a matter for the courts.
—————————-
to petitions
I see that this petition was accepted
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/44089
if i take out the accusation of unspecified individuals and replace it with the wording in the numbered list, that will be acceptable correct?
——————————————————-
to me
Moderators consider e-petitions based on the action the petition is calling for. In your rejected e-petition, the action you are calling for is for the Government to stop ‘non-white immigration’ and ‘forced assimilation’. Should you wish to resubmit your e-petition, the wording should be focused around this, rather than the accusations of genocide which are presented without evidence in the original petition.
——————————————————-
to petitions
This petition is making accusations of ongoing genocide, how is mine any different?
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/44355
——————————————————
to me
As I have said, I do not take the moderation decisions, these are taken in individual Government departments and so there is a degree of freedom in terms of what is accepted.

However, the focus is on the outcome of the petition. The use of terms such as genocide are emotive and controversial – if you wish to start a petition on the recognition of a genocide, you would be advised to state this as the purpose of the petition and provide evidence (we discourage the use of external links, but departments may choose to accept these). We would otherwise advise against making such claims

You may wish to contact the department to which you are submitting the petition for further advice, as my information is hypothetical. You can find departmental contact details either via their website or http://www.gov.uk

(2013) New Labour Party: GUILTY OF TAX EVASION

Watch the videos:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10102190/Donor-John-Millss-gift-to-Labour-avoided-tax-bill-of-1.5m.html

Tax evasion is a crime that if committed by me or you would result in imprisonment for several years. But there are two laws in the country: one law for us –the mere mortals, the innocent funding our enemies– and one for them –the “elite”, the Enemies of the People, those who live in luxury due to the exploitation of the People. In light of this reality, why give your permission to this criminal, corrupt system by voting for it? It is illegitimate –do not afford it any notion of legitimacy by giving it your vote.   

The Labour Party has helped its biggest financial backer avoid tax worth up to £1.5 million on its largest donation so far this year.

John Mills gave the party shares in his shopping channel company, JML, valued at £1.65 million in January. In an interview with The Telegraph, Mr Mills said that the donation was made in shares rather than cash so the tax on the deal would be significantly reduced.

Describing the donation as “tax efficient”, he said the form of the donation was agreed with figures in Labour’s fund-raising team.

Mr Mills said that if he had given £1.65 million from his own income he would have had to pay nearly half of that sum to the taxman.

Asked why he made the donations in shares, Mr Mills said: “To be honest with you, it is the most tax efficient way of doing this.

“Because, otherwise, you get no tax relief on donations to political parties for understandable reasons.

“If you donate to a political party out of a tax paid income, up until April it was 50 per cent and now it is 45 [per cent].

“That means if it is £100,000, the Labour party gets £55,000 and the Government gets £45,000.”

Labour donor John Mills (JULIAN SIMMONDS)

Mr Mills, a former councillor in Camden, suggested that the idea of donating in shares came following discussions with the Labour Party.

He said: “It emerged … came out of a discussion I had with them about the best way of doing it.

“It is quite a good model [of donating]. Labour has got people who deal with compliance and the legal side of all this. They are very sensitive nowadays.”

Mr Mills’s donation, the biggest from an individual so far this year, is the only gift to a major political party to have been made in shares. Accountants said Mr Mills is likely to have avoided up to £1.5 million in tax on the value of the stock he gave to the party.

The news will embarrass Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, who has repeatedly criticised tax avoidance. He said only last month that it was “wrong” that Google had gone “to extraordinary lengths to avoid paying its taxes”.

ARTICLE: Tony Blair: Libya, Lockerbie, Arms and Betrayals

 

“The public cannot be too curious concerning the characters of public men.” (Samuel Adams, 1722-1803, letter 1775.)

This will surely have you falling down with surprise. According to documents released under the Freedom of Information Act and obtained by the (UK) Sunday Telegraph, the August 2009 release from Scotland’s Barlinnie jail of Libyan Abdelbaset al- Megrahi, accused of the bombing of  Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in December 1988, hinged on an oil and arms deal, allegedly brokered by roving war monger (sorry, roving “Peace Ambassador”) Tony Blair.

At this point it should be said that anyone who has read John Ashton and Ian Ferguson’s meticulous “Cover up of Convenience” (i) on the Lockerbie tragedy could only regard Mr al-Meghrahi’s conviction as between very unsafe and very questionable.

The British Labour Party, which Blair headed for ten years, until 27th June 2007, have always insisted that the release had no connection with commercial deals. After leaving Downing Street, Blair visited Libya some six times.

On 8th June 2008, the then British Ambassador to Libya, Sir Vincent Fean, sent Tony Blair’s private office a thirteen hundred word briefing on the UK’s eagerness to do business with Libya, according to the Telegraph. (ii) Blair flew to Tripoli to meet Colonel Quaddafi, just two days later, June 10th. Quaddafi paid: Blair, always lavish with other’s money had requested, and was granted, the Colonel’s private jet for the journey.

Sir Vincent’s “key objective” was for: “Libya to invest its £80 billion sovereign wealth through the City of London”, according to the Telegraph, which also cites the Ambassador writing of the UK being : “privately critical of then President George Bush for ‘shooting the US in the foot’ by continuing to put a block on Libyan assets in America, in the process scuppering business deals.” Britain however, was voraciously scrambling to fill the fiscal gap.

Unlike the US and UK who abandon or drone to death their own citizens who are in trouble, or even accused of it, Libya’s Administration had stood by their man and seemed to be prepared to do even unpalatable deals to free him and had long been pressuring the UK to release al-Megrahi.

In May 2007, a month before he left Downing Street, Blair had made his second visit to Libya, meeting Colonel Quaddafi and his Prime Minister Al Baghdadi Ali al-Mahmoudi in then beautiful and now near ruined city of Sirte.

Surely coincidentally, on this trip, a deal was seemingly thrashed out, including prisoner transfer, just before British Petrolium (BP) announced their approximate £454 million investment to prospect for £13billion worth of oil in Libya.

Also, states the Telegraph report: “At that meeting, according to Sir Vincent’s email, Mr Blair and Mr Al Baghdadi agreed that Libya would buy a missile defence system from MBDA – a weapons manufacturer part-owned by Britains’s  BAE Systems.” This seemed to (also) hinge on a Memorandum of Understanding for a Prisoner Transfer Agreement: “which the Libyans believed would pave the way for al-Megrahi’s release.” Various sources state that the arms deal was worth £400 million, and up to two thousand jobs in the UK. Sir Vincent referred to the arms deal as a “legacy issue.” Blair’s “legacy”, as ever, synonymous with destruction.

Ironically, it was Blair who credited himself with persuading Colonel Quaddafi to abandon and destroy his weapons programmes  after his visit to the country in March 2004 (placing that Judas kiss  the Colonel’s cheek) as a step to Libya returning to the fold of the duplicitous “international community.” With friends like Blair, enemies are a redundancy.

When Blair returned to Libya in June 2008, the Telegraph contends that the British Government, then under Gordon Brown, Blair’s former Chancellor of the Exchequer (who left the national coffers near empty) used the opportunity: “ to press the case for the arms deal to be sealed. At the time, Britain was on the brink of an economic and banking crisis – and Libya, though the Libyan Investment Authority – had billions of pounds in reserves.”

Saif al-Islam, Quaddafi’s son, expressed the concern over the arms deal being voiced from within the Libyan military, given their close ties to the “Russian defence equipment camp.”

An earlier discovery by the Sunday Telegraph shows, in letters and emails, that Blair held hitherto undisclosed talks with the Colonel in April 2009, four months before al-Megrahi’s release. (iii)

Again he was flown at the expense of the Colonel, in his private jet: “In both 2008 and 2009, documents show Mr Blair negotiated to fly to the Libyan capitol … in a jet provided by Quaddafi.” Blair’s Office denies the claims, saying they were transported in a Libyan government ‘plane.

By the time of the 2009 visit: “Libya was threatening to cut all business links if al-Megrahi stayed in a British jail.” Blair seemingly attempted to pour oil on troubled waters by bringing American billionaire, Tim Collins to that meeting to advise Quaddafi on building the beach resorts he was planning, on the Libyan coast.

Further adding to the murk, a spokesperson for Collins stated:“Tim was asked to go by Tony Blair in his position as a trustee of Mr Blair’s US faith foundation. Tim had no intention of doing any business with Quaddafi.”

However: “Sources in Libya said Quaddafi had discussed with Mr Collins opening beach resorts along the Libyan coast, but that Mr Collins had dismissed the idea because the Libyans would not sanction the sale of alcohol or gambling at the resorts.

Blair’s spokesperson said of the visit: “ … Tony Blair has never had any role, either formal or informal, paid or unpaid, with the Libyan Investment Authority or the Government of Libya and he has no commercial relationship with any Libyan company or entity.” A Blair first, seemingly, given the impression that he never touches down anywhere without emerging with a lucrative contract or a large cheque.

However, Oliver Miles, a former British ambassador to Libya, is quoted as saying : “Mr Blair is clearly using his Downing Street contacts to further his business interests.”

In a further coincidence, the Prisoner Transfer agreement for Mr al-Megrahi was signed the day before Blair’s 2009 visit.

When al-Megrahi, who had been diagnosed with terminal cancer, was released in August 2009, the British media and politicians were outraged. Scotland had done a deal and was benefiting financially from Libya. The latest revelations prove Scotland did no financial deals. When Mr al-Megrahi failed to die, politicians and media were even more outraged. They were a shaming spectacle.

Mental mind set can be a huge force in prolonging life in even the most serious cancer patients. No doubt in al-Megrahi’s case, being back in a home and with a family he loved contributed to his extra time. He survived long enough to see his country destroyed by the devious forces the West embodies – and at which Blair excels.  Megrahi died in September 2012.

Incidentally, Ambassador Fean reportedly “expressed relief” at al-Megrahi’s release: “He noted that a refusal of Megrahi’s request could have had disastrous implications for British interests in Libya. ‘They could have cut us off at the knees.”

Quaddafi, however, never signed the arms deal.

Footnote: The 2004 visit by Blair was arranged by Saif al Islam, who Blair seemingly knew well and had allegedly even offered suggestions on his PhD thesis when Saif was studying at the London School of Economics.

In September last year Saif al-Islam’s lady friend of six years, appealed, passionately, to Blair to intervene to save the life of his now captured, maimed and death penalty-facing friend: “The two are old friends – it is time that Mr Blair returned some loyalty. Mr Blair is a man of God – as a Christian he has a moral duty to help a friend in need”, she has commented. (v)

Seemingly there has been no response from Blair’s office. Further, an extensive search for a comment on the appalling death of Colonel Quaddafi – his former host and private ‘plane provider – and the demise of  much of his family from this “Peace Envoy” and “man of God”, has come up with absolutely nothing.

To mangle a quote: Beware of British offering deals.

Read on:  http://www.globalresearch.ca/tony-blair-libya-lockerbie-arms-and-betrayals/5344774

ATICLE: Former head of MI6 threatens to expose Tony Blair’s ‘dodgy dossier’

The truth will always out -eventually. Seems the regime (“government”) doesn’t have the control it would like on the secret services. Perhaps MI5 might like to start to question to whom its loyalties really lie (the innocent people or their aggressor, corrupt, plutocratic “government”).

A former head of MI6 has threatened to expose the secrets of the ‘dodgy dossier’ if he disagrees with the long-awaited findings of the Chilcot Inquiry into the UK’s role in the Iraq War.

Sir Richard Dearlove, 68, has spent the last year writing a detailed account of events leading up to the war, and had intended to only make his work available to historians after his death.

But now Sir Richard, who provided intelligence about Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) that was apparently ‘sexed up’ by Tony Blair’s government, has revealed that he could go public after the Chilcot Inquiry publishes its findings.

Sir Richard is expected to be criticised by the inquiry’s chairman, Sir John Chilcot, over the accuracy of intelligence provided by MI6 agents inside Iraq, which was used in the so-called ‘dodgy dossier’.

Now the ex-MI6 boss, who is Master at Pembroke College, Cambridge University, has said: “What I have written (am writing) is a record of events surrounding the invasion of Iraq from my then professional perspective.

“My intention is that this should be a resource available to scholars, but after my decease (may be sooner depending on what Chilcot publishes)

“I have no intention, however, of violating my vows of official secrecy by publishing any memoir.”

Sources close to Sir Richard said that he insists Chilcot should recognise the role played by Tony Blair and the Prime Minister’s chief spokesman Alastair Campbell in informing media reports which suggested Saddam could use chemical weapons to target British troops based in Cyprus, a claim which led to Britain entering the war in Iraq.

Sir Richard is said to remain extremely unhappy that this piece of intelligence, which his agents stressed only referred to battlefield munitions which had a much shorter range, led to media reports that UK bases were under threat.

However, he accepts that some of MI6’s information on the WMDs was inaccurate, the Mail on Sunday reported.

Mr Blair and Mr Campbell have repeatedly denied making misleading statements about WMD.

Last week it was revealed that Sir John had written to Prime Minister David Cameron informing him of his intention to write personally to those individuals he intends to criticise, with Tony Blair reported to be among those on Sir John’s list.

Sir Richard has taken a sabbatical from his duties at Cambridge University to research and write his record of events, and is expected to resume his Master’s role at the start of the new academic year.

A security source told The Mail on Sunday: “This is Sir Richard’s time-bomb. He wants to set the record straight and defend the integrity of MI6. And Sir Richard has taken a lot of personal criticism over MI6’s performance and his supposedly too-cosy relationship with Mr Blair.

“No Chief of MI6 has done anything like this before, but the events in question were unprecedented.

“If Chilcot doesn’t put the record straight, Sir Richard will strike back.”

Last night the committee’s chairman, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, who was appointed in 2010, offered Sir Richard his support, saying: “I have never heard of a former MI6 chief putting something out there in these terms but I would be interested in what Sir Richard has to say in response to the Chilcot Inquiry which is clearly going to have some meat in it.

“I know Sir Richard and worked with him in the Foreign Office many years ago. He is a very able man of the highest character and a man of his own opinions. We shall have to wait to see what he says.”

Last night, Alastair Campbell and the office for Tony Blair declined to comment on Sir Richard’s account.