VIP paedophile ring

[Anna B 1,417]

This vilification of Tom Watson is a typical establishment strategy: If you can't destroy the message, destroy the messenger. They will use anything and everything to discredit him.

[I1L2T3 10]

Read the post again - I said it was difficult to DISPROVE -

 

Sex usually takes place between two people in private - word against word - easy allegation to make

 

And I said this ...."as to the vulnerability of the victims the reasons why many of the allegations are made very late is a direct consequence of the abuse" -

 

I doubt many sane people require telling that which occurs to you in the formative years can have a dramatic impact on your later years.

 

not sure what your point is

 

I apo!ogise. What I meant was that it is not easy to prove. The conviction rate for complaints of this nature is very low.

 

---------- Post added 14-10-2015 at 19:28 ----------

 

Does Zac Goldsmith?

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/14/zac-goldsmith-urged-to-withdraw-paedophile-ring-allegations

 

Like Watson, Goldsmith needs to stay strong.

 

The establishment is desperately trying to kill a number of ongoing investigations.

 

Thinking about it, this last week has to be one of the most concerted attacks by the establishment on an individual for some time. The BBC, the PM, numerous senior politicians and titles all across the print media have all been mobilised with the same message.

 

Looks as dodgy as hell.

[redfox 10]

It is hard for juries to comprehend why people do not complain at the time or how they behave when incidents actually occur. The stereotypes are very difficult to break down although I do think that is slowly happening - certainly in my experience it is - possibly because in the course of summing up cases of a sexual nature Judge now tell the jury not to have a stereotypical approach to how people behave in certain circumstances

Just because a person who is attacked doesn't fight and or scream but simply accepts it does not mean that they are not to be believed.

[drummonds 10]

I never said Watson had named a list of people.

 

The only person I know of to be naming names is convicted homosexual sex abuser Harvey Proctor, who publicly named Sir Edward Heath alongside Leon Britton, and General Sir Hugh Beach, Sir Michael Hanley, the head of MI5, and head of MI6 Sir Maurice Oldfield, to say they were not involved. I thought this was a bit strange; why name publicly name people who are not involved? I'd never heard of 3 of them....

 

Harvey Proctor, by the way, angrily and vehemently denied the accusations that he had had underage sex with rent boys aged 16 - 21 (age of consent between same sex couples was 21 at the time,) right up until his conviction, at which point he had to resign as an MP.

 

I don't know if Tom Watson has accused any particular people, do you?

 

so what you are saying is all tom watson has done is regurgitate any slur that he has come across and shouted it out to ensure the names get slapped across the press. he didn't actually have a shread of actual evidence or anything that wasn't already being investigated. the evidence against the respectable pillars of the establishment that you list is the words of a serial sex offender who was probably coerced to spit out names to try and spread the crap a bit thinner.

[Hesther 10]

 

Like Watson, Goldsmith needs to stay strong.

 

The establishment is desperately trying to kill a number of ongoing investigations.

 

Thinking about it, this last week has to be one of the most concerted attacks by the establishment on an individual for some time. The BBC, the PM, numerous senior politicians and titles all across the print media have all been mobilised with the same message.

 

Looks as dodgy as hell.

 

Especially given what we know as FACT.

[Anna B 1,417]

so what you are saying is all tom watson has done is regurgitate any slur that he has come across and shouted it out to ensure the names get slapped across the press. he didn't actually have a shread of actual evidence or anything that wasn't already being investigated. the evidence against the respectable pillars of the establishment that you list is the words of a serial sex offender who was probably coerced to spit out names to try and spread the crap a bit thinner.

 

I gather that what Mr Watson did was make sure an alleged rape was investigated as well as other allegations against Leon Britton. It seems that it had been overlooked / neglected. This ladies claims deserved investigation just as much as the rest.

 

What's wrong with that?

[I1L2T3 10]

I gather that what Mr Watson did was make sure an alleged rape was investigated as well as other allegations against Leon Britton. It seems that it had been overlooked / neglected. This ladies claims deserved investigation just as much as the rest.

 

What's wrong with that?

 

Nothing Anna. And it has now emerged that the police did not take Watson's intervention into account. They re-interviewed Brittan anyway.

[Anna B 1,417]

It is hard for juries to comprehend why people do not complain at the time or how they behave when incidents actually occur.

 

As I understand it, people did complain at the time. Some of these allegations go back to the 1970s but have been systematically shelved, lost, stolen, ignored, ridiculed, and the people involved threatened and intimidated, to the point where they gave up, or were too frightened to proceed.

[harvey19 541]

I wonder if any of these complaints were formal and if any official statements of evidence were made.

[Eric Arthur 10]

I gather that what Mr Watson did was make sure an alleged rape was investigated as well as other allegations against Leon Britton. It seems that it had been overlooked / neglected. This ladies claims deserved investigation just as much as the rest.

 

What's wrong with that?

 

What is wrong is doing it in public under the protection of parliamentary privilege. to insinuate guilt outside of a court of law. What possible motive could Watson have for doing that except to further his own career?

 

While you are thinking about Tom Watson, try googling Tom Watson vote rigging and tell us what you think about what you read.

[Anna B 1,417]

What is wrong is doing it in public under the protection of parliamentary privilege. to insinuate guilt outside of a court of law. What possible motive could Watson have for doing that except to further his own career?

 

While you are thinking about Tom Watson, try googling Tom Watson vote rigging and tell us what you think about what you read.

 

How on earth do you equate making a move which was bound to make enemies out past and present MPs as furthering his career? He only had to look at what happened to other MPs who did it to know it was actually more likely to be career suicide.

 

The bottom line is that the investigation into MPs and other very powerful Establishment figures is being deliberately hampered and misdirected in every way possible.

 

Anyone simply trying to get to the truth is being intimidated and threatened by the full weight and the Power of the Establishment, Media and Secret Service; determined that by fair means or foul, nothing will come out. They have been succeeding in this for the past 40 years. It is only with the advent of the internet creating an alternative route into the public domain that this has come to public attention at all. But it is still an almost impenetrable barrier with them holding all the aces.

 

That impenetrable barrier is slowly being broken down by people like Tom Watson MP, Simon Dancuk MP, Geoffrey Dickens MP, and Barbara Castle MP before him.

 

We now know about Sir Jimmy Savile and Sir Cyril Smith, (neither of whom incidently were actually convicted during their lifetimes,) but they may well be only the tip of the iceberg.

 

It is surely to Tom Watson's credit that he is prepared to put his career on the line to support the alleged victims.

If you want to Google anything try looking up some of those names and see what you come up with.

Edited October 16, 2015 by Anna B

[Eric Arthur 10]

You can't have it both ways Anna B. The Power Of The Establishment must be a bit crap if you are actually trying to argue that it worked against him, a man who's gone from a nobody back bencher to Deputy Leader of the Labour Party.

 

What do you think about Tom Watson and vote rigging?