Home Forums Chat Forum What the…. BBC news now, paedophile rings

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 77 total)
  • What the…. BBC news now, paedophile rings
  • tron
    Free Member

    A few months ago someone one here was banging on about politicians being involved in paedophile rings, and was pretty roundly regarded as a nutjob.

    It’s on the BBC News at 10 right now.

    fadda
    Full Member

    As the father of an 8 year-old, I find it terrifying.

    RaveyDavey
    Free Member

    I suspect that if the whole truth came out it would rock the country to its core.

    Coyote
    Free Member

    Read about this today after reading the interview from the guy making the allegations a few weeks ago. Unreal.

    #Edit: I’ll be amazed if the whole truth will be *allowed* to come out for this reason. The establishment don’t like change.

    benji
    Free Member

    Be more amazed if the evidence for the whole truth hasn’t already been destroyed.

    athgray
    Free Member

    Police are investigating possible murder of young boys as well.

    Klunk
    Free Member

    there are some pretty harrowing tales, childrens homes pimping out the kids the ‘the great’ and ‘the good’.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/david-icke-at-wembley-last-saturday

    No one denied that abusers exist in all walks of life they objected to this quote

    To be fair to David Icke, since the 90s he has been saying child abuse is central to the control structures of the political and religious elite.

    zippykona
    Full Member

    Can we expect a few high profile suicides/ tragic boating accidents?

    wrightyson
    Free Member

    *Tin foil hat on•
    I hate conspiracy theories and all that but someone said to me a good while ago that the reason jill dando was bumped off was because she’d got the dirt to dish on saville and a whole lot of others.
    Makes you wonder briefly.
    •tin foil hat off•

    nealglover
    Free Member

    A few months ago someone one here was banging on about politicians being involved in paedophile rings, and was pretty roundly regarded as a nutjob.

    As Junkyard said above. He wasn’t regarded as a nutjob because he said pedophile rings exist.

    Or because he said some politicians may have been/are involved.

    Pretty much everyone agreed with that.

    He was regarded as a nutjob because of all the other nutjob crap he attaches to it.

    (And because he thinks David Icke and Alex Jones etc are good sources of information)

    bencooper
    Free Member

    Can we expect a few high profile suicides/ tragic boating accidents?

    Well, there is this:

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/541793/SNP-activist-killed-over-child-sex-files

    6079smithw
    Free Member

    so basically what David Icke has been saying on this topic for over two decades is true

    batfink
    Free Member

    A few months ago someone one here was banging on about politicians being involved in paedophile rings, and was pretty roundly regarded as a nutjob.
    As Junkyard said above. He wasn’t regarded as a nutjob because he said pedophile rings exist.

    Or because he said some politicians may have been/are involved.

    Pretty much everyone agreed with that.

    He was regarded as a nutjob because of all the other nutjob crap he attaches to it.

    (And because he thinks David Icke and Alex Jones etc are good sources of information)

    Yes – it was more of a discussion about people’s ability to effectively “filter” things that they have read on the internet.

    For example, This:

    Is as credible as this:

    jivehoneyjive
    Free Member

    Hmm, is it the thing about VIP child abuse, murders and military bases…

    well I never

    Funnily enough, it seems several police officers have stated there has been a number of cover ups whenever things start implicating MPs:

    http://exaronews.com/articles/5429/protected-paedophile-mps-and-prominent-people-say-police

    Not to mention this from a BBC Radio 4 Today Programme reporter:

    How odd!!

    Philby
    Full Member

    Well Cyril Smith has been confirmed as a serial child sex abuser over many years. Also Norman Scott (he who was involved in the Jeremy Thorpe scandal) was apparently the target of some plot to kill him (his dog was shot), and the consensus was that it was senior officials in the Liberal Party who were behind the plot. So it doesn’t need much imagination to realise that the current allegations on the BBC including the murder of 3 boys may not be so far-fetched.

    wallop
    Full Member

    But… No evidence of murder, no victims, no bodies.

    This is going to go on for a while!

    oldnpastit
    Full Member

    Where’s the Dickens Dossier? That would make interesting reading for sure.

    geetee1972
    Free Member

    This story broke a few months ago now. There is an individual being referred to as Nick, who has come forward with very credible testimony of what happened to him between 1975 and 1984. The BBC carried that story at the time and I think it was being repeated yesterday because Scotland Yard have now spoken publically about it, acknowledging that his testimony is very credible, that they wholeheartedly believe his accounts and are now also investigating the possible deaths of three boys in connection.

    So, it’s not really a new story but the statements by Scotland Yard as to how they are treating it move the story on quite a bit.

    Tom_W1987
    Free Member

    I think we owe Jivehoney an apology! :mrgreen:

    epicsteve
    Free Member

    I don’t really know what to think on this one. On one hand the police do seem to be spending a lot of time on it so it sounds like they think it’s credible. On the other hand there doesn’t seem to be any evidence other than the testimony of a single individual – and it sounds like quite a lot of effort has already been expended on the case.

    Previously you’d have thought if they went as far as publicly announcing the inquiry etc. then they’d have more than enough hard evidence to indicate it was true, however after what happened with Saville and the BBC it’s more difficult to tell.

    bencooper
    Free Member

    I guess it’s an attempt to get more victims to come forward.

    bainbrge
    Full Member

    The problem with the conspiracy theories is that it allows people to divert responsibility onto the ‘elites’ or powerful politicians ((hated anyway), rather than accept that such abuse is likely spread across the whole of society. I’d guess most of this abuse is of the most mundane and ordinary kind, in other words committed within families, or by friends of families, or by anyone with a predilection and opportunity such as seen in Rotherham and elsewhere.

    The conspiracy theorists really do the vast majority of victims a disservice because of this diversion. The basic issue I think is that our society has failed to recognise this problem, and hence fails to protect children in any number of different ways. I know it has taken me months of press coverage of the issues in Rotherham etc. to accept that this sort of abuse must be more prevalent than I ever thought possible. Mysterious networks of powerful abusers may indeed exist, but to focus on them is to ignore and almost shield the larger problem from being dealt with.

    jivehoneyjive
    Free Member

    I’d have to disagree with you there bainbrge: if people in power are abusers, be they MPs, judges or high ranking police officers, then the whole system which goes toward preventing and punishing abuse is biased.

    Whatsmore, the majority of these cases involve the most vulnerable children from carehomes being used, abused and trafficked, funded by the taxpayer.

    That would mean that even if the system did remove children from an abusive home environment, the care system may abuse them further rather than rehabilitate.

    Much of the problem is that this particular crime has repeatedly been buried, with special branch/MI5 intervening each time:

    http://exaronews.com/articles/5429/protected-paedophile-mps-and-prominent-people-say-police

    and foul play to seize and destroy evidence, as in the following account:

    Scallywag’s Simon Regan

    This was due to the following article, which strangely McAlpine never sued over:

    Scallywag paedophile ring article

    I’ll let you take all that in, then if you’re good, I’ll tell you who Mr X is.

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    Tom_W1987 – Member
    I think we owe Jivehoney an apology!

    Some do for sure, rather unpleasant (if not unexpected) baiting.

    edlong
    Free Member

    I think we owe Jivehoney an apology!

    I think not. That there is (and has been for a while now) credible evidence of a potential paedophile “ring” operating in London, including members who were high level parts of the “establishment” is given credence from a number of directions.

    The issue people had in THAT thread is that the tinfoil hat brigade then extrapolate that and conclude that, if one conspiracy exists, then all the other conspiracies, with pyramids of masons and the Vatican under the guidance of the illuminati secretly controlling everything and every other nutjob conspiracy theory, from faked moon landings to the WTC coming down in a controlled demolition to capture of live aliens and exploitation of their technology at Area 51 are therefore also true.

    Although at first glance this appears harmless, and we can all have a bit of a laugh at the credulous, imo it’s dangerous, unhelpful and (perhaps counter-intuitively) the “truthers” are helping the true conspiracies.

    For instance, I understand (can’t arsed to look for credible backup for this, you can “do your own research” if you wish, I’ll call this a hypothesis for now) that there is some credence to the suggestion that the US (and potentially UK) governments have been happy to let just enough suggestion leak out there about covered up alien landings etc. to cover up the real secret military research that was being conducted. When the story is about crashed flying saucers and alien autopsies most people won;t believe it, if the story is about top secret military research, more people will buy into that.

    Or, since there seems to have been, potentially, some naughtiness (lets say it’s somewhere between inappropriate interpretation of evidence and intentional lying) in the preparation of the “dodgy dossier” about WMDs in Iraq, that the tinfoil hat brigade then produce lurid stories about the murder of David Kelly, again linked to the Vatican, the illuminati, and the masons and involving in part the continued cover up of the fact that those at the top of the pyramid are actually alien shape-shifting lizards distracts and increases that chances that those of us who are less credulous will dismiss the whole lot – i.e. it’s not impossible to believe, if there’s credible evidence, that people in government might have been dodgy in pushing their agenda on Iraq. But not many people are going to buy it if the same narrative involves shape-shifting space lizards.

    The problem with the conspiracy theorists is that there is no apparent critical thinking or weighing up of the evidence – they seem to believe that any and all wild conspiracy theories are true. That some of them are true only reinforces that view – if they were right about the WMD dossier and the paedophiles in Westminster then the alien lizard king must also be true, right? Wrong. And the converse is then also true – those of us who don’t buy into this kind of thing are likely to dismiss any and all allegations of conspiracy on the basis that, well, it’s just a conspiracy theory, isn’t it? Just because they’re after you, doesn’t mean you’re not paranoid.

    And the result? Stuff like the serious allegations this thread was started in response to doesn’t get taken seriously, things are brushed under the carpet and those in the establishment who are corrupt (or worse) are more likely to get away with it.

    jivehoneyjive
    Free Member

    Therein lies the problem; everyone leaps on the ‘conspiracy theory’ bandwagon…

    review the evidence presented and decide for yourself; it’s that simple really

    lalazar
    Free Member

    Very good points there edlong but I think a lot of people are too quick to jump on the nut job bandwagon. Who do we get our evidence from then and who do we trust ? Politicians ? Media ? Institutions like the Police or Cps ?
    Sad to say but there’s very few individuals of calibre and integrity amongst them and those in power abuse what they’ve got.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    I think delivering his information in that style does not help his credibility either

    It was all i know but i cannot tell you shit as well as vaguely and opaquely referencing his own “research” on the topic.

    You can get the bland facts here
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Wales_child_abuse_scandal

    Re mc Alpine his main accuser the one known to have publicly named him apologised for getting it wrong
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20269114

    Again no one is denying that some child care homes [ privately run generally] were centres of systamatic abuse of children. its also clear that abusers get jobs in positions where they can abuse and that the allegations were not taken seriously. i have seen very little beyoind unsubstantiated eye witness testimony to implicate the overarching conspiracy involving rent boy clubs and senior politicians.
    i am not saying it is untrue but the evidence is not overwhelming as yet.
    it should be investigated thoroughly

    rather unpleasant (if not unexpected) baiting.

    that is just such a beautiful example of the thing it criticises. Well played I salute your effort. Chapeau.

    Therein lies the problem; everyone leaps on the ‘conspiracy theory’ bandwagon…

    OH the irony

    review the evidence presented and decide for yourself; it’s that simple really

    We have the problem is you dont get reliable and verifiable and just use confirmation bias

    Ie you think it happens and you look for the evidence of it and ignore anythign that may refute it

    jivehoneyjive
    Free Member

    Ie you think it happens and you look for the evidence of it and ignore anythign that may refute it

    Aye, my bad, nationwide news of a police appeal for witnesses of a paedophile ring involving MPs murdering children at military bases suggests I’m just ignoring the facts.

    Funny as ever Junky, but maybe not for the reasons you’d hoped…

    😉

    As for this gem from my cuddly nemesis Mr Glover:

    (And because he thinks David Icke and Alex Jones etc are good sources of information)

    That is pure speculation, lacking credible and verifiable evidence (such as a dictionary apparently… always handy for investigating crimes). And it’s wrong…

    footflaps
    Full Member

    Also just because some people in high positions committed crimes does not mean there is a corrupt establishment / masonic cult running it all. Given that like Religion, child abuse tends to self propagate (if you were abused as a child, you are more likely to become an abuser), I suspect it’s been going on for generations in all walks of life, just better covered up be those from more privileged background as no one was prepared to challenges them.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    If they had the evidence to prove the case they would not be making the appeal would they?

    We know what you think and now we know the police dont have the evidence to prove what you think.

    Of course this means your view is true though

    your such an insightful thinker.

    jivehoneyjive
    Free Member

    We know the police think it too, else they wouldn’t be appealing for witnesses to fill in the gaps of all the evidence destroyed previously.

    That means enough of the police are convinced to overrule those who’ve covered it up beforehand.

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    That cap look lovely on, sir – a perfect fit. 😀

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    Doyou edit everyone of your posts ?

    Wrong on all points
    Non sequitur or in your case a leap of faith
    An appeal for witnesses is exactly that an appeal for witnesses. It means can we have some evidence please. Nothing more and nothing less.

    Appealing for witnesses makes no comment on a cover up never mind prove anything about it.

    FWIW many of us will think this is an issue worthy of investigation and worthy of time and effort. Discussing it with you is IMHO none of these things.

    Lets see where the evidence leads us.
    Respectfully I have no interest in your interpretation of facts as, given that post, its almost always incorrect/illogical/nonsensical.

    MoreCashThanDash
    Full Member

    Abuse is widespread across all levels of society, it was bound to involve those on high at some point. Though the fact remains that most kids are abused by people they know, not by organised VIP gangs.

    The Police clearly think that this guys testimony is worth following up and this appeal for witnesses is clearly a punt at getting someone to corroborate what are very serious allegations. In the post-Saville climate I think it will be harder to cover up or fail to join the pieces of the jigsaw then it used to be. That said, the false allegations against soldiers in the recent Iraq enquiry demonstrates the other side of such investigations.

    Lets hope the default setting for this kind of thread – from all of us – will be “let’s see where the evidence takes the Police”

    Apologies for some ninja spelling corrections, Windows phones are rubbish!

    Edukator
    Free Member

    Go Jive go.

    The Cyril Smith saga has been the one to leave me drop jawed.

    Over a hundred complaints to police, he confirmed complaints were true to his parliamentary colleagues and neither they nor the police did anything.

    Edit to respond to an edit: the police can’t be trusted to do anything because they have consistently participated in cover ups and destroyed evidence rather than prosecute.

    ScottChegg
    Free Member

    No evidence of murder, no victims, no bodies.

    Not true. Parts of one kid were found at the time. But no one seemed to care as he had a ‘troubled’ past.

    Makes you proud, dunnit?

    jivehoneyjive
    Free Member

    The plot thickens, more evidence of cover up and after 2 chairs with conflicts of interest, the inquiry panel is now to be disbanded:

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/20/newspaper-boss-police-vip-paedophile-coverup-claim?CMP=twt_gu

    Also, ex police to submit dossier of cover ups in previous operations to Met chief:

    http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5433/paedophile-operations-ex-police-to-submit-dossier-to-met-chief

    gobuchul
    Free Member

    If it’s true that a D Notice was issued regarding the ELm Guesthouse then that is serious shit.

    Officials running the D-notice system, who work closely with MI5 and MI6 and the Ministry of Defence, said they did not believe that such a notice would have been issued, but admitted that some records relating to official requests for media blackouts in the early 1980s have been destroyed.

    Why? On purpose? Routine? Accidentally?

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 77 total)

The topic ‘What the…. BBC news now, paedophile rings’ is closed to new replies.