[Closed] Anonymous to release child abuse evidence

As "hacktavists" any real information they have will have come from other sources and must(should) be known about by the police. If they actually do have evidence that action isn't being taken against criminals because they are in positions of influence and power then they are right to expose it.

On the other hand if it is just a load of conspiracy innuendo and bullshit then they are dickheads.

On the other hand if it is just a load of conspiracy innuendo and bullshit then they are dickheads.

+1

Also most likely scenario, they just libel a load of innocent people.

What this thread needs is more lizards and pyramids. I'm not convinced until jivehoneyjive is here.

name and shame, these vile ****ers have been protected for too long.

Given the relentless way in which the establishment has ruthlessly pursued child abusers, and remained steadfast in its steely resolve to bring every last one of them to justice, I can't for the life of me think why they would feel the need to do this?

name and shame, these vile ****ers have been protected for too long.

Vigilante justice invariably never gets the right people.

Remember the Speaker's wife, George Monbiot and co all doing exactly this.

Let me remind you with George Monbiot's eloquent apology.

I have helped to malign an innocent man.

By George Monbiot, published on monbiot.com, 10th November 2012

I have done a few stupid things in my life, but nothing as stupid as this. The tweets I sent which hinted – as I assumed to be the case – that Lord McAlpine was the person the child abuse victim Steve Messham was talking about were so idiotic that, looking back on them today, I cannot believe that I wrote them.

But I did, and they are unforgiveable. I helped to stoke an atmosphere of febrile innuendo around an innocent man, and I am desperately sorry for the harm I have done him. I have set out, throughout my adult life, to try to do good; instead I have now played a part in inflicting a terrible hurt upon someone who had done none of the harm of which he was wrongly accused. I apologise abjectly and unreservedly to Lord McAlpine.

What follows is in no sense an attempt to excuse the tweets I wrote, but simply to try to explain them.

I knew that Steve Messham had been treated appallingly, and I believed that the terrible things done to him had been compounded by a denial of recognition and a denial of the recourse to the law which was his due. When I saw his interview on Newsnight I was very upset. I trusted his account unquestioningly. I was horrified by what he said, and by the fact that the identity of the man he was talking about appeared to have been kept secret for so long.

I felt a powerful compulsion to do what I have done throughout my career: to help the voiceless be heard. But in this case I did so without any of the care I usually take when assessing and reporting an issue. [b]I allowed myself to be carried away by a sense of moral outrage. As a result, far from addressing an awful injustice, I contributed to one.[/b]

I have acted in an unprofessional, thoughtless and cruel manner, and I am sorry beyond words.

Genuine fresh evidence that needs action - should go to the enquiring authorities.

If it's just more jhj-style vague gossip and speculation, with nothing to actually use as legally substantiable evidence, that's as useless to the victims as what has gone before.

We all know terrible things have been done and covered up - that needs putting right through the law of the land, not through a scattergun internet witch hunt that may destroy some innocent people in the process.

And of course, if it is actually evidence, obtaining and publishing it by illegal means will very probably mean that it could then not be used in any legal case against the alleged perpetrators, meaning that the chances of them being convicted of the crimes are even smaller.

If it makes it into the press, then it would make finding an unbiased Jury very hard, so could easily jeopardise any chance of conviction.

I think IHN and footflaps have hit on the real danger of this kind of thing, especially if it is celebs involved, and then suddenly a lot more victims start reporting incidents through their "legal representatives".

Though I don't think any convicted celebs have appealed on this, tbf?

An impartial judicial process can easily be knocked of course by media/internet irresponsibility.

Where would anonymous get electronic evidence from ? The only written evidence stored on computers would be on police files unless they have hacked into individuals machines and found illegal stored images.

unless they have hacked into individuals machines and found illegal stored images.

Id assume thats what it is

unless they have hacked into individuals machines and found illegal stored images.

This

Hopefully if they've genuinely found something they work with the authorities to make sure the ba*ds get arrested and tried properly

My fear is that whatever they release identifies possible victims as well as possible abusers.

Id assume thats what it is

Well releasing it won't do any good as you can't prove which machine it came from and you can't use it as evidence as there's no proper forensic trail, plus it just alerts the owner to purge his machine.

You could hack into anyone's machine, suck out a few files, add in some kiddie porn photos and release the lot online, proves absolutely nothing...

Most of the time the seem to wait until the politician/banker/DJ has died before deciding that they were indeed a predatory pederast and that the signs were there all along...

Given the relentless way in which the establishment has ruthlessly pursued child abusers, and remained steadfast in its steely resolve to bring every last one of them to justice, I can't for the life of me think why they would feel the need to do this?

I find it puzzling as well.................

I think some of this is about

John Mann, a Labour MP for Bassetlaw, has urged Home Secretary Theresa May to address state secrecy shrouding these allegations.

Mann believes the Official Secrets Act is obstructing ex-Special Branch police officials from stepping forward with vital information

it is hardly news that corruption is widespread in the political system and it is pretty much useless in representing the publics interests in general e.g

https://stop-ttip.org/

[quote=footflaps ]You could hack into anyone's machine, suck out a few files, add in some kiddie porn photos and release the lot online, proves absolutely nothing...

That seems like rather a lot of effort to go to to stitch somebody up, when there are far easier ways once you've hacked into their computer...

[url= http://exaronews.com/articles/5428/police-privately-admit-cover-up-for-paedophile-mps-and-vips ]Police Privately admit cover up for paedophile MPs and VIPs[/url]

[url= http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5348/scotland-yard-delays-200-charges-over-claims-of-child-sex-abuse ]200 child abuse charges delayed[/url]

[url= http://exaronews.com/articles/5495/leon-brittan-faced-met-questions-over-elm-guest-house-visits ]Detectives were planning to contact Leon Brittan and 3 other living former Tory MPs, along with 2 pop stars and several senior officials*[/url]

[url= http://www.exaronews.com/articles/4798/operation-fairbank-carries-out-raid-to-seize-files-naming-mps ]
*over 2 years after receiving evidence, they have still yet to question those named[/url]

All a bit fishy...

[img] [/img]

Well, I for one won't believe a word of it unless it comes with a nice pyramid flowchart and some fancy infographics.

Well, I for one won't believe a word of it unless it comes with a nice pyramid flowchart and some fancy infographics.

We also need a photo of two people. Well know to know each other to be in the same image.

Oh, go on then, since you asked nicely...

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

This piece from [url=m.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/foreign-affairs/australian-diplomatic-staff-linked-to-missing-boy-and-london-pedophiles/story-fn59nm2j-1227202714827?nk=c7072476e0ec152b3fd7f7831d1a2549]The Australian[/url], linking notorious child killer [url= https://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com/2015/02/01/a-missing-boy-and-the-australian-high-commission-in-london-31-01-15/#comments ]Sidney Cooke to the Australian High Commission in London and Jimmy Savile's Driver, David Smith is worrying[/url]

Wonder why the story hasn't been publicized in the UK?

Seem to remember Somafunk mentioned something about a taxi firm...

Quick Poll:

Hands up who followed any of the links JHJ has posted on this thread?

If you did, how many of them?

just the last one

it depressed me

I would imagine that is something to do with the fairly robust libel laws in the UK ?

"I am aware" "evidence existed" "allegations were made" yes quite the smoking gun you have there.

Any of these pieces in isolation could just be of minimal consequence, but when you look at the bigger picture that emerges, there is certainly something not quite right...

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/11/missing-child-abuse-files-home-office-chief-mps ]Let's not forget the 114 missing files[/url]

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31072901 ]The Wanless review which failed to find files relating to high ranking Diplomat to Canada Peter Hayman, on whom Margaret Thatcher was briefed[/url]

The briefing document prepared by the Home Office should any questions arise in the commons stating:

Line to take 'there has been no cover up':

[img] [/img]

[url= http://news.sky.com/story/1422138/govt-refuses-to-reveal-titles-of-secret-files ]Given 4 further files have recently come to light which the Government refuses to name[/url], how many other files are [url= http://brynalynvictims.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/lying-britain-part-ii.html ]yet to be revealed[/url]?

Also we have the matter of CIA and KGB (doubtless along with other intelligence agencies) [url= http://www.mirror.co.uk/all-about/elm-guest-house-abuse-scandal ]being aware of the paedophile inclinations of a number of politicians[/url]

This is the cute bit about conspiracy theories that I love - unsubstantiated hearsay from an witness is considered concrete proof, yet what is being billed as a genuine cabinet office paper (also unverified) that says "there has been no cover up" - but that isn't proof that there isn't a cover up ?

So in essence, what The Man says is all lies, but what people say that conforms with the conspiracy theory is gospel.

It's like arguing about religion with Dolphins, ultimately pointless.

Closely followed by my second favourite piece of flawed logic (if I was asked for a Top Ten) "they wouldn't bother denying it if it wasn't true". Yes, quite.

You misunderstand hels...

that is a briefing document produced for MPs

~much like an actor gets a script to practice~

'There has been no cover up' is the line to take in public...

unsubstantiated hearsay from an witness is considered concrete proof

One witness in isolation would be questionable, but when you have several, from many different walks of life, all pointing to the same conclusion, denial, though the easy option, is irresponsible

It's like arguing about religion with Dolphins, ultimately pointless.

And in the end you always find yourself talking at cross porpoises?

'There has been no cover up' is the line to take in public...

Which does not mean that it is not true

"that is a briefing document prepared for MPs".

No it isn't. It is a piece of paper with some words typed on to it on an old typewriter, and a few scribbles/corrections in biro, that somebody has photographed and posted on an internet site.

Give us half an hour when I get home and I can make you another one - what would you like it to say ?

Cross porpoises - nice one !

[i]No it isn't. It is a piece of paper with some words typed on to it on an old typewriter, and a few scribbles/corrections in biro, that somebody has photographed and posted on an internet site[/i]

But! But!

It says 'Secret' at the top and everything!

It must be not only genuine but also untrue and a part of some overarching conspiracy by The Establishment.

What on earth are those photos supposed to 'prove' that celebrities and MPs meet occasionally? Hardly shocking stuff.

Which does not mean that it is not true

Debatable, given [url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/thatcher-stopped-officials-publicly-naming-sir-peter-hayman-as-suspected-paedophile-10020852.html ]Thatcher actively prevented Peter Hayman from being named[/url]

No it isn't. It is a piece of paper with some words typed on to it on an old typewriter, and a few scribbles/corrections in biro, that somebody has photographed and posted on an internet site.

Funny you should say that, since as well as being mentioned in the article above, the source I got it from happens to be [url= http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/meirion-jones-bbc-knew-jimmy-savile-was-paedophile-and-they-ran-christmas-tributesthere-something ]Meirion Jones[/url] the guy who's Newsnight investigation into Jimmy Savile was shelved from above

Here's his [url= https://twitter.com/meiriontweets/status/561217713323139073 ]tweet[/url] that I nabbed the image from

Keep looking and you will find whatever you want to.

It's like arguing about religion with Dolphins, ultimately pointless.

And in the end you always find yourself talking at cross porpoises?

Sorry but that gag is too good to be lost amongst a load of conspiracy links

Keep looking and you will find whatever you want to.

Fail to look and you'll accept any old lies you're fed by the powers that be...

so am I right in thinking that 'some' of the above forum members don't believe that there has been systemic paedo activity within government circles over the years???

Define what you mean by systemic.

There's certianly been active paedophiles within the bounds of government and the upper social circle, as there no doubt has within music, television, teaching the caring professions and probably every other professional circle, no doubt some paedophiles are drawn to certain professions due to the access and power it may give them over their victims.

There may even have been cover ups to prevent embarrassment to the government or many other professionals within various fields when someone is discovered to have been involved in this.

It's certianly concerning that there are gangs/groups involved, but when they do come out it seems to mainly be loose circles of two or three blokes with a 'shared interest' and look after each other's backs, maybe one bloke knows another group and they introduce each other, I can't imagine it's the easiest thing to drop into a conversation when looking for new members.

Sickening though all that that might be, it doesn't follow that there is some secret 'cabal' of paedophiles who all know each other and cover each other's tracks, get police investigations stopped, disappear files and prevent the truth ever coming out as people like JHJ seem to allege. If nothing else because of the risk of bringing attention to yourself.

There's so much smoke, there's got to be something burning in there.

The govt appointing 2 judges in a row who had connections with possible paedos has a bad smell to it. It is reasonable to draw a conclusion they want a whitewash based on that (even if it is not the actuality).

With this business of deaths, surely the homes these kids came from kept records. Why have they not been checked?

What Anonymous is doing is probably going to tar a few innocents, but it is also likely to drive the govt to at least pick a few scapegoats to sacrifice, so some good may come of it.

Maybe an amnesty should be declared for the first 5 to come forward and give evidence against the rest.

What Anonymous is doing is probably going to tar a few innocents, but it is also likely to drive the govt to at least pick a few scapegoats to sacrifice, so some good may come of it.

mikewsmith - Member
and if those innocent people end up dead?

I didn't say what Anonymous was doing was good. I was saying it is an ill wind which may blow some good.

If they have anything it will be the evidence already gathered by investigators, not material they have hacked from offenders PCs. That would be daft.

If they do release anything then I don't know who would publish it. You'd probably have to actively seek it out and know where to look.

Quick Poll:
Hands up who followed any of the links JHJ has posted on this thread?
If you did, how many of them?

I pretty much skip past every single one of his posts.

ninfan - Member
Define what you mean by systemic.
.
.
.
I mean there have been absolutely shitloads of evidence on Many Many politicians and some have seen the light of day but many haven't, and for all those that have been found out/reported/charged OR covered up there will be masses more that have not.
just because the idea is abhorrent to 'most' of us it doesn't mean its not going on!

The govt appointing 2 judges in a row who had connections with the Establishment [s]possible paedos has a bad smell to it[/s]. It is reasonable to draw a conclusion they want a whitewash based on that (even if it is not the actuality).

There is another big scandal surrounding the inquiry (and police investigations) brewing...
[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11198771/Fiona-Woolf-letter-went-through-seven-re-writes-and-amended-details-of-her-link-with-Leon-Brittan.html ]
If you recall, Fiona Woolf resigned over links to Leon Brittan, after the Home Office helped her edit a letter 7 times to reduce her perceived links to Leon Brittan[/url]

[url= http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5495/leon-brittan-faced-met-questions-over-elm-guest-house-visits ]Leon Brittan was being actively investigated by police before his death[/url]

In itself, that is quite a clear attempt at cover up, especially as the Home Office is in charge of the Police and MI5

Add to the mix that Police have had evidence for 2 years and still failed to question those named, and there is something very fishy going on, especially given links to both the intelligence services and
[url= http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedo-brothel-elm-guest-house-1558001 ]the Conservative Party[/url]...