No, no, I don’t think so

Amid concerns that Scotland Yard has not assigned enough manpower to ongoing sex abuse inquiries, Mr Danczuk said: “I think what we need to do is create an amnesty for former police officers and other people in authority, including border guards, probation staff and social workers.

Not really, for at the back of the allegations is the idea that social and probation workers were implicit in pimping out the children.

As is alleged happened in Islington in a different case. And we would rather like to get to the bottom of all of this and yes, we really would rather like to jail certain people if these allegations stand up.

So no amnesty I think.

And I do hope that this is all thoroughly investigated: should have a certain children’s minister quaking in her boots.

30 comments on “No, no, I don’t think so

  1. Fairly typical State cover-up.

    While I agree with the amnesty for the reason given, we all know that it will never be used for that purpose.

  2. Damn, hit the enter key too early…

    The main point being that all of the officers involved would have been of high rank, to reduce the chance of loose talk. They would have been middle aged in the Seventies. Many of them are doubtless dead by now and no amnesty is going to bring those back.

  3. I assume, TIm, you meant ‘former children’s minister’?

    Given her penchant for hauling evil tax avoiders up before the Court of Quasi-Public Opinion (formerly the Public Accounts Committee) despite having a less than unblemished record herself, perhaps she should be put in charge of any inquiry into peado cover-ups at the heart of Westminster.

  4. The thing is this; the late Geoffrey Dickens MP was widely thought and assumed to be a fruitcake. Several pennies less than the full shilling yet now some retrospective reports of what he is reported to have ‘known’ is now considered by the very same people who once laughed at him as gospel and sufficient for the current witchfinders general to besmirch anyone with in range.

  5. Is there a case to be made for a statute of limitations? In the tax world, HMRC can’t (usually) go back further than six years. Prosecuting paedophiles obviously requires a much longer limit, since victims may not recognise the gravity of the experience until well into adulthood.

    From a moral perspective, any crime should be punished, no matter how long ago. However, prison serves three main purposes: punishment, keeping crims off the streets, and dissuading other would-be criminals. Fom a practical (utilitarian) perspective, we’re spending a lot of time & money on prosecuting the likes of Rolf Harris, but we only gain the first of the three benefits of prison. Is it worth it?

  6. There is a snowball’s chance in hell that anyone from the Left will be dragged into all this, the usual suspects (BBC/Guardian et al) will make sure that this is 100% seen as a ‘Evil Tory Perverts’ issue. If being directly linked to a self admitted under age sex group didn’t result in anything for Hodge, some vague stuff about care homes in Islington isn’t going now. This is all about nailing Tories, nothing else. Not that they probably don’t need to be nailed, but have no illusions as to the motives of the pursuers.

  7. Chances of anybody getting nicked:zero After all MI5 spent years pursuing Harold Wilson as a Russian spy according to Peter Spycatcher Wright and there is plenty of evidence of right-wing Establishment bollock brains people trying to organise a coup.So if they can cover up high treason, they can cover up their tracks over this, no problem. After all Cyril Smith did for years, although his old-fashioned perversions were pretty common knowledge in Rochdale.
    The end result from the Establishment right -wing’s point of view was entirely successful: they got a Tory leader who smashed the unions whom they called the enemy within (you have to laugh) and then a Labour leader who went along with all the Americans’ childish foreign policies as trusty Boy Scout Number One.
    TW tries to carry on with the old blame it all on the public sector angle ignoring the supply/demand nexus with all the demand coming from the right-wing Establishment.
    How many of Margaret Thatcher’s Christmas Eve parties did Jimmy Savile attend?

  8. …aaaaaaand the conspiracy theory snowball rolls on down the hillside. Within a couple of weeks we’re going to have Maggie Thatcher organising paedophile orgies at Checquers.

    We’ve wrecked the memory of the 1970s. Now, onto the 1980s and the hated Thatcher Regime.

    This thing is going to run and run.

  9. Jim puts forward the idea that this will be manipulated to be a “Tory” scandal–and the in the very next comment–Reed jumps into action to try and make it a reality.Hey Reed, ever heard of socialist hero Laventiy Beria ?–he had a real and extensive career drugging and raping teenage girls–not the radfem fantasy bullshit that has been hung around “Satanist” Jimmy Savilles neck.

    The problem with any “investigation” now is that the police are no longer capable of an objective investigation of anything to do with sex. The radfem created Saville nonsense (which the ever- disgraceful Reed can’t wait to use as a smear) and the justice-abusing Yewtree show trials have now so corrupted everything that objectivity is no longer possible. They have gathered up, publicised and acted on so much absolute bullshit that you cannot trust the police (and esp not if the NSPCC radfem scum are involved) to tell you the time of day. Never mind sort out who did what, when–if anything.
    Originally IanB –correctly in my opinion pointed out that the Saville/Yewtree capers was the radfems trying to create their own equivalent of the MacPherson report–ie giving themselves immense power in (as the anti-racist=anti-white gang gained after MacPherson) and influence over the justice system. It now seems that, emboldened by their poisonous success with Yewtree they intend to attack the very foundation of the British state. Well I have no love at all for the British state–but we (and by we I mean anyone with a brain and a penis–because we are the ultimate target) would be very foolish to stand by while said state is shaped into an even-more willing creature of radical feminism.

  10. > How many of Margaret Thatcher’s Christmas Eve parties did Jimmy Savile attend?

    I don’t have the actual stats, but I’m going to take a wild guess and say that he went to more parties organised by the BBC than by Thatcher. If having Savile attend your bash is damning, both the BBC and rather a lot of hospitals can only be paedo fronts and must be shut down forthwith.

    Or maybe we could acknowledge that the thing about Savile is that he, you know, fooled people. That’s kind of the point of the whole controversy, in fact.

    On the subject of the amnesty, there should be an amnesty for anyone who knew anything but was (as is being credibly reported) made to sign a gagging order. Any amnesty should state explicitly it onlt applies to failure to report, not to taking part. That shouldn’t be too tricky to organise, surely.

  11. A great many people have been fooled in connection with Saville–fooled about him rather than by him.

    Hate-filled Radical Feminist scum have created a witch-hunting hysteria so intense that fact, reason and objectivity have all been swept away by tabloid-style madness. And people now want to invite Matthew Hopkins to tea at Westminster. If the same “standards” of lying, fantasising, confabulated bullshit that have applied to the Yewtree crap apply in these new Westminster investigations then the whole structure of the state will be in danger.I don’t care too much about that–but when the agents of influence hovering demonically nearby are Radical Feminsta scum looking to get their hands on ever more power that should give anyone with more than the brains of a gnat pause. This investigation should be put on hold for 5 years at least. Some of the head of poisoned steam will have drained from the femis cause by then and there will be a chance to get at the real truth–not immerse the whole nation in a boiling pot of manipulative radfem lies. Lies designed to empower the liars to shit on the male of the species. That is us by the way(mostly)–just for those commenters who think that they will be immune to whatever tricks the radfems pull.

  12. Looks like it’s got all the usual conspiracy theory ingredients: homosexuals, Jews, Freemasons, MPs, Lords, royals, corrupt police, MI5.

    Forgive me if I’m a tad sceptical.

  13. S2 is right here. Aviation investigations are a good model: obviously, evil people who actually hijack or explode planes are still jailed, but the systemic fuck-ups that lead to most disasters happening are explicitly not prosecuted (yes, even when people have done their jobs incompetently), and instead the aim is to get the most honest and accurate possible understanding of what happened so that it can be prevented in future.

    (except in Italy and Japan, where it’s handled by criminal law, leading to the worst air safety rates among developed countries).

  14. Not the slightest chance of an objective investigation. The same Yewtree witch-hunt gang want to set up operations in Westminster and do as much to undermine the current set-up as possible. If said undermining was to be done by friends of freedom I would be overjoyed. But it is to be undertaken by friends and supporters of socialist tyranny–esp against men. This will be a train wreck not an air crash. And if we are not careful, truth, freedom and justice will by stretched out gravely injured under the wreckage.

  15. @ DBC Reed
    MI5 was told by a Russian informant that the head of the Labour Party was a KGB Agent. What would have been treasonable would have been *not* to investigate. History now shows it was a translation error – the KGB agent, Tom Driberg, was merely Chairman of the Labour Party.
    At the time of the alleged child abuse Cyril Smith was a Labour Councillor in and, for the some of the time, Labour Mayor of Rochdale. Labour may have been the establishment in Rochdale but they certainly were not a *right-wing* establishment.
    The person who did most to break the unions was Arthur Scargill who split the NUM by declaring a strike against the NUM’s own rules relying on finance from the Soviet Union and lost the contest with the elected government (that’s the thing about representative democracies – we give power to those elected so I have lived three-sevenths of my life under Labour governments without ever feeling the need to murder a taxi-driver driving someone to work) because the Union of Democratic Mineworkers held a democratic ballot and voted not to strike.

  16. Ecks-

    Thanks for the mention. I think subsequent events bear me out, or are at least compatible with my prediction.

  17. Mr Ecks

    “Hate-filled Radical Feminist scum have created a witch-hunting hysteria”

    But their witch hunting does not seem to take them in the direction of those vile cvnts Harman, Hewitt and Hodge

  18. And just to prove Mr Ecks and Ian B right about the inquiry not being objective we hear that it will be chaired by the head of the NSPCC, a charity with a vested interest in hyping up the climate of fear.

    BBC: May asks NSPCC boss to head child abuse review

    The same NSPCC that fermented the fear over satanic abuse. And look how that worked out; falsehoods & scaremongering a plenty creating a climate of fear that no child was safe unless parents followed NSPCC rules.

  19. Theophrastus: Thanks for your stunning insights into the matter. So long as men of your genius are on the job none of us have anything to fear.
    And yes, that vile, dozy cow May has now appointed the radfem scum of the NSPCC– prime movers in the Yewtree bollocks– in charge of the Westminster caper.

  20. Well, this evening’s headlines are all about a Labour minister, so Mr Ecks’s conspiracy theory didn’t even make it a day before being disproven. Reality, eh? Tsk.

  21. I noticed on the Guardian website the other day thet were talking about “Rolf Harris survivors”! Jesus wept.

  22. I noticed on the Guardian website the other day thet were talking about “Rolf Harris survivors”!

    Makes him sound like a ship that sank!

  23. Squander: There is something in what you say. Erin Pizzey points out that as long ago as the 60’s radfem scum decided that there was to be no solidarity with leftist men just because they were leftists. All men, socialist idiots or not were to be the enemy.
    Altho’ tonight’s headlines are just the vile papers trying to blow smoke up the public’s arse–the NSPCC trash haven’t got on the job yet.

  24. Actually I got that slightly wrong, it was an article about Rolf and an ‘abuse survivor’ of his. But, ‘survivor’, for fucks sake, he didn’t go around killing people.

  25. Since it’s already fairly routine to use the word “survivor” about people who have faced no risk to their lives whatsoever — “one of the survivors of the Dot-com bubble”, for instance — I’m not going to get too upset about the word’s being used to describe people who have actually been harmed.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.