|
HortonNash posted:Poacher turned gamekeeper? Seems to me more like an oddly wealthy gamekeeper under whose aegis a suspicious number of birds have been poached getting a new, better estate to manage.
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 00:21 |
|
|
So not only is she the sister of one of the people central to the cover-up, but she's also responsible for covering up accused pedophiles herself. This thing has got to be pretty bad considering the lengths they're going to to try to re-bury it
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
Is this a real attempt to make this legit or an attempt by one part of the establishment to gently caress with another?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 16:23
|
|
|
notaspy posted:Is this a real attempt to make this legit or an attempt by one part of the establishment to gently caress with another? Make what legit, exactly?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:Make what legit, exactly? The announced enquiry into child abuse coverups.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
To be clear are you asking if this is a genuine attempt to get someone to lead the enquiry who isn't pro-cover up vs simply one elite faction attacking another? Or are you asking a different question?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
I feel like I'm having a stroke. Of course that's what they were asking, what on earth else could it mean?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:I feel like I'm having a stroke. Of course that's what they were asking, what on earth else could it mean? Haha, thanks man. I can sometimes be obtuse in my questions. Glad someone understands me (I'm looking at you mum). This feels more like the elites doing all they can to make this a cluster gently caress so when the truth comes out there is a convenient way of saying 'look, see it was never done properly, my friend was never a peado'
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
There was a trial balloon in the Guardian yesterday. Police therapist explaining that investigating old child-abuse cases was (A) causing all the poor police officers PTSD and (B) distracting them from investigating modern cases "in which the children can actually be helped". No points for noticing the contradiction between point A and point B.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
notaspy posted:Haha, thanks man. I can sometimes be obtuse in my questions. Glad someone understands me (I'm looking at you mum). I dunno, a quick clean inquiry that burns a few scapegoats would seem infinitely preferable to something open ended that lets various groups who actually care about the truth have cause to keep adding questions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
Better make sure those scapegoats don't rat out the ones you're trying cover.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
Better make them dead scapegoats then I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Thatcher wasn't only loving with kid's milkquote:Margaret Thatcher 'personally covered up' child abuse allegations against senior ministers
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Rare moment when you find out that Thatcher was worse than you ever imagined she could have been. BRB, got to print this cover off and shove it into the faces of everyone who ever called her "The Lady".
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:Thatcher wasn't only loving with kid's milk So what you're saying is that this song is no longer just a metaphor?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:Thatcher wasn't only loving with kid's milk
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:What was that about Ł15m towards a Thatcher museum? Old story. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/margaret-thatcher/10007828/David-Cameron-gives-backing-to-15million-Thatcher-museum.html
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
One would assume if there were any truth to this there would be retaliatory leaks of allegations about a Labour figures' misdeed and on that note: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/13/labour-peer-letters-boy-questions quote:Copies of old letters sent to a young boy in a care home by a Labour peer now at the centre of paedophile allegations reveal how the politician cultivated an extremely close relationship with the teenager over a two-year period. Still though with the focus on establishment paedophiles it could simply be these stories are coming out as a consequence of that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987 quote:Senior Tory cabinet ministers were supplied with underage boys for sex parties, it is sensationally claimed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 10:34
|
|
|
I personally would liked to have see that old hag alive and lucid while the allegations were read against her. But then again the fact that she's in hell is why these charges were made public and not shuffled under the rug, I assume. E: you could say she cloaked ongoing molestation and child rape in an iron curtain of secrecy. FAUXTON fucked around with this message at 10:52 on Jul 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 10:48
|
|
|
 I must be terrible because I want Reagan to somehow be implicated in all of this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 11:45
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:I personally would liked to have see that old hag alive and lucid while the allegations were read against her. But then again the fact that she's in hell is why these charges were made public and not shuffled under the rug, I assume. It also gives a chance for those who have previously apologised for or idolised her to call it a big witch hunt which is only happening now because she's dead and can't fight back. Though after the way Saville went, I think a lot of people will be a bit more tight lipped in offering defence.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 11:57
|
|
|
AtomikKrab posted:
Yeah, you actually are terrible. "Wow I hope the monstrous abuse of dozens or maybe hundreds of children is politically convenient for me" is not a very nice sentiment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 12:39
|
|
|
So, given that sexual abuse of children now seems to have been fairly widespread in the 70s, do we think this kind of thing still goes on now among politicians and celebrities (obviously it has been fairly common in the Catholic church in the more recent past)? If not, what has changed since the 70s? Was child abuse just not considered to be as beyond the pale as it now is?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 14:21
|
|
|
There's probably no more child abuse back then than there is now, it's just that it seems these things have a very slow fuse as due to our crazy libel laws even the insinuation that something is going on ('Why is Lord McAlpine trending?') will get you into some serious poo poo if you don't have 100% hard proof and even then it will not be enough if that person is important enough. How much goes on today? Impossible to say, because everything is stacked against the victims.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 14:26
|
|
|
Whitefish posted:So, given that sexual abuse of children now seems to have been fairly widespread in the 70s, do we think this kind of thing still goes on now among politicians and celebrities (obviously it has been fairly common in the Catholic church in the more recent past)? If not, what has changed since the 70s? Was child abuse just not considered to be as beyond the pale as it now is? Well, the Mirror says that a currently-serving cabinet minister was seen at the Thatcherite parties, so that's a bit of a hint. Didn't say in what capacity, though, so it might have just been William Hague.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
Really good piece in the Graun about the new Savile biography coming out. Well worth a read. http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jul/13/jimmy-savile-man-who-knew-him-best-dan-davies-in-plain-sight
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 15:06
|
|
|
Whitefish posted:So, given that sexual abuse of children now seems to have been fairly widespread in the 70s, do we think this kind of thing still goes on now among politicians and celebrities (obviously it has been fairly common in the Catholic church in the more recent past)? If not, what has changed since the 70s? Was child abuse just not considered to be as beyond the pale as it now is? Rohypnol etc have become more easily available since then which could be a factor in reducing the number of allegations if they aren't simply being covered up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Rohypnol etc have become more easily available since then which could be a factor in reducing the number of allegations if they aren't simply being covered up. At the same time child protection and safeguarding has improved considerably in places like schools and hospitals over the last decade (and I don't just mean the CRB/DBS certificate stuff, but protocols, training and even the design of buildings). The changes in how children are treated in school now compared to when I was at school in the 80s and 90s is quite staggering. The majority of abuse will always occur in the child's own home or the home of their friends or family, that's why it's important that professionals that encounter children have the training to deal with any disclosures (how to properly record a disclosure, not as easy as you might imagine, and who to report it to) and that there are protocols to ensure that disclosures are investigated by the appropriate body. I don't know if the police now are better at dealing with victims, I hope they are.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Rohypnol etc have become more easily available since then which could be a factor in reducing the number of allegations if they aren't simply being covered up. Benzos are rarely used in child sexual abuse mostly because they can't really resist and erasing their memory of events isn't a priority for child abusers. If they want a sedative, alcohol is much easier to use - too easy to overdose children with other sedatives. Rohypnol was discontinued by the manufacturer in the mid-1980s.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
kim jong-illin posted:
Flunitrazepam isn't even in the BNF as far as I can see.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
Whitefish posted:So, given that sexual abuse of children now seems to have been fairly widespread in the 70s, do we think this kind of thing still goes on now among politicians and celebrities (obviously it has been fairly common in the Catholic church in the more recent past)? If not, what has changed since the 70s? Was child abuse just not considered to be as beyond the pale as it now is? The paedophiles from the 70s are dead and can no longer sue for libel. There are much more recent allegations but you won't see them discussed in the press as the alleged paedophiles are still very much alive (Some of them even still in government).
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
Gum posted:The paedophiles from the 70s are dead and can no longer sue for libel. There are much more recent allegations but you won't see them discussed in the press as the alleged paedophiles are still very much alive (Some of them even still in government). Well, not by name, anyway. That Mirror article was pretty clear about a currently-serving Cabinet minister being at the Thatcherite sex parties.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:Well, not by name, anyway. That Mirror article was pretty clear about a currently-serving Cabinet minister being at the Thatcherite sex parties. I'm surprised they even went that far. After all, McAlpine managed to get damages out of the BBC even though they never mentioned him by name.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
So who thinks this might be in retaliation to the phone hacking convictions?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
Warcabbit posted:So who thinks this might be in retaliation to the phone hacking convictions? Oh, I'm sure that's part of it. Particularly the way the Times is bigging itself up as the number one source on the Westminster scandal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
Gum posted:The paedophiles from the 70s are dead and can no longer sue for libel. There are much more recent allegations but you won't see them discussed in the press as the alleged paedophiles are still very much alive (Some of them even still in government). Yeah, I guess that is a key aspect of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
Whitefish posted:So, given that sexual abuse of children now seems to have been fairly widespread in the 70s, do we think this kind of thing still goes on now among politicians and celebrities (obviously it has been fairly common in the Catholic church in the more recent past)? If not, what has changed since the 70s? Was child abuse just not considered to be as beyond the pale as it now is? Some food for thought. The first heterosexual age of consent was set in 1275, at 12 years old. It stayed there for as near as dammit exactly 600 years; then was raised to 13 in 1875, and subsequently to 16 in 1885; so in 1970, a preteen age of consent was only just on the verge of passing out of living memory. Now, consider that societal attitudes usually don't change in precise lockstep to the law, and that we can all think of something that is currently illegal but still believed by at least a sizeable minority to be a reasonable thing to do. Now, add that to the mother of all flagrantly hypocritical Victorian/Edwardian concepts, the one about how pornography was completely indecent and sinful and utterly unacceptable, while a good solid intellectual manly appreciation of the nude form was something quite, quite different. As practised by (among many others) one Robert Baden-Powell, founder of the Scouts: quote:"Another incident illustrative of Baden-Powell's appreciation of naked boys occurred at Charterhouse, when he was staying overnight at the school with his old friend A. H. Tod, who had been in the Rifle Corps and in the football 1st XI with him. In November 1919 Tod was over the retirement age but still teaching because it was wartime and all the younger staff had joined up. 'Stayed with Tod,' Stephe wrote in his diary. 'Tod's photos of naked boys and trees etc. Excellent.'. That a bachelor housemaster should have taken large numbers of nude photographs of his boys evidently did not strike Baden-Powell as undesirable. A few days later he wrote to Tod about starting a Scout troop at the school and added that he would soon be visiting Charterhouse again, 'which will give me the opportunity of seeing the football; and possibly I might get a further look at those wonderful photographs of yours!' From Tim Jeal's biography of B-P. In that context, it's a lot easier to see how this sort of thing comes to happen. That's not a defence, of course; just an explanation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
I do wonder whether there has been a change of culture in some respect, at least in certain parts of society. Perhaps this is a prejudice on my part against private schools, but my feeling is that in the earlier part of the 20th Century there was this ideal of 'Greek love' which was more common in private schools. And part of that ideal involves older men having relationships with younger men and boys. Maybe that's completely unfounded and wacky though. I just feel that either sexual abuse of children is far far more widespread than commonly thought (in which case the Paedogeddon stuff that Brass Eye made fun of wasn't so far from the mark), or there's something specific about the era and the backgrounds of the people involved that makes it possible for so many members of Parliament and the Government in the 70s and 80s to be (allegedly) linked to this sort of thing. I mean, the allegations that are currently flying around make it sound like a good proportion of the Cabinet was doing it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 00:21 |
|
|
Whitefish posted:I do wonder whether there has been a change of culture in some respect, at least in certain parts of society. Perhaps this is a prejudice on my part against private schools, but my feeling is that in the earlier part of the 20th Century there was this ideal of 'Greek love' which was more common in private schools. And part of that ideal involves older men having relationships with younger men and boys. Maybe that's completely unfounded and wacky though. I think you're over-thinking it a bit - Cyril Smith certainly didn't come from that class. Instead, consider that some people go into politics because they like power over others, and extrapolate from there why there may be a higher proportion of sexual predators (paedophile or not) in the Palace of Westminster. Then think about the other sorts of jobs those sort of people end up in - religion, education, the police, and think about how that might possibly affect reporting and investigation of such crimes. Not saying that's the case, but it's not impossible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2014 23:14
|
|