Pages

Friday, 1 July 2016

The ESTABLISHMENT

Wow, I've been a waiting for something new(ish) to blog about, and here it is, courtesy of our social betters, the 'ESTABLISHMENT' no less !
 I had no idea that this was going on until FACT, which campaigns on behalf of Falsely Accused Carer's and Teacher's, tweeted this
 Naturally, I followed the link and found that this debate took place yesterday not today, which is a good thing because the transcript has been published and here is the link 
https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2016-06-30/debates/16063032000573/HistoricalChildSexAbuse 

I'd say that the debate yesterday started well, but I'd be lying because in the very first few sentences of his opening, lord Lexden came out with this 
 Yes, you read that correctly guys and gals and some of you would be forgiven for not being surprised that one of our social betters, endorses the injustice that is the Savile 'scandal'. But, hang fire a bit there and read on, because what this git comes out with next confirms the FACT that there will NEVER be Justice for ANYONE in this country when you have lawmakers who condemn one dead man, while ACTIVELY supporting others. It's that Peter Hitchin's - George Bell moment all over again isn't it ?
 His Lordship has read the outstanding FACT report and supports the need for an inquiry into the handling of such cases.

Now, it goes without saying that I welcome the interest that the lords and ladies appear to be showing in such matters. But you CANNOT decide that one great dead man's reputation is more important than another. And, if you do, then you are morally corrupt, end of ! 

His lordship then shows his cards, he's a 'member of the George Bell support group'. Hold on to your self-belief for the next bit 
 A little later in the debate lord Cormack offers this
Vomit-inducing isn't it ? Only they can 'restore the moral compass' Give me strength ! And then, this 

 I'll be a picking through their lordship's debate next time. Just thought I'd get this out there seeing as it's been so long since I last blogged !


 

13 comments:

  1. Lexden seems to have his own axe to grind as well.

    "I myself was given a role in that first fable."

    "This month has brought a powerful reminder of some of the principal causes of the disquiet that has arisen. Sir Cliff Richard has been told that he is not to face charges arising from the investigation of allegations relating to purported events going back more than 30 years. The allegations were made two years ago in a blaze of publicity created by the police and the BBC acting in grotesque collusion before he had even been interviewed. Such a media circus should never have occurred. Could it have been the fact that the initial complainant was aged under 16 at the time of the allegation, which created the temptation that led these two public organisations to take action at Sir Cliff’s expense? How can we ensure that nothing of this kind happens again? Sir Cliff has spoken movingly of the harrowing distress that he endured during the two years that he had to wait to hear his fate, which was that “insufficient evidence” existed on which to bring charges against him. His innocence has not been fully and unambiguously restored.

    Those of us in political or parliamentary life will never forget other astonishing police behaviour. The manner in which Field Marshal Lord Bramall was treated shocked us all, as did the distress inflicted on Lord Brittan during his final illness and the additional pain suffered by his much-loved wife after his death. The sight of a senior police officer standing outside Sir Edward Heath’s former home in Salisbury and exhorting those who had allegations to make to get in touch will not fade from the memory.

    Nor we will forget the ludicrous, large-scale police operation undertaken on the word of a fantasist to track down a murderous ring of paedophile politicians in Dolphin Square, London. Just a little light research would have shown that much the same story, minus murder, had been manufactured 20 years earlier. I myself was given a role in that first fable."

    ReplyDelete
  2. So what it comes down to is that all Savile's fault:
    "If that long-haired uncouth oaf hadn't been such a filthy pervert, hiding his abuse in plain sight for 50 years, nobody would have thought of making these foul allegations against all these great and good men!"

    Have I got that right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes ! Of course, Jim was one of 'them' though wasn't he ? :-)

      Delete
    2. Right on the money, Mrs G.

      I have to confess that I'm pleased to see some of these things being said. But surely it would just be so much easier if these people had the sense to see how absurd the SJS story was in the first place and follow things from there.

      To be fair, of course, Jim was not the first - just the biggest. This has been happening to regular decent people since the eighties. I suppose from SJS onward it just became 'popular'.

      Delete
    3. Misa, I think it was Moor who said something a long the lines of, Jimmy still doing some good after his death, if that makes any sense ?

      Delete
  3. Did any of the eminences (former Lord Chief Justice, President of the Family Division, the great men of the cloth and a former senior copper) mention any of the little people subsumed in false allegations and convictions - given it kicked off from the FACT report? Wonder what Jim would have said about this de haut en haut hand-wringing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haven't got that far TBH Maggie. I think their interest's may not stretch as far as the lower classes !

      Delete
  4. To believe Jimmy Savile was guilty it’s essential to believe he was immensely influential, indeed truly powerful - powerful enough to silence anyone who spoke up during his 50-year reign of terror.

    The House of Lords is peopled with the influential and powerful.

    They do not believe national treasure Sir Cliff Richard could have done it.

    They do not believe that Bishop George Bell could have done it.

    They do not believe that Field Marshal Edwin Bramall, Baron Bramall, KG, GCB, OBE, MC, JP, Dl former head of the armed services, could have done it.

    They do not believe that former Prime Minister, Sir Edward Heath, KG, MBE could have done it.

    Conclusion:

    The most influential and powerful people in the UK think Sir Jimmy Savile, OBE, KCSG was more influential and powerful than any of these people.

    What a queer country we live in.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed.
      And as Moor has shown, Savile was soooo influential at the BBC that he had to struggle to get even the most modest expenses reimbursed.

      Delete
    2. I felt so concerned about the false allegations I have now published a book on Amazon Kindle "Jimmy Savile Why I Believe He is Innocent" by John Marsh. It is third in a mini series.

      Delete
    3. John Marsh - just had a look inside your book courtesy of Amazon. Looking good there Sir. Well done

      Delete
    4. Thanks. It still needs a little work but as it is Amazon Kindle anyone who buys it should have no problem uploading any updates at no further cost one reason among many I like the Kindle. The undertaking I expected to take three months and so far it has been 16 months.

      Delete
    5. Yes, I remember you mentioning this ages ago. Am letting the world know John. Nice one

      Delete