Commenters on this blog directly caused the exposure of Clement Freud in the ITV story. I published an anodyne obituary in 2009 giving my memories of Freud. One commenter wrote:
He was a notorious old goat and his pursuit of young women could verge on the sinister. I met one of his young ‘victims’ who told me about a job interview with him turning into a very traumatic experience.
And a second wrote the startling
Writing as one of his 1000s of sexual ‘victims’,
still surviving, terrified as I write for fear he is not yet quite yet dead – the man was an evil, conniving,
ruthless user for his own bottomless ego of all he came into contact with.
Our children – boys and girls are all that much safer for his demise.
And that is just the tip of an iceberg of political and media dirty dealings that reaches into the heart of the broken Britain he has left behind him.
His family will now, unfortunately, reap the rage and revenge of those he destroyed and their much needed justice for his many heinous – still untold – actions.
Six years later I was contacted by a journalist working for ITV who had leads on Freud and looking for more evidence. He had dug up those comments on my blog. Using the magic of the internet, I was able to trace the last commenter and put them in touch, with their permission, with the ITV team.
I also told them an anecdote I myself recalled. I was a young First Year Rep on Dundee University Students Association Council while Clement Freud was Rector. One day the then President of the Students Association, Ian Morris, came out of his office in a terrible mood after a phone call from Freud, saying that Freud had asked him to line up female students for him and was trying to use him as “a pimp”. This was not paedophilia but it was unpleasant – Freud was 35 years older than the students he was targeting.
It then all went quiet for a year before ITV contacted me this morning to tell me the story was running.
It is hard to know what to make of Freud owning a holiday villa close to where Madeleine McCann disappeared. Clement was apparently not in Portugal at the time. When you add in the fact that the McCanns’ sleazy “spokesman”, Clarence Mitchell, works for Freud’s son Matthew, the coincidences do add up. I am not jumping to any conclusions at present. But I found the following fascinating.
Clement Freud assured Kate McCann she had nothing to fear from the cadaver dogs giving a positive response inside the McCann’s hire car, hired after Madeleine “disappeared”. They had no evidential value. “So what are they going to do? One bark for yes, two barks for no?” asked Freud.
There were two dossiers and John Mann MP found the second last year. He’s handed it to the police.
Thanks for that, appreciated. Perhaps I wasn’t around when that was reported in the press or wherever.
Do you have any further info – any links and so on? I’m particularly interested to learn how/where he found it and when
From the horse’s mouth https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oqx4nE35Z0
I’m not sure if this is correct. What was found was a copy of something, already long in the public domain, but which had dropped out of sight, and then was unearthed again. This was not the Dicken’s dossier, but merely a document, forming part of the Dicken’s dossier, as an appendix. Fools above are now disputing there ever was a dossier, when the incontrovertible fact is that there was and Leon Brittain, or his helper elves, when he was Home Secretary lost or destroyed it, and later other copies of it, disappeared too, burglaries, safe-deposit box robberies etc. took place. As for Dicken’s not taking the document to the police, last I checked, then, at least, the police came under the Home Secretary’s remit. Now of course they’re militarised and part of the Ministry of Offence.
For discussion, facts and background and information on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann join us here:
https://www.facebook.com/MadeleineMcCannKnowTheTruth/
Clement Freud’s wife’s response “elicited no protest of his innocence from his widow”
“The allegations will dismay Freud’s many friends and millions of fans. But they have elicited no protest of his innocence from his widow Lady Freud, the actress Jill Raymond — born June Flewett — now 89.
Instead, in the film she apologises ‘for what has happened to these woman’, expressing her shock, and her deep sorrow.”
And:
“In her astonishing testimony, Sylvia Woosley — who met the Freuds with her wayward mother in the South of France in 1948, and was taken in by them in London in 1952 when her mother decamped to Ibiza — describes a morning when she joined the couple for breakfast in their bed. She was 14.
When Mrs Freud got up to make the breakfast, Sylvia offered to help, but Jill Freud told her to ‘stay where you are with Clay’.
She says: ‘I knew what was going to happen. I was in my nightdress, and he pulls it up and pulls me against him, touching me and kissing me.’”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3641876/Dark-secrets-Freuds-Did-wife-47-seduced-boy-16-turn-blind-eye-Clement-s-depravity.html
The prurient, curtain-twitching tone of the Daily Fail in full flow there!
One of the commenters on the Daily Mail’s article (in the Mail’s website) writes as follows:
“The accuser who has identified herself admits that years ago she told Freud’s wife that the accusation was a lie”
Has anyone else heard that or know where it comes from?
Probably someone like yourself or Jim desperately trying to distract from the allegations made.
Amazing the way you pair imediately try to tarnish the account, without knowing anything about it.
It’s that immediate knee-jerk reaction that gives your game away.
Nope, just amused at the sources you’re attaching such importance to. You mean you’re not mildly amused at the typical prurient tone of the Mail piece?
If it’s typical why would I focus on that rather than on the substance of the allegation.
Why would anyone focus on that rather than on the substance of the allegation.
You’re attaching a lot of ‘substance’ to the Daily Mail, that’s my point. Which is quite amusing considering the deserved contempt it usually gets from most posters on here.
You’re still talking about the Daily Mail and avoiding the allegation contained therein.
Why.
The allegation isn’t made by the Daily Mail.
It’s made by Sylvia Woosley, who lived with the Freud’s. It’s a personal testimony.
Why are you so determined to talk about everything and anything but the allegation made.
I know nothing about the allegations made apart from what you’ve linked to in the Daily Mail. What I’m interested in is why you are attaching such veracity to the words of a Daily Mail journalist.
Strange to doubt the veracity of the Daily Mail as a source of information? I think not Herb.
And I notice my posts keep on being deleted, now that I do find strange, almost like you’re being protected and shepherded yourself.
It’s the words of the woman herself.
How many times…
Maybe, Professor. That’s why I was asking whether anyone here had heard anything like that.
I don’t think I’m trying to tarnish the account (whatever that means?) and I admit I know no more about this than anyone else on here. Less; perhaps, which is why I was asking for more info.
Finally, if you’re looking for knee-jerk reactions, I think you’ll find lots of them on this thread, starting with those postulating – yet again – a vast conspiracy and those conflating homosexuality and paedophilia.
Hope that clarifies, ‘Erbie!
And now fuck off and draw up another Big Picture 🙂
They’re not the words of a Daily Mail journalist.
They’re the words of the woman herself.
Why would anyone have any interest in pretending otherwise.
And you’ve done that continually throughout.
Very strange.
Your source is the Daily Mail, so yes I have good reasons to doubt anything from such a rancid publication.
Just a distraction.
In your fevered imagination. Having said that, I’ve seen some other more reputable sources since earlier, and Matthew Freud has cancelled his big party tonight. I might even develop a mild interest in the subject now we’re away from the Fail.
I think you’re dreaming, Macks, all my posts are there as far as I can see.
Peter Cook satirising the summing up in the Jeremy Thorpe case for anyone not familiar with it :
https://youtu.be/6xi-agPf95M
So Cook is basically saying that Thorpe was protected by the establisment.
Why would he be protected.
Gawd knows Herb, you tell me!
It doesn’t concern you?
What doesn’t concern me? You haven’t told me yet.
That Thorpe was protected by the establishment.
You haven’t told me why though. Please tell me why.
I’m asking are you concerned that he was protected.
It doesn’t much matter at this stage why he was protected.
Are you concerned that he was protected.
Yes or No.
Because really, it doesn’t seem that you’re much interested in anything but distracting from the allegations made and you don’t seem overly concerned that a politician charged with a very serious offence was protected.
Protected from what? You haven’t told me yet.
You’re not at all interested. That’s quite clear.
But important to expose that.
The woman’s testimony is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bE0m_hQoew
And again, it’s important to point out that you don’t address that at all.
All you’re interested in is distracting and diverting with non-issues about the Daily Mail.
Your source is the Daily Mail, that doesn’t concern you? You’ve got to go to the source, don’t you get that? The allegations may well be true, who knows?
Dim Jim; “Protected from what?” Dimbo Jimbo has never heard of “The Thorpe Affair” !!
“But the jury that tried Thorpe was not convinced that a politician described by the trial judge as a man of “hitherto unblemished reputation” and “a national figure with a very distinguished public record” could be capable of such a dastardly deed.”
Ah, such extraordinarily nice kind words from such an extraordinarily friendly Judge ! 😀
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11274214/Jeremy-Thorpe-scandal-where-are-they-now.html
“Meighan said that he had given a statement to the authorities in 1975, but that this was significantly altered by the police to remove all references to Thorpe. Meighan was not called to give evidence at the subsequent trial. “It was a cover-up, no question, but it suited me fine”, he said.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Thorpe#Trial_and_acquittal
Oh, that was a bit naughty of the good old boys in blue, I wonder why they did that ! 😀
The source is not the Daily Mail.
The source is Sylvia Woolsey’s personal testimony itself.
If you’re that stupid it’s reallyhard to discuss anything, but here it is again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bE0m_hQoew
Herbie:
After the fact Herbie, your link was to the impeccable non-prurient Daily Mail, no changing goalposts now.
Mack creature :
No, I’ve never heard of the ‘Thorpe affair’, that’s why I’ve referenced it several times today.
It’s quite amazing the lengths you will go to avoid the woman’s testimony.
Why would you do that. Why would anyone act as you have acted here on this matter.
Talking about anything and everything but the testimony itself.
Why so many diversions and distractions.
I’m equally interested in why you are so fascinated by this subject. It’s mildly interesting and distressing, but so are many things in this vale of tears. It’s like something from Brass Eye’s paedophilia parody here today.
It’s a bit more than mildly interesting.
Many, many instances of coverup in the UK, the US, Belgium, Jersey etc.
But we know now that you’re not concerned about that.
The only question is why.
What interest do you serve.
No, I’m not really interested in a subject which is do widely known and has been for years. If I was working in child protection then I’m sure my interest would be greater. I just find the ‘Brass Eye’ level of faux concern here pretty amusing.
Cyril Smith & Jeremy Thorpe were instrumental in propping up the failing Labour government,
that’s why.
Elaborate for me Michael. I need to see how the judge was part of this whole establishment plot.
Wow!
You’ve never heard of a whitewash Inquiry.
Really.
Tell all Herb! I’m all ears!
I’m not interested in your displays of faux naivete.
You’ve demonstrated to my satisfaction that you’re a fraud.
No normal human being would seek to drown out the testimony of someone claiming abuse by reference to all manner or trivial diversions and distractions.
Only someone with a vested interested would do that.
Herbie
There was no “inquiry”.
There was a jury trial and Thorpe was acquitted.
You really know nothing, don’t you.
No, I think you’re the one being protected Herb, I’ve just noticed that a perfectly fine post pointing out to you that it’s about forty years since the Thorpe trial, and you claim that ‘at this stage’ it’s not important to know the details of your purported conspiracy, has been deleted. As has a perfectly justified earlier riposte to a serially abusive Mack character. Why are you being protected Herb?
Yes he is Habbs, no worries though, it’s pathetic stuff!
I know that, habby.
I was just pointing out to stupid Jim that we’ve a long history of dubious judges chosen to lead dodgy enquiries.
the same sorts of jusges who are chosen to hear sensistive trials.
My question to you was would you be concerned that Thorpe had been protected.
It’s simple enough.
But you’re having some serious difficulties answering it.
Why.
One would need to know why Herb, you’ve had a good forty years to bone up. In your own good time sir, and your own words from memory if you please, no sneaky Wiki searches.
You don’t need to know anything to be concerned that a judge protected someone.
That’s the whole point.
It’s a standalone concern in itself, which you’ve repeatedly failed to address.
You’re quite clearly not concerned at all.
All I ask is that readers ask themselves why.
All you had to say was;
“Yes, I’d be concerned if a judge protected someone at trial.”
Just that.
But you couldn’t even manage that.
That’s what was so curious..
Not now, of course. You’ve exposed yourself now.
And all your diversions and deviations over the woman’s testimony. Quite a sickening display that.
But anyway.
Job done.
More unbelievable deletions! So ‘save it for the judge Herb, you’re all worked up with nowhere to go’ is somehow beyond the pale? His confected outrage is not worth a mild parody? Pathetic, he can fight his own battles if he’s up to it can’t he?
A judge can certainly influence a jury by his conduct of the trial and by his instructions to the jury. Here’s what Wikipedia says about the trial:
Peter Cook’s biased judge sketch (complete)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kyos-M48B8U
LOL
Note that, despite the snitch’s strange denial, this passage does deal with the judge’s conduct of the trial and with his instructions to the jury (I have bolded the relevant language):
Michael Norton
I think you’ve inadvertently conflated a couple of events.
After the February 1974 general election, Edward Health attempted to hang onto office by forming a coalition with the Liberals under Jeremy Thorpe. That fell through for diverse reasons, including that part of the price would have been a couple of Cabinet posts for the Liberals including the Home Secretaryship for Thorpe himself ( a demand unacceptable to Heath, who had already been briefed about rumours concerning Thorpe’s homosexual life style.
There was indeed a Lib-Lab Pact from March 1977 which lasted a year or two and could be said to have propped up the Callaghan Labour govt. But by the time of that agreement Thorpe had already stood down as leader of the Liberals and had been replaced by the Boy David (aka David Steele).
*******************
BTW, “Macky” (above) has mentioned the Thorpe trial. However, in his haste to display his anti-Establishment credentials and to get in a kick at Jim, “Macks” has forgotten to tell us that Thorpe was on trial not for homosexuality (that had been decriminalised years before under Home Secretary Roy Jenkins) but for conspiracy to murder his (younger) lover. He was acquitted after a jury trial.
You are correct
but the creep Cyril Smith was the power broker for both Thorpe and Steel
That might be because he was a whip and new sordid details or because he had previously been in the Labour party,
I expect it was the former.
If that’s so, then it was worth it.
It’s not true though.
Afraid not Cyril Smith always opposed the LibLab pact his sympathies were with Tory grandees in Rochdale such as Fred Ratcliffe, his Tory friends such as David Waddington and the asbestos industry.
Ha, posthumous allegations… If he were guilty they’d have nailed him while he was alive.
Like they nailed Jimmy Saville?
Like they nailed the disgusting Cyril Smith,
good friend of Jimmy Saville, Jeremy Thorpe and Davis Steele
David Steel
All innocent
An innocent man. You’ve proved my point.
O.K. so how many U.K. politicians have been put in prison for shagging rent boys?
How many went to prison for having their rent boy threatened with a shooter?
Not many, the Whips took care of this;
http://www.bbc.com/news/28207066
Yes.
He was very determined to divert from the subject matter of the thread, wasn’t he.
Very determined.
Yes.
That’s obvious, and particularly when you look at the Belgian and Jersey cases, the Epstein case and the notorious Franklin coverup.
All the same MO.
You have to be particularly evil to want to cover that up.
And here we have two posters who do precisely that using the most absurd, like really really absurd, distractions and diversions.
If they’re so well covered up how do you know about them Herb?
Jim felt the lash a little. Nice to know there is some balance to the deletions.
What did they erase? Was it substantial, or the usual hangnail upon which nothing hangs except sarcastic ooze?
I wonder if the Boy George doomsaying is causing the World to go tits up,
oil prices are tanking.
The Saudis are still pumping like they still have vast stores. Oil has been so cheap for so long that China even started making their own plastic bags and collapsed the US market.
All roads lead to crude.
Toi aussi.
Given that you are keen on posing questions to others, I assume that you are not averse to answering questions.
My question is: You have called for this blog to be comment free. This blog post indicates that the comments section did, in small part, contribute to the expose of Clement Freud. In light of this “public service” aspect of the comments section would you consider amending your previous expressed opinion? If not, why not?
Thank you in advance for your considered reply
Brass Eye, Paedogeddan! :
https://youtu.be/RcU7FaEEzNU
I would have thought Clarence Mitchell was sufficiently prominent to have a wikipedia page, but I can’t find it.
There are wikipedia pages about four Clarence Mitchells, but none of them is the one involved in the McCann case :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Mitchell
He gets a few mentions on the wikipedia page about the McCann case, but there’s no detail:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Madeleine_McCann
However, there is a German wikipedia page all about him:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Mitchell
You’d think someone would have done one in English.
Seems rather odd.
There’s also Clement’s participation in, as a military interpreter, and presence when German prisoners were being grievously tortured in Nuremberg area jails, in the mid to late 1940s, before his alcoholic haze years in France.
The London Cage was a notorious torture centre in WW2 too. :
https://www.vice.com/print/the-secret-ex-torture-compound-in-the-heart-of-kensington
A third victim of Freud’s has come forward. I wonder how many more there will be now.
The Guardian: Third woman alleges she was sexually assaulted by Sir Clement Freud:
I wonder how many more there will have to be before his apologists stop defending the man.
“I wonder how many more there will have to be before his apologists stop defending the man.”
Their Knight of Pentacles would have to fall off his draught horse and mount from behind on youtube with all the proper timestamps. But then, and only then, would they throw him under the double-decker bus.
Not trusting the Daily Mail is a long way from apologia for paedophilia.
Legal proceedings against a 97-year-old ex-head teacher accused of historical child sex offences have been halted because of his ill health.
Jack Mount had denied 50 offences alleged to have taken place in Shropshire from 1954 to 1979.
He had been cleared by a jury previously of some charges and in a further trial a jury failed to reach a verdict on other charges.
Mr Mount, now of South Molton, Devon, was one of the UK’s oldest defendants
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36542372
The real world? God help us.
Not everyone is as patient as Herbie. The evidence is from a victim , not from a newspaper.
As the claims all originated from an ITV programme, why bother yourself with the Mail?
http://www.itv.com/news/2016-06-15/victim-paralysed-by-fear-after-alleged-sir-clement-freud-abuse/
I assumed you have a television?
I don’t buy it
Lysias
If we discard the idea that Freud was mentally ill, looking for a tighter fit in a girl in her early teens because of some paranoia about his prick size, we are left with a man who wanted to subvert the innocence of children and also divert the ambitions of academic success for female students who had new opportunities to attend university.
I was brought up to passionately defend equal opportunities. Subverting the rights of children and the ambitions of women sounds like the opposite of equal opportunities. It sounds to me like the old guard trying to keep the lid on change.
With the disgusting Clement Freud we have a new category of nastiness, in which his race, his political status and his public profile are all irrelevant. What we have here is simply a very nasty, spiteful man who had opportunities in life, but who tried his best to prevent others from taking advantage of the opportunities life had given them.
A bitter and twisted piece of hate.
I wouldn’t take it personally, Jim. I’ve been here quite some time, and the mods always appear true to the stated rules (which appeared some time back).
If there are personal attacks, they’ll do their best to weed them out. It’s a harder job than is sometimes realised. One cannot expect them to look at every thread and every post therein, and only get the _real_ troublemakers. One would have to review a feud running along for ages, and know exactly where to intervene. All “sides” think they are being picked on, because everyone naturally thinks what _they_ have written is entirely fair.
There are disruptive elements here which would simply have been banned long since if the blog’s host didn’t believe in free speech a bit too much.
Ok Glen fair enough, I suppose I’m a relative newcomer around here. Thanks for the input, I know it all seems a bit childish but it’s surprising how emotionally fraught one gets! I really need to desist. Cheers again.
It’s not childish (imho) really, after all – one contributes considered thought and genuinely tries to explain their position, and that effort is going to take a bit of an emotional toll, we would not be human otherwise. Some here are doubtless out for merriment or mischief. My advice is not to make it personal. Your good friend Habbabkuk, for instance, likes personal attacks – it’s his stock in trade. I wish he’d stick to the matters at hand, because he’s very good at it when he does apply himself.
I don’t have the link for it anymore, but the rules (as loosely applied as they are) said something along the lines of no personal attacks, no anti-Semitism, no racism generally, play the man not the ball, save discussions of 9/11 for the thread allocated, and do keep on-topic for at least the first page or so. Which I’m currently violating by talking off-topic now, come to think of it.
This isn’t systematically applied – it’s more down to what the mods can manage to do in their spare time, while keeping spam and other attacks at bay – and (IIRC) they aren’t supposed to discuss anything themselves either.
Thankless job, in other words, because everyone feels victimised even while they try to be as fair as possible. Surprising anyone wants to do it. One very decent fellow did it for ages, and it took quite a toll – he got treated terribly unfairly by posters here, falsely accusing him of all sorts (favouritism, agendas, being a “gatekeeper”, an “Establishment stooge” – and that was the polite end of it).
*
Anyway – watch yourself, or you’ll be stuck here for good – it has that effect on many. You’ll rue the day you started posting 😉
Ha ha! Cheers for that Glen. I blame my geopolitically obsessed mate Rob for sending me endless links to Alabama and her moons, I had no real interest in this until then, now he’s the one trying to drag me away! Nightmare! Time for bed. ?
Clumsily worded… wish there was an ‘edit’ button! What I was trying to say was it’s hard to see who “started it”, and identify only the wrong-doer. We’ve all had posts deleted, with rare exceptions, and the best thing is not to complain too much, because nobody likes a whiner. However, I do not agree that some individuals are protected.
Ok, I remember the JSD glee though when he thought he had me rumbled, that still really niggles!
JSD has always struck me as one of the most honest posters here. Not that I agree with him on every issue, I hasten to add. But he doesn’t engage in mud-slinging, and I’d wager he would be one of the few posters who’s never had a contribution deleted (a distinction which I’ve certainly failed to achieve).
A wager you would lose, Glenn. But thanks, much appreciated.
Rules:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2015/06/some-rules-for-comment-moderation/
Or use the site search facility:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/?s=moderation
We apologise for any inconvenience. No refunds.
This is the last time I shall contribute to this blog.
A reference to Jewishness if factual is not racist.
I have broken no blog rules. I will not have good arguments arbitrarily removed by arsehole mods.
Bye
It’s always the decent principled ones that leave; trolls never leave, even when they have been supposedly banned.
You will be missed my friend, as much for your wit as well as your humanity.
“It’s always the decent principled ones that leave; trolls never leave […]”
Thank you for explaining your continued presence. 🙂
Seriously though, I had a few constructive comments removed yesterday too. It is a bit annoying at times, but hey – you get what you pay for in life (if you’re lucky).
You never did master irony you poor thing.
On the contary, I even do my underwear ! 😀
“A reference to Jewishness if factual is not racist”
In your case the references were hardly ever factual and were just unpleasant generalisations applied to all the members of that religion – I think religious bigotry or anti-Semitism ( the usual dictionary definition for any pedants) is the more correct description. That said I could at least see that underneath you had a sense of humour which is more than some.
Rather snide to direct your remarks to & have a pop at somebody who’s left.
I think you will find that as was not above having a pop at Guano before what I suspect will be a temporary absence – and anyway there was a hidden compliment in there, which I appreciate you might not understand.
“Clement Freud, My Part in his Downfall”
Small point – I’m not sure that he can have a downfall after he’s dead. If you believe in an afterlife, he’s burning in eternal hell already so the posthumous earthly disgrace will add little to that discomfort. If there’s no afterlife, he got away with it already and nothing will change that.
Larger point – we should do better at catching these vermin while they are still alive.
Hey Craig, you get a mention in dispatches:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/madeleine-mccann-clement-freud-victim-police-investigate-a7084881.html
“Craig Murray, a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, told the Independent he had been contact by several people alleging further instances of abuse.”
Why do I feel as if I am reeling from the Clement Freud revelations? I feel queasy and despairing.
It isn’t because I am surprised that he was a child molester. It ‘sort of’ fits into the pattern of all the others, such as Cyril Smith.
While Habbakuk rightly points out that the Thorpe affair was about homosexuality, and this is about child abuse, there is a common theme of privilege and empowerment to act and behave in deplorable ways.
It has something to do with ‘celebrity’ too, although that may be a coincidental after effect of the revelation, and the once celebrated individual who turns out to be so flawed.
There is also the problem of the eulogies and endorsements and approval of the various people both during their life, and at their death. At his death then PM Brown described him glowingly as a national treasure. I dare say others were effusive in their tributes to him. The elevation to a knighthood is a huge
‘tribute’ from the establishment but what I wonder is : Did no-one know anything? How was it not known? Did Gordon Brown not have access to serious intelligence / information about such individuals on their death and as he was about to publicly pronounce on his worthiness.
I imagine something along the lines of a secretary coming into the PM’s office with the news of his death and a sheaf of papers about Freud-a briefing, and an understanding that there will be a PM comment in tribute to some fallen comrade/colleague/worthy opponent/all round good guy/ stalwart defender and participant of democracy(as an MP).
This is not saying that Brown knew anything , but I have a hunch that he could easily have had some inside knowledge such as that that a whip might have or an intelligence agency might have-such gossip is the very essence of their trade-incriminating opportunities for leverage?
So regardless, these pronouncements are made. A sad comment on the loss of the national treasure, a short tribute. What I am getting at here is the very deep and troubling hypocrisy of it-the charades and the knee jerk defence of privilege- the endorsement of the good values and qualities that he represents.
Again it is an ‘expected’-whoever was PM at the time would have done the same-the tribute was probably written by an office lackey- so it is harsh to condemn Brown-he just played his part. he didn’t question his role but then does anybody think that Major,Blair or Cameron would have done differently.
The same applies to Savile and Smith-they were certainly given protection and that would have been with the approval of many high ranking individuals.(It is unthinkable that the knowledge was not available to a select few). Savile nd smith both received their glowing tributes on their death.If Janner had died a few years earlier would he have also have been feted as a staunch defender of Labour and a tireless defender of the rights of minorities (or something)
It seems to me that the problem may lie elsewhere, It is not that people are flawed. (We are all subject to the injudicious, the passions, the misapprehension, the slow erosion of value, especially in the absence of penalties equably applied. These are people who share quite a lot with many of us-maybe not the SAME flaws, but failings nevertheless. Phillip Green is now revealed as an unmitigated bully, aggressive and driven by a kind of lunacy-a greed, to the exclusion of the values that attach him to his fellow (flawed) humans. And yet he was revered for those ‘qualities’ just a year or two ago before the BHS chicanery and given a knighthood with a supposedly high level scrutiny applied to the selection(there is a monitoring committee).Apparently the committee exists simply to rubber stamp suggestions or to highlight only the most blatantly egregious failings-all that other dodgy stuff can slip under the radar if it is deemd not very serious by the committee of ‘wiselings’. (I love neologisms-a ‘wiseling’-a high-appointed defender of public values, with the full knowledge of human failure that can only come from a deep understanding and immersion in the very failures they are entrusted to capture. A Hypocrite- in-Chief).
Even inadvertently you really shouldn’t to seen as providing any sort of aid to our resident Apologists tactics of diversion by using the word “rightly”; he & our friend Dim Jim very WRONGLY deliberately tried to deflect & muddy the waters of this thread, by trying to make it a big bogus issue of homophobia; perhaps not so clear now because of deletions, but that’s the truth.
I think what i meant is that if you conflate these two things, you open up the possibility of being criticised for it by being described as homophobic.
Thorpe’s behaviour was deplorable whether he was homosexual or not.He was sordid, decadent and seedy, but these can apply to anyone.
We have to be careful because of the possibly homophobic component of the Orlando shooting.
Thrope’s case was brought up a an earlier example of an Establishment cover-up, it was the trolls who deliberately tried to conflate this with the issue of homophobia; If you weren’t following the thread it would explain your comments, but even without the benefit of the missing deletions, you should already be very aware by of MO of the resident Apologists.
In view of your comments about Thorpe, which go without saying really, if our resident trolls were consistent in their smearing on this thread, you will now be subjected to smears & insinuations of being homophobic
I mentioned Thorpe because he led the Liberal Party when Freud was chosen to be a candidate. Then I discovered a report that Thorpe played a major role in that choice.
You really are just being incredibly naïve if you think it is only Western establishment politicians who use positions of power and privilege as a cover for sexual and other abuse – it happens in business, in political regimes of all colours – look at Ghadaffi, the KGB and its allies got up to all sorts of things – and it even happens in the left wing political groupuscles that you favour ( look up Gerry Healy and the recent treatment of rape within the SWP – and I’m sure that there are many more). Perhaps one day if you ever start to live in the real world you might get a better understanding of human nature.
@Resident Dumbo, so are you saying it’s a bad, bad world were lots of dreadful things happen, therefore we shouldn’t a)worry, or b)call out, or c)be too hard on TPTB protecting the sexual monsters that prey on our children ! Which one RD a, b or c ?
Remind us DGP, is that Orlando Northhumberland….;), which county are you talking about?
The attack in Florida, USofA, has very little to do with the engrained child sex abuse amongst the established powers and their very own security services here, they are two distinctively different crimes, however much it is used to reach out over the rainbow, and or as diversion/ PR manoeuvres by politicians; we are all old and informed enough to recognise the spiel that is now going on here.
why ever Jeremy Thorpe was mentioned I have no idea.
Everyone jumping on innocent comments. Orlando was mentioned because it is probably a homophobic attack and I thought it best to acknowledge that the comment climate should be moderate and try to avoid anything that can be misconstrued.
As for the ‘rightly’, about the Habbakuk comment. I followed the thread rather loosely.I was a little bit disappointed that it descended into the usual hostility but i was making the point that the common element of both individuals is the capacity to evade the exposure of their flaws. I am trying to tease out the reasons.A ‘conspiracy’ is always an unsatisfactory explanation, despite the undoubted existence of conspiracies and collusion , because it simplifies a seemingly omnipresent and undesirable feature of human activity to a ‘them and us’-them being b;lack hearted devils and us being the good, trumpets of righteous justice-when in reality we are all flawed and susceptible to error.
Thorpe may well have had a helping sympathy from his type of person sitting as a judge(it seems rather likely) but that is unlikely to be a conspiracy, just an accommodating and selective sympathy because he had known Thorpe’s uncle/ granny/ family and recognised him as ‘one of us’.
Clement Freud was not entirely awful- without the knowledge of his ‘other behaviour’ it is difficult to not to be amused or entertained by him-someone who summoned his ‘talents’ for that purpose by developing his comical persona as a lugubrious curmudgeon with a quick line of repartee. We are all a bit susceptible to ‘patter’ or absurdity or whatever schtick that person is selling.
What I am trying to understand is our inability to recognise the inherent contradiction in ‘celebrity’ and righteousness or morality. We seem to be fooled int thinking that ‘talent’ or celebrity excuses our behaviour. It is something of an internal quid pro quo-(I am clever /popular/given status due to wealth therfre Ia free to make my own rules. Status and celebrity are linked, partly through wealth, and the wealth s linked to the tiny contributions to that wealth, that so many ordinary people endorse. Again when G. Brown goes along with that essential relationship (status and celebrity and wealth) by endorsing Freud, without applying or seeking to reveal the deeper reality of feet of clay, (or even obscuring it) it is acquiescing to the constructs of a very flawed social construct which values ‘talent’ and celebrity’ above integrity, modesty etc. I won’t be the first to suggest that we in the west particularly are in the grip of a cult of celebrity and money and individualistic freedoms that are readily abused in that context of a sense of individual agency and freedom, which flows readily into transgressive and aggressive behaviour.
Again i will say that the explanation is much deeper than ‘conspiracy’ or overt class sympathy for the establishment( an elusive and shape shifting concept if ever there was one) . It is subtle class sympathy, elusive, indefinable and undetectable collusion that thrives in an economic environment that we all regard as essential to our prosperity( and possibly survival, although i suspect not) but it is not confined to just those in positions of power. These are long ingrained habits The disempowered and righteous are also players in this delusional condition.
Abuse of power, perhaps, rather than talent or wealth or celebrity, seems to me to be the common thread running through these revelations generally. My own profession codifies the risks of an imbalance of power explicitly:
British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy: Ethical Framework for Good Practice in Counselling and Psychotherapy, section Providing a good standard of practice and care, paragraph 17:
“Practitioners must not abuse their client’s trust in order to gain sexual, emotional, financial or any other kind of personal advantage. Sexual relations with clients are prohibited. ‘Sexual relations’ include intercourse, any other type of sexual activity or sexualised behaviour. Practitioners should think carefully about, and exercise considerable caution before, entering into personal or business relationships with former clients and should expect to be professionally accountable if the relationship becomes detrimental to the client or the standing of the profession.” (My italics.)
I think this is the only prohibition in the Framework. It is there because it recognises in writing what should really be obvious to anyone in a position of potential authority over another person: that there is a serious potential for imbalance of power making the other person sexually vulnerable. And that applies to priest and supplicant, doctor and patient, therapist and client, teacher and pupil, Rector and student, Member of Parliament and constituent, employer and employee, or – and especially – adult and child: almost any adult, and almost any child. And people of wealth and position and power, and people without these things.
People in positions of authority can be faced with this kind of power situation a lot. Most of the time there are codes of practice in place, which recognise and give guidance on it, but this only writes down a situation which should be pretty obvious to them already. To misuse one’s position of authority as deliberately and seriously as Craig and others are suggesting that Clement Freud seems to have done, pretty well most of his life, shows a remarkable moral abandonment – but we’re only really hearing about it because he is so high-profile.
Slight problem with that statement is; Omar Mateen was a regular customer of the Pulse nightclub and he used to go there often and was seen to be dancing, interacting, talking, picking up men after he had bought them a drink! Although this version of the events is not favoured by the Muslim haters here and elsewhere in the media, hence the constant referral to the incident as a homophobic attack.
The nice queer/homo/gay/etc. witness has gone on record in an interview that was broadcast, but as ever this latter day Zapruder clip will only surface sometime in the future, as currently it is being suppressed for now, given the current imperatives of the zionists and their sponsors; hatred of Islam and all things Muslim!
Although some will probably contend; Omar Mateen was a self hating queer/puff/gay/uphill gardener/rides on the other bus/etc. and therefore the charges of homophobia still stands. Fact that the paucity of the debate brought on by the mandatory limitations of the identity politics, has arrested the progress of debate as to why a born and raised Yankee with a weird name could go on a shooting spree and kill so many people he knows/around him/in public gatherings/office/subway/etc. ?
That is another story and really it is not for us to debate or entertain.
And consider how rapidly they jumped on this thread. Somebody must really want this story to go away.
deepgreenpuddock said: “Why do I feel as if I am reeling from the Clement Freud revelations? I feel queasy and despairing.
It isn’t because I am surprised that he was a child molester. It ‘sort of’ fits into the pattern of all the others, such as Cyril Smith.
While Habbakuk rightly points out that the Thorpe affair was about homosexuality, and this is about child abuse, there is a common theme of privilege and empowerment to act and behave in deplorable ways.”
Habbabkook likes to put everything in neat little boxes. It simply reveals his control-freak personality. As for “the erosion of values” that’s another variable that depends on who insists on forcing their values onto whom. Again, the control-freaks always do their utmost to control everybody else.
H.T.H.
And deepgreenpuddock, in order to save you from further queasy and despairing thoughts I found this for you:
http://www.drjudithorloff.com/Free-Articles/How-To-Deal-With-A-Control-Freak.htm
“As a psychiatrist, I have observed that relationships can be one of the major sources of exhaustion for my patients. In “Emotional Freedom” I discuss how to deal with different kinds of draining people to avoid getting fatigued, sick, or burned out. One of these is the control freak.”
Again H.T.H.
DGP; “I followed the thread rather loosely”
Seems too loose to even read the comments that remain;
“Thorpe may well have had a helping sympathy “ versus https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/06/clement-freud-part-downfall/comment-page-2/#comment-603282
“Clement Freud was not entirely awful-“ rather a superfluous remark, I quite enjoy Woody Allen films etc, but this is because you are looking in the wrong direction; it’s not Celebrity Culture or a “conspiracy” per se, these just a symptoms, rather the roots of this issue, which have to lie with the centuries old social structures that have been constructed by those on top for their descendants to stay on top, and begins with the Public Schools, then Oxbridge & ending up in the privilege cosseted bubbles of Westminster & Big Business, etc; this system is fine-tuned to produce people with mindsets that can rationalise the depravities of Empire, Corporatism,Wars, and the on-going exploitation of the planet, etc, why should you be surprised at the practice/ toleration of paedophilia amongst all this other immoral depravity generated by such a systemically nurtured mindset within in own circles?
@Fedup, I take it you saw the reports that the FBI asked Mateen’s ex-wife not to tell American media that he was gay, why would they do that ?! I think we all know the reason why.
http://nypost.com/2016/06/13/shooter-used-to-visit-orlando-gay-club-use-gay-dating-apps/
No I saw the middle aged gay chap, giving and interview to a TV reporter during which he talked about the frequent visits of Omar Mateen to the nightclub, and his interactions with the rest of the punters. Interestingly enough Omar attacked the nightclub on a “Latino Night”! Why did he not attack the place any other night has not been asked or explored?
Also your link provides more information about Omar’s gay dating apps and his other gay activities, although he should have forgotten about it all when he rang 911 and declared his allegiance to ISIL/ISIS/ETC. Out of curiosity how this declaration of allegiance goes? Is the 911 tape being put together as we speak in the SITE facilities with that nice and efficient terrorist investigator Rita Katz?
But hey never mind all this “conspiracy stuff” lets go back to the “facts”, Omar was so sickened by the sight of two men kissing* that weeks/months/year? later he snapped and went and bought two rifles and lots of amo and then went to the club to shoot the bally lot of gays there!!!
Finally for his ex wife who has been asked to keep quiet about Omar’s gayness is not strange at all. It should be part of the investigatory precautions not to let the killer know that they know he was as gay as you could get, fact that he is dead makes no difference to the standard procedure!!!!!
* Afghan men don’t kiss each other as they greet each other, and hold hands, and put their arms around the neck of their mates, etc. when they are together and out, at all, at all!!!!!!! Also Afghan war lords were not duelling it out with tanks in the middle of Kandahar for the sake of a lover that had been nicked by the other warlord!!!!!
I have spread this story to two other newspaper blogs locally who did not report the full facts on their pages, were as vague as the BBC, I don’t know what others here do to make it more public.
This story is being suppressed and nobody wants to run with it, as yet, CF was a BBC radio lovey and NOBODY, again, knew/cared about his secret sexual proclivities?
Its the Beeb gambaccini/savile syndrome, it can afflict those who have adjoining offices – aka gaju alliance.
No wonder our trolls have all gone to ground this morning;
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/clement-freud-paedophile-mp-could-have-sexually-abused-dozens-more-victims-a7083346.html
Did you hear that Sir Cliff is off the rack and has received apologies from the South Yorkshire police?
Singer Sir Cliff Richard will face no further action over allegations of historical sex abuse, prosecutors say. The Crown Prosecution Service said it had “carefully reviewed” the case and decided there was “insufficient evidence to prosecute”. Sir Cliff said he was “obviously thrilled that the vile accusations and the resulting investigation have finally been brought to a close”.
Four men claimed offences took place between 1958 and 1983, the CPS said.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36546038
Wonder if the BBC will run this live, their helicopter overhead to make sure they capture all the action, complete with scrolling banners and continuous coverage for most of the day?
For sure there’ll be a mass of new people now flocking here, only to be confronted with inane comments such as yours.
There is of course a big difference between lack of sufficient evidence to prosecute and proof of innocence.
Perhaps they (trolls) have been given the order of the boot.
It’s happened before, when they were waiting for instructions on how to handle a new development.
Their instructions yesterday were probably to pooh-pooh the Freud story. But now that has blown up in their faces.
No I haven’t gone to ground, I have gone to work in order to earn a living and support my family and pay my taxes. Can we presume that you our one of the leisured classes who has a private income in order to support his literary output – it would be just a tad hypocritical if it was state support that allowed you to comment wouldn’t it.
Naughty naughty Resident Dumbo, fishing for personal information, rather like a well known sinster record keeping snitching Clown.
I shall take a leave from all the diversions offered here.
C’mon Wales, another 1:1 would be just. Whether it would stop the disgusting behaviour by some of the violence seekers, whilst changing the mind of the French our Brexit being ‘terrible’, is to be seen.
This blog has suffered a massive credibility deficit by its refusal to discuss the greatest issue to confront the UK since WW2.
I am of course refering to the vote on Brexit in 10 days time.
At present other topics are just diversions and distractions.
I too regret the fact we have not had a proper discussion on the referendum. We desperately need proper facts and information from a reliable and trustworthy source, instead of empty assertion and counter-assertion from highly dubious, self-interested politically motivated professional liars (eg. sitting MPs).
In the absence of any discussion here, try this:
http://majority.fm/2016/06/14/614-matthias-matthijs-the-uks-brexit-or-not-to-brexit-moment/
The consistently brilliant Majority Report – despite being US based – gave a better airing of the matter than just about anything I’ve heard coming out of this country.
There was discussion.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/05/the-embarrassing-referendum/
And the issue isn’t really the referendum, is it? IN = European hegemony, OUT = US hegemony. Nothing actually changes with regard to the globalist model, except which bunch of dead-eyed billionaires is leeching off our residual productivity.
Monbiot clarifies: this is a contest of plutocracies:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/15/european-union-eu-britain-sovereignty
The EU issue is likely more complicated than a contest of plutocracies.
Traditionally when faced with structural economic problems sovereign countries act to devalue their currencies. This is not possible for countries in the euro and is especially damaging for southern Europe. This means that their economies can never recover. The only alternative open to them is to shrink the supply of labor by exporting surplus workers. As more surplus workers come of age each year this means that they need to export surplus workers on an ongoing basis.
There are glaring disparities in wage rates and welfare support between states in eastern Europe and Western Europe. This fact creates ongoing incentives for people to migrate from East to West.
The EU has failed, and is failing, to coherently deal with the wave of migration into Europe from outside of Europe. It is impossible to estimate how many people will ultimately enter Europe via non conventional routes. Italian intelligence estimates between 4 to 8 million people in the near term.
The same economic forces at work on southern and eastern Europeans will also apply to non Europeans immigrating into Europe.
That this situation is unsustainable is obvious. No clear solutions present themselves. If the UK is successful in choking off immigration then for southern Europe this will be the equivalent of stepping on a drowning mans head. It is to be expected that this will result in increasing social tensions and civil unrest throughout southern Europe. Tensions throughout Europe will ultimately be exacerbated by the presence of large numbers of non Europeans who have no obvious economic or social role to play in their new countries of residence. After all if you do not want the existing population then for what reason do you want a new population?
If the UK does not or cannot choke off immigration then it become increasingly clear that it is the destination of choice for literally millions of economically and/or socially displaced people. This may slow down the development of civil unrest, but it will not prevent it since the UK has a “mirage” economy, whose apparent wealth is almost entirely underpinned by inflated house prices. Anything that cannot go up forever will not go up for forever. A catastrophic unwinding of the UK economy is guaranteed. The more people, especially if those people are non socially cohesive, then the worse the consequences at an individual level.
No pretense to being a hegemonic power (be that the EU, the US or Martians) can withstand the tsunami of economic destruction that must engulf Europe.
Europe has many problems – but a principal problem is the euro. Unless and until this is destroyed there can be no hope of recovery for southern Europe and no possibility of France escaping from its downward spiral. Those that administer the EU are filled with a toxic mixture of stupidity and hubris and will resist at all costs any attempt at reform.
The situation is desperate and no good options exist. The best hope is for the UK to vote to leave and trust that the power of their vote is sufficient to bring the whole rotting structure crashing down. Alone among all of the countries that may act the UK is big enough and powerful enough to deliver a decisive knock out blow to the EU. If we are forced, ultimately to rely on the French then we will be dealing with revolutionary fervor infused with nationalism – and chaos is all but assured.
The ultimate choice is simple – to persist with an Aztec like sacrificial society where southern Europeans are offered up as sacrifices to the unseen money gods, or to accept reality.
my letter to the local papers.
make of it what you will, our interest and future interest lie in Europe and Eurasia, and history shows that we have more in common than meets the eye.
In 600 AD, Britain Started to mint coins and make pottery of some marketable value in Ipswich and Thetford.During these times our abilities and inventions mostly derided from Anglo Saxon artisans from all over the EU continent. Most inhabitants here are from Anglo Saxon decent. By the 14th century this country was part of the first trading link, the Hanseatic League. It protected its Guild’s led merchant towns and fostered trade from Kiev in Russia, to Bergen,Norway and as far as Istanbul,then Constantinople. We protected each other from pirates and the guilds and their trade flourished. Then we knew were our economic as well as security interests lie. We fought wars and scraps for hundreds of years, but we also made peace and got on with each others life’s. After the last great unpleasantness, so fondly remembered here for Churchill’s decisions, others such as the European Steel and Coal Community and the club of Rome in the EU decided to take his lead seriously.
At Zurich university in 1946 he said: “There is a remedy which … would in a few years make all Europe … free and … happy. It is to re-create the European family, or as much of it as we can, and to provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom.
We must build a kind of United States of Europe.”
He also saw the value and interest of this country in a united Europe and Eurasia, were our real interest lie, were resources are in abundance.
Those who work and live in Europe have not been asked for their opinions in this party splitting debate, whilst EU citizens living here longer than in their country of birth are disenfranchised from this vote. That said, some voters were kind enough to realise this and offered to vote for my choice at the election, for which I’m grateful. So I will be voting to stay were our best interests lie, to remain In a EU that needs much change to work for us, the voters. So lets not run away without a plan, let us change the EU for the better.
Wood and trees, Loony, with all due respect –
There are glaring disparities in wage rates and welfare support between states in eastern Europe and Western Europe. This fact creates ongoing incentives for people to migrate from East to West.
The EU has failed, and is failing, to coherently deal with the wave of migration into Europe from outside of Europe.
But because discount labour rates maximise profits for the people who really hold the power, while the EU has failed in its advertised humanitarian mission, it is succeeding brilliantly as far as its major investors are concerned. Or will be as soon as it can pump up another speculative bubble for them. Immigration is intentional…sure…and if you believe indigenous workers will be valued any higher outside the EU, then you’ve got a sad awakening in store. Though I’m not sure I wouldn’t prefer Mexicans to Estonians…
The situation is desperate and no good options exist.
Which is all I am saying, except that you’re as well tossing a coin as making a conscious decision.
Komo; The EU was sold just like any other commodity. You can’t sell candy by advertising it rots your teeth.
Ba’all Zevul. Maybe Jim Morrison can help
“This is the end, beautiful friend
This is the end, my only friend, the end
Of our elaborate plans, the end
Of everything that stands, the end
No safety or surprise, the end”
The monetary base of the world is in a speculative bubble – and so this is the last bubble possible. This means the “major investors” are just as screwed as the rest of us – sure their access to things may enable them to live a little more comfortably or last a little longer, but the end is the same.
There is not really any coin tossing on my part. For the moment people can still choose delusion or reality. At some point in the future the choice of delusion will be removed.
The future is unwritten so if we choose reality today there is at least a chance, no matter how improbable that the economic plane can be landed without killing all the passengers.
The EU is an Aztec style sacrifice cult. The longer it persists the more more damage it will inflict. The British have a chance to destroy it – after all their own mythology revolves around the slaying of a dragon.
This will not solve all problems, perhaps it will not solve any problems.. It is a necessary, but not sufficient, first step. Vote leave and you give yourself a chance. No matter how small that chance is it is bigger than the alternative.
Varoufakis’s new book is devastating on the people leading the EU.
Come on, a bit of discussion between ourselves wasn’t what Salford Lad was talking about.
No solid campaigning, like there was when the Scottish Referendum was in full swing. Then, we heard nothing else for months.
Orlando was nothing compared to Paris…but I think I know what you mean.
Is this the Incredible Shrinking comment thread?
A lot to be said for light moderation;
“If it wasn’t for that comment appearing on my blog, I don’t think this ever would have come to light.”
U.K. politician shot.
Apparently stabbed with a high-capacity knife as well.
There are guns in the UK?
Jo Cox (Lab). Yes we do have guns in the UK, both registered and licensed for sporting and vermin control use, as well as clandestine – often re-activated de-acts, for criminal purposes… but the type wasn’t specified. Seriously injured, attacker reportedly shouted ‘Britain First’. Though that may well be adjusted to ‘Allahu akbar’ for the morning tabloids…
Either a first world war gun, or a home made gun apparently!
The story goes that after the shooting the MP was kicked too! This sounds a domestic violence based on the course of events.
The Yahoo reporting has mentioned the various attacks on the politicos without mentioning the zionist thug wearing an IAF (Shitty strip of land Aggression Force) tee-shirt. How is that for dissembling?
Tongue stuck in cheek, Komo. Is a colonoscopy necessary to obtain license? 🙂
It may well be, Ben. And handguns are a no-no since the Dunblane slaughter (unless you join the Army), so this one was illegal, whatever its provenance. I’d incline to the idea that it was a wartime relic rather than a homemade, as it seems he got three shots off rather quickly, and that would mean something more complicarted to build than a zip gun (remember them?) OTOH, the sound one witness described – ‘pops’ – suggests a small calibre effort. (And see ‘Brocock’)
Start your own thread here :
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/forums/forum/discussion-forum/
If you think Trump doesn’t have a chance, think again.
http://blackboxvoting.org/fraction-magic-1/
Despite all the rumours, in 1988 Steel ensured Smith was given a knighthood. And on Smith’s 80th birthday, the then Liberal leader Nick Clegg extolled him ‘as a beacon of our party in the 1970s and 1980s’.
Finally, in 2012, the police admitted that Smith (who died in 2010) should have been charged with sexual and physical abuse and revealed 44 complaints had been made over three decades.
Any roll-call of sexual shenangians in the Liberal Party cannot exclude the antics of Chris Huhne, who stood as deputy leader. He admitted cheating on his wife, Vicky Pryce, with his parliamentary aide Carina Trimingham, who, at the time, was in a civil partnership with a woman.
How ironic that the Lib Dem manifesto for the General Election in 2010 declared: ‘We will clean up politics.’
From randy Old Goat Lloyd George to Jeremy Thorpe and Cyril Smith and now Clement Freud, the Liberals have repeatedly revealed themselves to be hypocrites – sexual libertines who preach ‘do as I say, rather than do as I do’.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3643961/Why-Liberals-sleazy-party-ANDREW-PIERCE-looks-long-list-Freud-s-political-colleagues-revealed-ruthless-sexual-predators.html#ixzz4BkjvTo48
quite a good read for the Mail
FYI; If you go to top of all comments to make your entry, rather than hit ‘reply’ on a lower post, your comment will stand alone. Otherwise, it looks like you are answering a specific poster.
With the added advantage that, if a ‘parent’ comment gets deleted, all the others below it disappear too, regardless of their merits.
That explains the bloody slaughterhouse.
” the Liberals have repeatedly revealed themselves to be hypocrites ”
Careful, according to his Wiki entry Craig was a member of the Liberal Party from 1973.
I wonder if, Craig, there were any rumours doing the rounds within the party machinery at the time or if as a teenager you were ever warned off about certain people.
And on Smith’s 80th birthday, the then Liberal leader Nick Clegg extolled him ‘as a beacon of our party in the 1970s and 1980s’.
So only a handful of years before Cyril was outed by the police as a paedo Nick Clegg was lording him as a beacon of perfection.
That says a lot.
Putin would love him some payback for the Yeltsin gift from the US. I think he wants Trump.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-government-hackers-penetrated-dnc-stole-opposition-research-on-trump/2016/06/14/cf006cb4-316e-11e6-8ff7-7b6c1998b7a0_story.html
Hillary Clinton is a fantastically dangerous person who is most likely set on launching a full scale war against Russia. Thus the Russians are doing all in their power to block this fanatical person from becoming POTUS.
Russians are now threatening to release e-mails hacked from her private server
http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Russia-Is-Reportedly-Set-To-Release-Intercepted-Messages-From-Clintons-Private.html
Someone has just released a list of all Clinton donor’s who have contributed $100,000 plus.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-16/leaked-list-hillary-clintons-mega-donors
The bulwark of democracy that is NATO has announced that cyber warfare is also covered by the mutual defense pact.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/b7a8330df0114498a1611257d4cb5d58/air-land-sea-cyber-nato-adds-cyber-operation-areas
Maybe Clinton can still achieve her aims even if she fails in her bid to become POTUS
Looney.
According to this article Hilary Clinton knew about Obama’s support for Al Qaeda in Syria, she received (IAR’s) regularly.
“WASHINGTON, DC — Hillary Clinton received a classified intelligence report stating that the Obama administration was actively supporting Al Qaeda in Iraq, the terrorist group that became the Islamic State.”
“The memo made clear that Al Qaeda in Iraq was speaking through Muhammad Al Adnani, who is now the senior spokesman for the Islamic State, also known as ISIS. Western and Gulf states were supporting the terrorist group to try to overthrow Syrian dictator Bashar al Assad, who was being propped up by the Russians, Iranians, and Chinese.”
It makes for a interesting read, if the war hawk Clinton becomes POTUS, and I for one think she will, they’ll be no change on the aggressive foreign policy.
Looney.
It would help if I included the link.
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/14/hillary-clinton-received-secret-memo-stating-obama-admin-support-for-isis/
The all pervasiveness of the corruption and duplicity in Washington is astonishing. The only thing more astonishing is the complete lack of media interest in exposing this and holding the powerful to account.
Maybe people look to conspiracy theories to explain events because, whatever the conspiracy theory, it is almost always more plausible than the actual truth.
Looney.
Yes I agree, you are branded a conspiracy theorist, (a somewhat derogatory term) if you question the offical narrative. However in this day and age, of subterfuge and duplicity one would be very fool hardy indeed, to take any offical narrative on face value, as the truth.
“Maybe people look to conspiracy theories to explain events because, whatever the conspiracy theory, it is almost always more plausible than the actual truth.”
___________________
Looney.
I might add this since we’re on the subject of conspiracies.
Saudi legal expert Katib Al-Shammari, writing in the London-based Saudi daily Al-Hayat on 28 April 2016, stated that the U.S. carried out the 9/11 attacks.
Here is the full article, it seems plausible to me.
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/9202.htm
I’m not sure Hillary would be more dangerous than Trump. His loose cannon has more weight I believe.
We know Hillary is a warmonger. We have no idea what Trump would do.
I’m not going to vote for either. I’m voting for Jill Stein.
It’s just surreal that a person under investigation by the FBI is allowed to run for Office ! Something not quite right there !
“Labour MP Jo Cox has been shot and stabbed at her advice surgery in West Yorkshire, her office has confirmed. Reports say a 52 year old man has been arrested.”
“Cox was shot in Birstall outside the library and has been airlifted to nearby Leeds General Infirmary in a critical condition.
Various eyewitness accounts suggest the MP was shot during a row with a man with a gun.”
“Some eyewitnesses report the attacker may have targeted Cox deliberately, and shot her up to three times, as well as beating and stabbing her while she was on the ground.”
“Another man reportedly intervened to help her.
Suggesting a possible motive, another eyewitness said the suspected attacker shouted ‘Britain First’ – the name of a far-right political group. ”
https://www.rt.com/uk/346955-shooting-incident-police-birstall/
Cox is currently Chair of the Friends of Syria All-Party Parliamentary Group.
Britain First has denied involvement. Still, we’ll see.
http://www.britainfirst.org/news/
Media desperately try to incriminate Britain First in shooting of Labour MP Jo Cox based on hearsay and unconfirmed sources
It always seems someone knows why the perpetraitor did it within minutes
remember when the Spanish tried to blame the Basqe people for thetrain murders, turned out they were Islamists, the government had to leave.
That’s why it’s always a good idea to wait a bit. But at a guess, ‘MP shot by unbalanced constituent with private grudge* and far-right sympathies’ may just about cover it. There may be the usual backlash against quiet loners, who are well known to be more murderous than gregarious types like Joe Stalin.
*stretching intuition further, a grudge inspired by some perceived fault in the MP’s response to the constituent’s concerns.
Of course, where intelligence agencies are behind a professional hit, they generally try to make it look like the act of a lone nut.
A rather interesting article on the Orlando shootings.
” Many things are just not right with this story, including the father of the alleged shooter Omar Mateen, an Afghan-American, Seddique Mateen, who is closely linked to some of the most powerful leaders and agencies in Washington DC.”
“Below is a photo of Omar’s father after a meeting at the US State Dept. in Washington DC where he met with “officials”, but oddly, no log of his visit is available in the public record.”
http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/06/15/father-of-orlando-shooter-is-long-time-cia-asset/
“Just 24 hours later, we learn from a report in the Orlando Sentinel that the alleged shooter Omar Mateen was in fact a frequent visitor for years at the Pulse gay nightclub in Orlando.“It was definitely him. He’d come in for years, and people knew him,” one customer said. Another Pulse customer, Kevin West, even stated on record that he had been talking with Mateen for up to one year on a gay-chat mobile app.”
“So, based on this updated information, this could not have been a “hate crime” because Omar Mateen was most likely gay himself, albeit in the closet.”
PCR has chimed in on this…
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/06/14/my-several-million-readers-are-unable-to-help-me-prove-the-official-story/
Mateen apparently felt shame as a result of his father’s ideology further fomented by ISIS, by what means is not known. He committed the act during Ramadan, in which Jihad forgives all sins. There are many who are in denial about their sexuality and the psychological impact often projects the blame toward others.
It is a form of homophobia and you can’t detach it from religion, especially one that encourages violence toward infidels and is sexually repressive.
Ben; “especially one that encourages violence toward infidels and is sexually repressive.”
You do know that his both wife & ex-wife has said that he wasn’t particularly religious, nevermind radicaliced ?
Sorry to see you echoing Islamophobic sentiments;
https://theintercept.com/2016/06/13/stop-exploiting-lgbt-issues-to-demonize-islam-and-justify-anti-muslim-policies/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/13/gay-american-imam-daayiee-abdullah-heartbroken-by-orlando-murders.html
I think you are confused, Macky. How am I Islamophobic? I hear people timidly doubting this has nothing to do with religion. How would you separate with the known facts?
The wife is now before the Grand Jury on her role in this. I guess I’m a misogynist as well.
@Ben, is it a known fact that Orlando has anything to do with your opinion that Islam “encourages violence toward infidels and is sexually repressive” ? Is your opinion even a fact ? No & No I think is the answer.
‘No. No’
You provide no evidence it is only my opinion. I see isolated individuals/small groups who occasionally speak to the peaceful side of Islam. But I think they are the exception to the rule. There needs to be a critical mass of Muslims coming out against this insanity. I would suggest a Million Muslim March against the violence.
Ben; “You provide no evidence it is only my opinion.”
“Opinions” by self-inherent definition are not “facts”, so when you state “ How would you separate with the known facts?”, is it for you to provide evidence for your “facts”.
BTW Did you notice the interesting poll in the Greenwald piece that found that Muslims were more accepting of homosexuality than other groups ?
If you want to counter an opinion, use facts to undermine the false perception. You have nothing except the fear of bigotry. No I am not condemning an entire religion, but if that religion doesn’t want the negative publicity arising from their own extremist sects to attach to them, they need to grandly disassociate themselves from it. Social Media, public demonstrations with some advance press notice. IOW’s they need to organize in order to avoid being generalized.
Actually it was not in the State Dept, it’s just the door of their liaison office in the Capitol building http://skepticalbureaucrat.blogspot.de/2016/06/father-of-orlando-shooter-visited.html
I’m sure all our thoughts are with Joe Cox MP, who at the time of writing is fighting for her life in hospital, after being shot three times (once in the head), repeatedly stabbed and then kicked by a Caucasian male who is reported to be 52 years old.
I’ll just say, please note the stark difference between this terrible attack on Joe Cox and what happened in Orlando at the weekend. By that I mean there’s mobile phone footage of the events this afternoon, including the assailant being arrested, and the presstitutes are saying that we mustn’t speculate about what happened.
You mean you’re not claiming it’s a “False Flag”?
Bet RoS thinks it’s one. If he doesn’t yet, that towering intellectual Spivvy will soon think it for him.
The tragic death of Jo Cox today appears to be a genuine event, in that the mainstream media don’t know how to react to it, and there’s no pre-prepared script/narrative from the so-called ‘security services’ pumped out by the MSM.
Last weekend we were told that 50 people were killed in Florida, by ‘an agent of ISIS’, with no evidence presented whatsoever. The MSM just parroted the line put out by government and the ‘security services’ (the MSM are not called presstitutes for nothing).
Only total egits swallow such rollocks hook, line and sinker.
It’s clear the Florida freak was rather confused. He claimed to be a member of ISIS, and AQ, and also Hamas – which must make him some sort of super-teeerrr’st, since the three groups he mentioned are at war with each other.
The MSM clearly love to do the work of ISIS or AQ and act as their publicity agents, because that sort of thing attracts eyeballs.
I’d say only total idiots – utterly heartless ones at that – start screeching “False Flag!” and worse still, “Crisis Actors!” at the bereaved on such occasions. Without a scrap of evidence.
This in addition to my 16.29pm comment, I find rather interesting.
http://www.madcowprod.com/2016/06/13/orlando-shooter-dad-longtime-cia-asset/
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Daniel_Hopsicker
*********Breaking news********
Jo Cox MP has died.
That’s not good. MPs are going to want retribution off some kind. Expect more draconian laws passed soon.
If it is about the Referendum ( which is possible)
would the M.P.’s call it off?
Michael
(radio news) campaigning on the EU referendum has been suspended, for how long I don’t know as a mark of respect
________________
Alan.
Not sure why MP’s would want retribution, however they may wish more protection at their surgeries, a completely understandable request.
Police now claiming the attack on MP wasn’t a terrorist attack (radio news).
I mean, if the woman M.P. was shot dead during Referendum campaining
will the House of Parliament
suspend the actual referendum?
Michael.
I very much doubt the referendum will be suspended, with a week to go.
Well Cameron changed the rules part way through
by extending voter registration by 48 hours
Michael.
I see your point, however according to this report:
“More than 430,000 people applied to register to vote in the EU referendum during the extended deadline period.”
“The two-day extension was granted after the government website for registering voters failed just before Tuesday’s original deadline.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36496047
It does seem to have been the proper action to take in my opinion.
RoS asked “Not sure why MP’s would want retribution”.
Remember, or maybe you’re not old enough, when the train robbers took out the Royal Mail train at Bridego Bridge? TPTB threw the book at them for having the audacity to rob HM’s Royal Mail.
http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/bridego-bridge-site-of-the-great-train-robbery-1963/view/google/
More recently, remember when Raoul Moat decided to take up killing police officers in Northumbria? About 500 police hunted him down like a dog.
Quite simply, if you decide to take on TPTB, they make a point of making an example of you. Have you been living in a monastery or something?