BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Mar 18 - 05:56 AM

Is there any truth in the rumour tat you are setting up an organsiation called P.O.P.P.L.E. (Protection of Prominent Paedofiles League")?
I hope all your good work is recognised for its contribution to society
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Mar 18 - 05:17 AM

Idiotic prick goblin

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Mar 18 - 05:17 AM

Incidentally
Yor link pre-dated three of mine - please try to keep up
Game, set and match
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Mar 18 - 05:14 AM

Not a tabloid claim Keith - a load of police reports
You've lost this one, I'm afraid (not)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Mar 18 - 05:14 AM

Not a tabloid claim Keith - a load of police reports
You've lost this one, I'm afraid (not)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Mar 18 - 04:50 AM

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/20/police-chief-hits-out-mail-on-sunday-edward-heath-abuse-claims

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Mar 18 - 04:49 AM

Jim,
Guardian Feb 2017,
"Policing was rocked by the fallout from a Scotland Yard inquiry, Operation Midland, into claims establishment figures were involved in child sexual abuse in the 1970s and 1980s.
A report in November 2016 castigated the Metropolitan police for being duped by false claims from a complainant given the name “Nick”. In that case, police chiefs were among the last to realise their inquiry, which wrongly targeted establishment figures, was an error.
Heath died in 2005, aged 89, meaning there can be no trial, making the resolution of the allegations complicated. At the end of their investigation, police are planning a report assessing whether the evidence gathered would have been sufficient to charge him."

That was over a year ago, and no such assessment has been forthcoming.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Mar 18 - 04:41 AM

Hairy arsed cockwomble.

Ha ha ha. You have become irrelevant.

Jim, your red quote is of a man saying his back bench MP dad had affairs.
Big deal. No hint of anything non-consensual or concerning children.

You claimed "proven cases" of "rape and paedophilia" by "Prime Ministers and Government high-ups."
That was a lie. There have been none.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Mar 18 - 04:06 AM

The message here appears to be that peadophelia, rape and sexual persecution isn't important if it is carried out by Tories
Tories have a history of their politicians being involved not just in harassment, but serious sex crimes (including possibly torture and murder) - their leadership has a history of hiding and destroying evidence (even the present Prime Minister has admitted that possibility - that's how possible it is)
And the Labour party have a "major problem£ because forty women have complained that Corbyn has "not done enough" to stop sexual harassment in Parliament -!!!!!
Theresa May has consistently supported sex pests until their behaviour has become impossible to excuse
In a way, she has opted out of taking action by suggesting teh victims go to the police
Often the harassment does not reach the level of illegality - you cannot be prosecuted for offering promotion for sex - she stood by Damien Green when he did exactly that
Such people should not hold high office (take your pick on whether that means those who persecute or thoe who defend the persecutor)
If a woman is sexually assaulted or raped the chances of bringing her attacked to justice are minuscule - that's why only a small percentage of women report sexual attacks
Sexual persecution in Parliament should be automatic grounds for dismissal - not passing the problem on to someone else.
And Keith continues to defend the countries most prominent paedofile even though the present Prime Minister has suggested that his crimes were possibly covered up and even though the evedence against him was "lost" by another Government minister, who was a known paedophile himself
Don'cha love the Tory sense of justice?
"It was all a hoax." (unlinked)
CREDIBLE
"HEATH A PAEDO"
"SEVEN CREDIBLE ALLEGED VICTIMS "
BOYS AS YOUNG AS TEN
Not according to the police enquiry last year Keith, but maybe they didn't know him as well as you do!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 03:06 PM

Hairy arsed cockwomble.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 03:04 PM

TOP TORY SAIS DOLPHIN SQARE EVIDENCE "EXPLOSIVE"
The Evidence disappears (You've had the link Keith
MIGHT HAVE BEEN COVER-UP, MAYFLY
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 01:58 PM

Was this the "fantasist you were talking about Keith?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/10978492/My-father-was-a-sexual-predator-like-Jimmy-Savile-says-son-of-former-Tory-MP.html

"'My father was a sexual predator like Jimmy Savile’ says son of former Tory MP
The son of a Conservative MP has built up his own dossier on his father and a wider circle of friends
The son of a former Conservative MP has told The Telegraph he believes his father was a “prolific sexual predator” who he fears might have been linked to an alleged Westminster paedophile ring.
Anthony Atkinson suspects his father David Atkinson’s name may also have been included in a notorious dossier compiled by his fellow Conservative MP Geoffrey Dickens. The dossier, handed to the then Home Secretary Leon Brittan in the 1980s, has subsequently been lost or destroyed.
David Atkinson, according to his son, had a string of young lovers, among them a number of parliamentary assistants, with whom he conducted affairs behind the back of his wife and two children.
Justin Fashanu, the former professional footballer, who had grown up in a children’s home and subsequently committed suicide, had claimed to have had an affair with a married Conservative MP.
The MP is now thought to be Mr Atkinson. Letters from Mr Fashanu to Mr Atkinson, now in possession of his son, suggest the two men, although close, did not consummate their relationship.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 01:56 PM

Jim,
Ther Heath accusations have only just resurfaced

A senior police officer stood outside Heath's house on all the news broadcasts appealing for any victims to come forward.
None have yet been found. It was all a hoax.

Your claim was "proven" cases of rape and paedophilia by "Prime Ministers and Government high-ups."
There has not been one.

Dave,
Gammon Faced Shitfluke.

Do you think your behaviour makes you look good to anyone?

You clearly have nothing to contribute, but why show yourself up?

There are five people putting your case, and only me putting an alternative one, and you can't even cope with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 01:39 PM

"They are proven lies. The accuser was a deluded or deranged fantasist and is totally discredited."
No they are not Keith - they all predate Dolphin Square and are accusations of historical abuse
Apart from Dolphin Square, none of tehm have ever been challenged
Ther Heath accusations have only just resurfaced
At no time have any of those who were openly named in the Dolphin Square covered-up affair ever sought legal recompense from either the police or the papers that named them - never
That says what needs to be said
You are now blatantly lying in the face of given evidence
The more you dig into these affairs the more worms you expose
Prince Andrew?????
Certainly by association
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 01:23 PM

Gammon Faced Shitfluke.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 12:53 PM

Dave,
There is a huge difference between addressing a person and addressing the points. Addressing a person usually begins with the persons name.

No. I always name the person then quote their point that I am addressing.

Jim,
"There have been none."Are you claimign that the links I put up to Brittan, Proctor Heath and Boothby are lies then

They are proven lies. The accuser was a deluded or deranged fantasist and is totally discredited.

Steve,
My objection was clearly stated in my post, arse.

You identified no error in my statement, and could not because it was factual.
You also resort to infantile name calling, having nothing better to say.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 12:46 PM

SIXTEEN DEAD CHILDREN?
Your worst nightmare Keith!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 12:42 PM

LYING POLICE OR LYING POLITICIAND AND LYING KEITH?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 12:32 PM

Tops the moron by a mile - don'cha think
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 12:26 PM

That was an oxy too much, Jim ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 12:14 PM

My objection was clearly stated in my post, arse. Don't try to play games with me, please.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 11:21 AM

Jackaroo, I have not claimed any victory.
I thought we were just exchanging views. I am sorry if you feel defeated.
An oxymoron
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 11:01 AM

Another "innocent" Dolphin Square visitor who escaped justice
"PROLIFIC SEXUAL PREDATOR" SAYS SON
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 11:01 AM

Another "innocent" Dolphin Square visitor who escaped justice
"PROLIFIC SEXUAL PREDATOR" SAYS SON
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 10:50 AM

"There have been none."Are you claimign that the links I put up to Brittan, Proctor Heath and Boothby are lies then
If so, say so,
If not, withdraw your accusation and apologise
Brittan was probably responsible for 'disappearing the paedophelia research report
All those who were named and were let off the hook after Dolphin Square were proven predators beforehand - that is wy it is obvious that accusing one of the victims of being a fantasist was a cover-up
Odd that a "fastisisst' should select actual paedophiles to "fantasize"
What you are doing here is trying to make a case for attacking Labour whicle at the same time defending high-up actual sexual criminality
Now - Heath?, Proctor?, Boothby, Napier?, Morrison?, Hayman? Brittan? - were the links all lies
If they are not, then you are
A REMINDER - MORE TO COME
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 10:48 AM

There is a huge difference between addressing a person and addressing the points. Addressing a person usually begins with the persons name. Addressing the points does not. Unless we are speaking a different language...

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 10:44 AM

You have continued addressing me long after I have asked you to stop.

I have addressed the points you made.
If you do not want them addressed, PM them to whoever it is you do want to read them.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 10:38 AM

All I have done is expressed my views without abusing anyone.
You clearly disagree with them, but that is no excuse for this nastiness and childish name calling.

You haven't. You have continued addressing me long after I have asked you to stop. That is a perfectly good excuse for the responses you get. When will you get it?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 10:32 AM

Jim,
Once again you have accused me of lying
"You have to resort to blatant lying to make a case."

Yes.
You said, "proven acts (paedophelia and rape) by Government high ups and Prime ministers."

There have been none.
It was a lie Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 10:29 AM

Dave,
as well as a weasel with worm like tendencies

All I have done is expressed my views without abusing anyone.
You clearly disagree with them, but that is no excuse for this nastiness and childish name calling.

Steve,
"Jews in other parties had no issue with their own parties but joined the condemnation of Labour anti-Semitism..."
You really, really can't see it, can you, Keith?

I can't see anything wrong with that statement of fact.
What is your objection Steve?

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 10:25 AM

"He was a Liberal. Never even close to government."
Smith was an MBE and a Member of Parliament - Hounoured by Britain, as was Savile and Harris - how close can you get to the Establishment?
Once again you have accused me of lying
"You have to resort to blatant lying to make a case."
and I have provided the evidence for what I stated
You now respond with excuses for Pedophilia and the rapists and sexual predators who carried it out
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 09:58 AM

"Jews in other parties had no issue with their own parties but joined the condemnation of Labour anti-Semitism..."

You really, really can't see it, can you, Keith? And what this remark also reveals is that you are completely unable to address the point well made by pfr at 07.17 am and ably supported by Jack and Dave. It's a poor do, Keith. From the leafy subururbs of Tory Hertford you are fighting a one-man anti-Labour campaign on Mudcat and nothing but nothing is going to get those blinkers off you.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 09:33 AM

I know many people don't have much truck with the Sun (myself being one of them). However it is a Tory supporting publication so I was somewhat surprised to find the following which was updated on the 8th February this year. I believe it may have been published earlier.


Tory impropriety

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 08:48 AM

Cousin Dave: "See what I mean Jackaroodave? I think your analysis is right. Don't rise to the bait."

If someone wants to come in here embarrassing himself with that weak stuff, it's not my problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 08:39 AM

See what I mean Jackaroodave? I think your analysis is right. Don't rise to the bait.

Fine Keith. You cannot take the hint that I do not want you to address me again. You will not take a direct request to fuck off and stop mithering me. Feel free to carry on proving yourself to be completely unempathetic as well as a weasel with worm like tendencies. If that is the impression you want to give it is no skin off my nose.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 08:37 AM

Keith - if as it seems you have too much free time to occupy yourslf...
why not give the aggro down here in BS a rest,
and instead come upstairs to Music
to unwind and relax with like minded folkie mates for a while...

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 08:28 AM

Jackaroo, I have not claimed any victory.
I thought we were just exchanging views. I am sorry if you feel defeated.

Dave TG,
We said the same about the antisemitism claims

Yes. Labour Party Jews complained about anti-Semitism within the party.
Jews in other parties had no issue with their own parties but joined the condemnation of Labour anti-Semitism.
Your case was that did not mean Labour had a particular problem, even though the leadership admitted that it did.

Also Dave, we are all free to address anyone on the forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 08:04 AM

TWO excellent posts!

I do think that Keith's strategy is to pursue such a blatantly wrong-headed approach that one of us loses it from sheer exasperation and then to claim victory on a foul.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 07:53 AM

An excellent post PFR. We said the same about the antisemitism claims. In a party where questioning the leadership and making yourself heard is encouraged there will always be this type of protest. In a party where the 'traditional values' of misogyny, racism and class divides prevail it is likely that people will keep their heads below the parapet.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 07:46 AM

btw "That is why I think Labour has a problem"

Well no surprises you are [deliberately..???] misconstruing circustantial evidence
and diseminating untruths about labour yet again..

Far from having a 'particular problem', labour is actually leading the way in addressing problems of abuse in society;
even to the extent of pre-empting remedying any that may or may not exist with labour itself...
Sending out warning signals to any who may think they can join labour and take advantage of it's weaker members...

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 07:17 AM

"40+ Labour women MPs write to their leader begging him to do something about it.
A new grassroots movement within Labour to highlight the problem and to fight against it.
Nothing comparable coming from any other party.
That is why I think Labour has a particular problem."

Somone needs to grasp the quite simple basic truth that the kind of women/feminists who are attracted to the labour party
tend to be far more questioning, militant, and argumentative
than in all other mainstream parties...

Of course they will be more demanding and awkward for labour leaders to deal with...

This is good healthy open democratic relationship between grassroots members and leaders..

But unfortunately this does not play too well in tory owned press and media,
desperate to exploit anything they can spin as labour disharmony and division...

Though Keith already well knows this..

No one of his age and intelligence can be that politically naive or dense...????

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 06:43 AM

Keith, when I want your opinion I will ask for it.

Again, no-one needs permission from you to post an opinion.

You don't. Addressing me when I have specifically said I do not want you to is harassment though and you need to stop.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 06:30 AM

Dave TG,
Keith, when I want your opinion I will ask for it.

Again, no-one needs permission from you to post an opinion.

Both Daves,
There has been an outcry from Labour women about misogyny and the abuse of women within the party by party members.

40+ Labour women MPs write to their leader begging him to do something about it.
A new grassroots movement within Labour to highlight the problem and to fight against it.
Nothing comparable coming from any other party.
That is why I think Labour has a particular problem.

Because so many members say so.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jackaroodave
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 05:49 AM

Keith: "Both Daves, your premise that despite having the same serious problem that Labour women are vocally rebelling against, the feisty women from parties like SNP and Tories are just lying back and thinking of England is laughable."

That is pretty funny, Keith. ;-)

By "feisty women" you mean people like Kemi Badenoch ? When a party trots out its rising star to push back against actual and potential claims of harassment, well, that's pretty much a give-away.

"The idea is ludicrous, I do not believe it,"

Of course you don't, Keith. You have exhaustively documented your inability to understand the phenomenon.

"and it would be laughed out of court."

Court? I'm happy to refer the verdict to the unfolding of events.

Anyway, I guess we're done: Take your self-awarded victory lap.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 05:23 AM

Maybe tory women are still being raised to lie back and think of England,
and not jeopadize their options of catching a rich husband...???????


or for the more progressive moden ambitious tory women:

lie back and think of England,
and not jeopadize their options of winning a well salaried influential job in high position...???????

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 05:14 AM

A good indication of why women in the Tory party are not as forthcoming as others.

A veteran Tory MP has allegedly blamed female journalists for the Westminster sex scandal and described victims of sexual harassment as “wilting flowers”.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 05:04 AM

Keith, when I want your opinion I will ask for it. Until then there is no point discussing anything with you.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 04:57 AM

Jim,
"The disgusting monster Cyril Smith alone has been revealed to have abused children or raped anyone."
I quite agree - I pointed out he did

You agree that he alone abused kids or raped.
He was a Liberal. Never even close to government.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 04:53 AM

Dave, I do not need your permission to post an opinion here, and resorting to personal abuse shows you have no case.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexual impropriety at Westminster
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 18 - 04:48 AM

You have all the details of Government linked criminal sex offenders
You are the one who is lying unless you are clainignthat
Date: 06 Mar 18 - 11:31 AM
Date: 06 Mar 18 - 12:38 PM
Date: 06 Mar 18 - 01:37 PM
Date: 06 Mar 18 - 01:44 PM
Are all lies
Is that your point

These are not jeust pests - they are criminals who have been protected by the Govenment
"The disgusting monster Cyril Smith alone has been revealed to have abused children or raped anyone."
I quite agree - I pointed out he did
What's your point?
Jim Carroll