Daily Mail smear campaign

Against Harriet Harman appears to be faltering .

Curiously, in spite of the continued campaign against her, not 1 comment against these sordid stories has been posted.
Either on-one is interested, or more likely there is a strict ban and censorship taking place.
Oddly , not a single word from Dacre in today's copy.
I think their smear has been rumbled.



Silence: In 2012, Harriet Harman said that the whole truth must come out about Jimmy Savile. How strange then, that she is so reluctant to reveal anything at all about her past links with the Paedophile Information Exchange
RightMinds  
Article
DAILY MAIL COMMENT: A silence that grows ever more deafening
By DAILY MAIL COMMENT All By This Author - 24/02/2014 00:46:36

In a 2012 radio interview about the Jimmy Savile sex scandal, Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman stressed the vital importance of unearthing the whole truth.
Harriet Harman
News  
Article
Harman wasn't so quiet on Savile scandal: Deputy Labour leader toured TV and radio stations
By JACK DOYLE,SAM GREENHILL All By This Author - 24/02/2014 00:29:14

Harriet Harman may be reluctant to speak out now, but when the Jimmy Savile scandal exploded in 2012, she loudly demanded a judge-led inquiry.
Labour trio
News  
Article
How much longer can paedophilia apologists stay silent? Even Left demands answers from senior Labour trio over links to child sex group
By GUY ADAMS,TIM SHIPMAN All By This Author - 23/02/2014 23:50:28

Pressure is mounting on Labour's deputy leader Harriet Harman and others to explain their links with a vile group that tried to legalise sex with children.
Demetrious Panton suffered terrible abuse at a children's home in Islington in the late 1970s
News  
Article
Apologists for paedophilia: As the Mail exposes more links between senior Labour figures and a vile paedophile group, one man who was abused as a child asks them: why won't you admit you were wrong?
By GUY ADAMS All By This Author - 22/02/2014 13:19:52

The childhood of Demetrious Panton ended one night in July 1978, a few days before his 11th birthday. That was when a man called Bernie Bain, who ran a care home in North London where Panton lived, knocked on the door of his dormitory.
AY99621640image001 copy.jpg
Femail  
Article
'A bigot in a bra!': A male writer responds to Esther Walker's 'toxic and chauvinistic' admission that she doesn’t want to give birth to a little boy
By PETER LLOYD All By This Author - 22/02/2014 10:40:41

This week, Esther Walker - wife of celebrity food critic Giles Coren - wrote a vile, lacerating opinion piece about her casual sexism towards men and boys.
Kate Moss walks to collect the award for best male solo artist on behalf of David Bowie at the Brits
RightMinds  
Article
PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Drink, drugs and the Brits 'role models'
By AMANDA PLATELL All By This Author - 22/02/2014 02:12:25

What a shameful show they put on. What we were served up was not a celebration of the best in music but a sordid and self-indulgent orgy of booze and drugs.
Patricia Hewitt, Labour minister
RightMinds  
Article
DAILY MAIL COMMENT: The Labour elite who gave succour to paedophiles
By DAILY MAIL COMMENT All By This Author - 22/02/2014 01:24:35

Today the paper publishes an exposé of the frankly disgusting views on paedophilia held in the 1970s and 1980s by people who rose to the highest ranks in the modern Labour Party.
Top Tory sources have said that many people fear making waves in the commons for fear of scaring their public and not being re-elected
RightMinds  
Article
SIMON HEFFER: Ministers who put their jobs before their country
By SIMON HEFFER All By This Author - 22/02/2014 01:19:12


Defence Secretary Philip Hammond (inset) looked sheepish after wrongly referring to Liz Kendall (left) as Rachel Reeves (right) on the BBC1 show.
'Time for BBC2's Newsnight - and editor Ian Katz, formerly of the Guardian, has excelled himself. Jeremy Paxman is dressed as Whack-O! actor Jimmy Edwards with a cane'

RightMinds  
Article
Surprise, surprise, the BBC has ignored our expose of Labour's links to a child sex scandal. QUENTIN LETTS imagines its reaction if those involved were Tory
By QUENTIN LETTS All By This Author - 21/02/2014 04:53:49

From Today to Newsnight, the Beeb’s in a frenzy. Can the evil Tories survive this scandal?
Characteristically, Harriet did rouse herself to airily dismiss the revelations as 'rubbish'. However, that is nowhere near good enough
News  
Article
JAN MOIR: How can Harriet call herself a feminist after this?
By JAN MOIR All By This Author - 21/02/2014 01:03:09

Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman (pictured), her husband Jack Dromey and former Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt have yet to say anything significant about the links, detailed in this newspaper in recent days.
Harriet Harman last month
News  
Article
Inexcusable: Leading abuse charity demands apology from Labour trio with links to vile paedophile group
By GUY ADAMS,MICHAEL SEAMARK All By This Author - 21/02/2014 00:27:40

Harriet Harman, her husband, Jack Dromey and Patricia Hewitt were key figures in the National Council for Civil Liberties when it forged links with the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange.
Harriet Harman: Legal officer of the NCCL, now Labour Deputy Leader
News  
Article
How three of the party's most senior figures campaigned for a vile paedophile group now being probed by police for 'abusing children on an industrial scale'
By GUY ADAMS All By This Author - 21/02/2014 00:26:16

A letter written to a Left-wing magazine by a Londoner who described himself as ‘both a paedophile and gay’, complained that laws forbidding him from having sex with children 'interfere with my life and civil liberties'.
Romanian migrants arriving at Luton Airport on the first day since the lifting of travel restrictions. MPs Mark Reckless (left) and Keith Vaz welcome Victor Spirescu, 30
RightMinds  
Article
Cut migration to give our young a chance
By DAILY MAIL COMMENT All By This Author - 20/02/2014 01:46:16

The number of under-25s out of work, the great majority of them British-born, remains disturbingly high at 917,000.
Harriet Harman: Legal officer of the NCCL, now Labour Deputy Leader
News  
Article
Vital questions these Labour apologists for child sex MUST now answer
By GUY ADAMS All By This Author - 20/02/2014 00:32:00

This week the Mail published a major exposé revealing how three senior Labour Party figures gave their support in the 1970s to a vile organisation that tried to legalise sex with children.
Harriet Harman
News  
Article
Now say sorry! Ex-Yard chief calls on Labour trio to admit backing paedophilia was a 'huge mistake'
By STEPHEN WRIGHT,MICHAEL SEAMARK All By This Author - 20/02/2014 00:25:50

Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman, her husband, home affairs spokesman Jack Dromey, and former Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt all held key roles in the National Council for Civil Liberties.

So you think there is no need for her to answer questions concerning her signature appearing on documents in the public record expressing support for a paedophile association?

I think she is the subject of a tory paper led smear campaign. And sodo many others.

Handy Andy wrote:I think she is the subject of a tory paper led smear campaign.  And sodo many others.

The thing is what is she being smeared with? Those documents are public record - they exist.

The mail is not suggesting she had anything to do with abuse they just want to know whether she still holds the same opinions now as she expressed then.

You call it a smear - I call it a fair question.

sphinx wrote:So you think there is no need for her to answer questions concerning her signature appearing on documents in the public record expressing support for a paedophile association?

The Mail hasn't shown those documents and she has stated that they were before she started working there and also she supported the right of gay people to have the same age of consent as hetrosexual people and worked against the PE, so I'd prefer to see the evidence, not rely on the Mail.

Daily Mail is barely for for wiping one's bottom, the same paper who told us that smoking or ingesting pot alone can kill.

One signature on a brief dealing proposing that child pornography laws be relaxed so that where there is no evidence of harm to a child then they are not illegal.

Of course also the date she started working for them and stopped working for them are also matters of record.



Here is her husband listed on the NEC on a page showing association with PIE

It's so comforting reading the comments of posters on this site who appear to support MPs who have clearly shown support for paedophiles.....So comforting & all the usual suspects.

Look guys why the hell are Labour and you making so much fuss about not responding to this?

If those involved last week had stood up and said "we were young idealistic, and were fooled by the machinations of what was at heart a professional con job. We were not they only ones and regret having been sucked in and apologize for ever having fallen for the terrible objectives we inadvertently supported and any suffering that came about because of that" then the story would have died last week.

What is keeping the story alive is that 3 people are not apologizing and are even trying to deny it happened and people want to know why.

Have you actually read and digested the page you have put up Sphinx?

Seriously what is actually more important - that the Mail is taking great delight in highlighting what happened or that it happened at all?

Shady wrote:It's so comforting reading the comments of posters on this site who appear to support MPs who have clearly shown support for paedophiles.....So comforting & all the usual suspects.

Except at the moment there is no evidence they have, just a DM smear story.

sphinx wrote:Seriously what is actually more important - that the Mail is taking great delight in highlighting what happened or that it happened at all?

Seriously, read that page, and if you don't understand that it is NOT supporting peadophiles you're not as bright as you think you are.

The evidence is very clear.What's the problem?

Why haven't the BBC been giving this story air time.

Why haven't Liberty addressed the issue?

Mmmmm...........cover up.

Shady wrote:The evidence is very clear.What's the problem?

Why haven't the BBC been giving this story air time.

Why haven't Liberty addressed the issue?

Mmmmm...........cover up.

Yes they have, it was on today and tonight.

Sassy wrote:Have you actually read and digested the page you have put up Sphinx?

The page is at the end of the report without the bit about legalizing pictures where no suffering is happening on it - and if I put the page that does say that up you will allege it is from a different report because it is not signed.

I was more interested in the date and signature - because that is the time this was happening.

I mean at the end of the day if you would rather argue that the evidence is faulty and they didnt do it rather than asking for an explanation then that is fine.

The first two paragraphs for example are making sure that the CHILD isn't prosecuted.

Sassy wrote:

sphinx wrote:Seriously what is actually more important - that the Mail is taking great delight in highlighting what happened or that it happened at all?

Seriously, read that page, and if you don't understand that it is NOT supporting peadophiles you're not as bright as you think you are.

But still probably brighter than you young lady.

I've been folowing this story for sometime & from a variety of sources & the evidence is clear & damming.
Hatty,Patty & the guy clearly wanted PIE to be recognised as legitimate & wanted sex with children & incest legalized.

How can this be defended?

Shady wrote:The evidence is very clear.What's the problem?

Why haven't the BBC been giving this story air time.

Why haven't Liberty addressed the issue?

Mmmmm...........cover up.

Actually Liberty addressed and they made a full apology for the role of the organization even though the people in the organization now were not involved then. What others are asking for is an apology from the people who were involved at the time even though they are no longer in Liberty.

Sassy wrote:

Shady wrote:The evidence is very clear.What's the problem?

Why haven't the BBC been giving this story air time.

Why haven't Liberty addressed the issue?

Mmmmm...........cover up.

Yes they have, it was on today and tonight.

That'll be a first.....maybe the BBC are starting to cave in under pressure.What next Sass? An unbiased report from the BBC regarding this? Or will they try & smooth things over for their fellow paedophile supporters.

Shady wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Seriously, read that page, and if you don't understand that it is NOT supporting peadophiles you're not as bright as you think you are.

But still probably brighter than you young lady.

I've been folowing this story for sometime & from a variety of sources & the evidence is clear & damming.
Hatty,Patty & the guy clearly wanted PIE to be recognised as legitimate & wanted sex with children & incest legalized.

How can this be defended?

I've seen no evidence for that at the moment. If and when I do, then I'll demand answers, not on the say so of innuendo and make believe.

For what it is worth this is the page from the report stating that a picture shall not be considered illegal if the child is not suffering

sphinx wrote:

Shady wrote:The evidence is very clear.What's the problem?

Why haven't the BBC been giving this story air time.

Why haven't Liberty addressed the issue?

Mmmmm...........cover up.

Actually Liberty addressed and they made a full apology for the role of the organization even though the people in the organization now were not involved then.  What others are asking for is an apology from the people who were involved at the time even though they are no longer in Liberty.

But did Liberty insist that the gang of 3 were investigated by the police? Or was it a sanctimonious apology which took into account paedophiles human rights...Pardon my cynicism.

You lot are like the mob who set of what they thought was a peado and turned out to be a pediatrician, exactly the same lack of logic and willingness to be manipulated.

Sassy wrote:

Shady wrote:

But still probably brighter than you young lady.

I've been folowing this story for sometime & from a variety of sources & the evidence is clear & damming.
Hatty,Patty & the guy clearly wanted PIE to be recognised as legitimate & wanted sex with children & incest legalized.

How can this be defended?

I've seen no evidence for that at the moment.   If and when I do, then I'll demand answers, not on the say so of innuendo and make believe.

Then I suggest opening your eyes and going and reading what is said rather that assuming it is lies because of who is saying it.

Sassy wrote:

Shady wrote:

But still probably brighter than you young lady.

I've been folowing this story for sometime & from a variety of sources & the evidence is clear & damming.
Hatty,Patty & the guy clearly wanted PIE to be recognised as legitimate & wanted sex with children & incest legalized.

How can this be defended?

I've seen no evidence for that at the moment.   If and when I do, then I'll demand answers, not on the say so of innuendo and make believe.

In other words you don't care about the accusations & want them to go away because you are a Labour supporter.....yes?

Sassy wrote:You lot are like the mob who set of what they thought was a peado and turned out to be a pediatrician, exactly the same lack of logic and willingness to be manipulated.  

And your motives are just as questionable.

There has never been any suggestion that either those 3 or any other member of NCCL was involved in committing or enabling abuse. The accusation is that they allowed an organisation that did those things to become associated with them thus gaining respectability and that they acted to provide legal support furthering their cause.

The only thing NCCL and the labour 3 were guilty of was incredibly bad judgement - but to be honest in the climate at the time with the recent changes in how homosexuality was viewed it is almost understandable that the appearance of a group using exactly the same argument would be greeted sympathetically.

Liberty were able to see this and apologize - so why cant the Labour 3?

sphinx wrote:There has never been any suggestion that either those 3 or any other member of NCCL was involved in committing or enabling abuse.  The accusation is that they allowed an organisation that did those things to become associated with them thus gaining respectability and that they acted to provide legal support furthering their cause.

The only thing NCCL and the labour 3 were guilty of was incredibly bad judgement - but to be honest in the climate at the time with the recent changes in how homosexuality was viewed it is almost understandable that the appearance of a group using exactly the same argument would be greeted sympathetically.

Liberty were able to see this and apologize - so why cant the Labour 3?

At the moment there is no suggestion that they were up to no good,but their link to PIE gives us a good idea of what was going through their heads.......Legalizing sex with children......because of their human rights.

And these are the kind of people that Labour suppoters will vote for....kinda makes you think doesn't it?

sphinx wrote:There has never been any suggestion that either those 3 or any other member of NCCL was involved in committing or enabling abuse.  The accusation is that they allowed an organisation that did those things to become associated with them thus gaining respectability and that they acted to provide legal support furthering their cause.

The only thing NCCL and the labour 3 were guilty of was incredibly bad judgement - but to be honest in the climate at the time with the recent changes in how homosexuality was viewed it is almost understandable that the appearance of a group using exactly the same argument would be greeted sympathetically.

Liberty were able to see this and apologize - so why cant the Labour 3?

I believe that the NCCL were associated with PIE long before Harman was involved with them.

Jack Dromey has released this statement...

A statement released by Mr Dromey said: "Sexual abuse of children is evil and I have always viewed paedophiles and any group associated with them as evil.

"During my time on the NCCL Executive, I was at the forefront of repeated public condemnations of PIE and their despicable views. Then, when I was elected chairman, I took them on.

"I personally chaired the NCCL conference that, on my recommendation, refused to back by a massive majority a loathsome motion from a leading light in PIE calling on NCCL to support the so-called 'rights' of paedophiles. Indeed, my stand was denounced in a leaflet distributed by PIE to the delegates to the Conference.

"Like many organisations in the 1970s, NCCL had been infiltrated but that was the moment the tide was turned. I closed the conference saying that we had to stand up for the rights of children not to be sexually abused and that adults guilty of abuse were the lowest of the low.

"I was then the first to argue that paedophiles could have no place in NCCL.

"As a lifelong opponent of evil men who abuse children, the accusations of the Daily Mail are untrue and beneath contempt."

And if any of them really have been associated in any way that they have ever supported PIE and what they stood for then they should be run out of office. Apologies are not enough.

Shady wrote:

sphinx wrote:There has never been any suggestion that either those 3 or any other member of NCCL was involved in committing or enabling abuse.  The accusation is that they allowed an organisation that did those things to become associated with them thus gaining respectability and that they acted to provide legal support furthering their cause.

The only thing NCCL and the labour 3 were guilty of was incredibly bad judgement - but to be honest in the climate at the time with the recent changes in how homosexuality was viewed it is almost understandable that the appearance of a group using exactly the same argument would be greeted sympathetically.

Liberty were able to see this and apologize - so why cant the Labour 3?

At the moment there is no suggestion that they were up to no good,but their link to PIE gives us a good idea of what was going through their heads.......Legalizing sex with children......because of their human rights.

And these are the kind of people that Labour suppoters will vote for....kinda makes you think doesn't it?

What about these people?Paedo brothel advertised in Tory Party leaflet

I say can all those involved.

For a second there Irn I thought I was seeing the first sensible reasonable response to the story.

I am sure that Jack Dromey can show plenty of documents demonstrating his feelings during the years he was with the NCCL. He is at least not denying that the time did not happen. Is there some reason his wife and Hewitt cannot do the same?

It is a shame you had to then resort to a rather typical mailesque throw shit back manoeuvre. There is a hell of a lot of difference between an official group with the name paedophile in the title which nobody can even claim they were unaware of, and a leaflet for a guest house that turned out to be a brothel and have abuse associations because you have to prove that the people giving out the leaflet did indeed know about and wish to promote the illegal activities.

I watched Harman on Sky News just now. You don't have to be a professional psychologist to know what the constant stutter and rapid eye blinking meant when she answered questions. If I were a copper interviewing her for a crime I'd know she was guilty in an instant.

Irn Bru wrote:

Shady wrote:

At the moment there is no suggestion that they were up to no good,but their link to PIE gives us a good idea of what was going through their heads.......Legalizing sex with children......because of their human rights.

And these are the kind of people that Labour suppoters will vote for....kinda makes you think doesn't it?

What about these people?Paedo brothel advertised in Tory Party leaflet

I say can all those involved.

I imagine that your use of a Tory party leaflet story is some sort of attempt to get at me & reduce the seriousness of the Labour MPs involvement in this latest scandal.Well tough titty baby because I'm not a Tory supporter either & in my opinion that party is only marginally better than Labour.

Still,back to the leaflet.....what of it? What do you expect me to do,defend it? No,what it's about is wrong,but that shouldn't detract from the actions of Hatty,Patty & matey boy whatever his name is.

I thought Harman's husband looked like a typical perv, so I googled him...

Harriet Harman's MP husband left red-faced after adding gay porn Tweet to his 'favourites'Labour MP Jack Dromey linked to a tweet about well-endowed black men:

The link showed a picture of two men engaged in a sex act.
This was the second occasion on which Mr Dromey’s finger had strayed on Twitter. Back in September, Mr Dromey also favourited a link to a Tweet on a similar theme.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2511016/Harriet-Harmans-MP-husband-Jack-Dromey-adds-gay-porn-Tweet-favourites.html#ixzz2lICZQCYT

Tess. wrote:I thought Harman's husband looked like a typical perv, so I googled him...

Harriet Harman's MP husband left red-faced after adding gay porn Tweet to his 'favourites'Labour MP Jack Dromey linked to a tweet about well-endowed black men:

The link showed a picture of two men engaged in a sex act.
This was the second occasion on which Mr Dromey’s finger had strayed on Twitter. Back in September, Mr Dromey also favourited a link to a Tweet on a similar theme.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2511016/Harriet-Harmans-MP-husband-Jack-Dromey-adds-gay-porn-Tweet-favourites.html#ixzz2lICZQCYT

Good afternoon Tess.

I readily admit that I have special needs in the sex department  ::D:: but Labour MPs & their associates leave me standing  

Harman says she had no involvement at all with PIE. But...

"In 1975, for example, the NCCL conference was addressed by the PIE chairman, Keith Hose. Delegates passed a motion declaring that ‘awareness and acceptance of the sexuality of children is an essential part of the liberation of the young homosexual’.

In 1976, with Jack Dromey on its executive (he served from 1970-79), the NCCL filed a submission to a parliamentary committee claiming that a proposed Bill to protect children from sex abusers would lead to ‘damaging and absurd prosecutions’. ‘Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage,’ it read. ‘The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage.’

Two years later, in 1978, Harriet Harman, then a newly qualified solicitor, became the NCCL’s legal officer. She promptly wrote its official response to Parliament’s Protection of Children Bill, which sought to ban child pornography.

Her letter claimed that such a law would ‘increase censorship’, and argued that a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered.
‘Our amendment [to the proposed law] places the onus of proof on the prosecution to show that the child was actually harmed,’ she wrote."

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-263547.html

Tess. wrote:Harman says she had no involvement at all with PIE.  But...

"In 1975, for example, the NCCL conference was addressed by the PIE chairman, Keith Hose. Delegates passed a motion declaring that ‘awareness and acceptance of the sexuality of children is an essential part of the liberation of the young homosexual’.

In 1976, with Jack Dromey on its executive (he served from 1970-79), the NCCL filed a submission to a parliamentary committee claiming that a proposed Bill to protect children from sex abusers would lead to ‘damaging and absurd prosecutions’.  ‘Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage,’ it read. ‘The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage.’

Two years later, in 1978, Harriet Harman, then a newly qualified solicitor, became the NCCL’s legal officer. She promptly wrote its official response to Parliament’s Protection of Children Bill, which sought to ban child pornography.

Her letter claimed that such a law would ‘increase censorship’, and argued that a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered.
‘Our amendment [to the proposed law] places the onus of proof on the prosecution to show that the child was actually harmed,’ she wrote."

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-263547.html

It's incredible isn't it? And she's now an MP....What hope have we got when these creature hold positions of power?

I wonder if some where further down the line,the likes of Harmen & co will be implicated in the J saville enquiry?

Tess. wrote:Harman says she had no involvement at all with PIE.  But...

"In 1975, for example, the NCCL conference was addressed by the PIE chairman, Keith Hose. Delegates passed a motion declaring that ‘awareness and acceptance of the sexuality of children is an essential part of the liberation of the young homosexual’.

In 1976, with Jack Dromey on its executive (he served from 1970-79), the NCCL filed a submission to a parliamentary committee claiming that a proposed Bill to protect children from sex abusers would lead to ‘damaging and absurd prosecutions’.  ‘Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage,’ it read. ‘The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage.’

Two years later, in 1978, Harriet Harman, then a newly qualified solicitor, became the NCCL’s legal officer. She promptly wrote its official response to Parliament’s Protection of Children Bill, which sought to ban child pornography.

Her letter claimed that such a law would ‘increase censorship’, and argued that a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered.
‘Our amendment [to the proposed law] places the onus of proof on the prosecution to show that the child was actually harmed,’ she wrote."

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-263547.html

David Icke!  ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: 

You really are a fucking loon Tess.

Catman wrote:

Tess. wrote:Harman says she had no involvement at all with PIE.  But...

"In 1975, for example, the NCCL conference was addressed by the PIE chairman, Keith Hose. Delegates passed a motion declaring that ‘awareness and acceptance of the sexuality of children is an essential part of the liberation of the young homosexual’.

In 1976, with Jack Dromey on its executive (he served from 1970-79), the NCCL filed a submission to a parliamentary committee claiming that a proposed Bill to protect children from sex abusers would lead to ‘damaging and absurd prosecutions’.  ‘Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage,’ it read. ‘The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage.’

Two years later, in 1978, Harriet Harman, then a newly qualified solicitor, became the NCCL’s legal officer. She promptly wrote its official response to Parliament’s Protection of Children Bill, which sought to ban child pornography.

Her letter claimed that such a law would ‘increase censorship’, and argued that a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered.
‘Our amendment [to the proposed law] places the onus of proof on the prosecution to show that the child was actually harmed,’ she wrote."

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-263547.html

David Icke!  ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: 

You really are a fucking loon Tess.

David Icke quoting an article..   

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2523526/How-Labour-Deputy-Harriet-Harman-shadow-minister-husband-Health-Secretary-Patricia-Hewitt-linked-group-lobbying-right-sex-children.html

Tess. wrote:

Catman wrote:

David Icke!  ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: 

You really are a fucking loon Tess.

David Icke quoting an article..   

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2523526/How-Labour-Deputy-Harriet-Harman-shadow-minister-husband-Health-Secretary-Patricia-Hewitt-linked-group-lobbying-right-sex-children.html

Good one Tess

Tess. wrote:

Catman wrote:

David Icke!  ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: 

You really are a fucking loon Tess.

David Icke quoting an article..   

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2523526/How-Labour-Deputy-Harriet-Harman-shadow-minister-husband-Health-Secretary-Patricia-Hewitt-linked-group-lobbying-right-sex-children.html

All just Daily Heil smears.

You visit David Icke forum!

Only fucking RW conspiracy theory loons like you would do that Tess!

 ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: 

Catman wrote:

Tess. wrote:
David Icke quoting an article..   

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2523526/How-Labour-Deputy-Harriet-Harman-shadow-minister-husband-Health-Secretary-Patricia-Hewitt-linked-group-lobbying-right-sex-children.html

All just Daily Heil smears.

You visit David Icke forum!

Only fucking RW conspiracy theory loons like you would do that Tess!

 ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: 

I don't you fucking retard. I googled Harman's pervy husband and this was one of the links that came up. But carry on diverting from the truth. My post quoted an actual letter written by Harperson defending paedophiles!!

Tess. wrote:

Catman wrote:

All just Daily Heil smears.

You visit David Icke forum!

Only fucking RW conspiracy theory loons like you would do that Tess!

 ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: 

I don't you fucking retard.  I googled Harman's pervy husband and this was one of the links that came up.  But carry on diverting from the truth.  My post quoted an actual letter written by Harperson defending paedophiles!!

Yea.....whatever Tess




  

Catman wrote:

Tess. wrote:
I don't you fucking retard.  I googled Harman's pervy husband and this was one of the links that came up.  But carry on diverting from the truth.  My post quoted an actual letter written by Harperson defending paedophiles!!

Yea.....whatever Tess




  

More diverting from the truth. How pathetic - and dusgusting.

Look they dont want to admit that their golden party is anything less than perfect and fail to realize that if these 3 just stood up and said we were young and failed to properly assess the implications of our decisions and are very sorry then everyone would have a hell of a lot more respect for them as individuals and as a party

Tess. wrote:

Catman wrote:

All just Daily Heil smears.

You visit David Icke forum!

Only fucking RW conspiracy theory loons like you would do that Tess!

 ::smthg:: ::smthg:: ::smthg:: 

I don't you fucking retard.  I googled Harman's pervy husband and this was one of the links that came up.  But carry on diverting from the truth.  My post quoted an actual letter written by Harperson defending paedophiles!!

When BB2 Newsnight were after her blood last night, and was defended by Nadine Dorris on Sky at lunch not to mention the tweet from Harpic trying to show the DM as a sexual deviant newspaper , there is much more to come out.

It has all been known about for many years but no one has ever really dug and gone to press.

Did I hear Scotland Yard are investigating...... ?

Tess. wrote:Harman says she had no involvement at all with PIE.  But...

"In 1975, for example, the NCCL conference was addressed by the PIE chairman, Keith Hose. Delegates passed a motion declaring that ‘awareness and acceptance of the sexuality of children is an essential part of the liberation of the young homosexual’.

In 1976, with Jack Dromey on its executive (he served from 1970-79), the NCCL filed a submission to a parliamentary committee claiming that a proposed Bill to protect children from sex abusers would lead to ‘damaging and absurd prosecutions’.  ‘Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage,’ it read. ‘The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage.’

Two years later, in 1978, Harriet Harman, then a newly qualified solicitor, became the NCCL’s legal officer. She promptly wrote its official response to Parliament’s Protection of Children Bill, which sought to ban child pornography.

Her letter claimed that such a law would ‘increase censorship’, and argued that a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered.
‘Our amendment [to the proposed law] places the onus of proof on the prosecution to show that the child was actually harmed,’ she wrote."

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-263547.html

it with many thanks to Durham for this link................................


It is horrendous reading BTW but full of factual events. Maybe worth a peak before the site is removed from the web. It will not be the first to removed from view due ti the contents being unfavourable to liebor.
Labour25

http://labour25.com/

sphinx wrote:Look they dont want to admit that their golden party is anything less than perfect and fail to realize that if these 3 just stood up and said we were young and failed to properly assess the implications of our decisions and are very sorry then everyone would have a hell of a lot more respect for them as individuals and as a party

If that's directed at people on here then that's just nonsense because what I have said and others have said is that anyone who has supported paedophiles in any way should be run out of office and if they have done that then apologies are not enough.
You are the one avoiding looking at the bigger picture over what has been going on for decades and you couldn't even bring yourself to add support to Tom Watson's call for action to flush out the truth about what has been going on for decades.
And it's a bit much to accept lectures from you in the way that you and Flap and a few others over on the Saville apologist site were prepared to defend Saville and Cyril Smith almost to your dying breaths.
Are you sorry now that you did that? Do you apologise?

gerber wrote:

Tess. wrote:Harman says she had no involvement at all with PIE.  But...

"In 1975, for example, the NCCL conference was addressed by the PIE chairman, Keith Hose. Delegates passed a motion declaring that ‘awareness and acceptance of the sexuality of children is an essential part of the liberation of the young homosexual’.

In 1976, with Jack Dromey on its executive (he served from 1970-79), the NCCL filed a submission to a parliamentary committee claiming that a proposed Bill to protect children from sex abusers would lead to ‘damaging and absurd prosecutions’.  ‘Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage,’ it read. ‘The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage.’

Two years later, in 1978, Harriet Harman, then a newly qualified solicitor, became the NCCL’s legal officer. She promptly wrote its official response to Parliament’s Protection of Children Bill, which sought to ban child pornography.

Her letter claimed that such a law would ‘increase censorship’, and argued that a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered.
‘Our amendment [to the proposed law] places the onus of proof on the prosecution to show that the child was actually harmed,’ she wrote."

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-263547.html

it with many thanks to Durham for this link................................


It is horrendous reading BTW but full of factual events.  Maybe worth a peak before the site is removed from the web.  It will not be the first to removed from view due ti the contents being unfavourable to liebor.
Labour25

http://labour25.com/

Hi there Gerber.

Seeing as Durham has been delving into the David Icke site for his material can you send this one back to him also from the David Icke site...

Paedophile Rings … And 10 Downing Street – FULL ARTICLE

Even those readers from around the world may have noticed that Britain has been rocked by the paedophile revelations regarding Jimmy Savile, the former disc jockey and procurer of children for the rich and famous – and what has followed in relation to Lord McAlpine, the former treasurer of the Conservative or ‘Tory’ Party at the time of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

There is information coming from all directions and it can be very confusing for those who have not followed this unfolding story stage by stage. I have been on this case since the 1990s and I’ll put the pieces together to make sense of it.

This is not just a story about Britain, either, because the same networks of paedophilia and Satanism covertly manipulate the political system all over the world and most certainly in places like North America. The Bush family are up to their necks in it.

What even many more open-minded people can’t grasp is the almost unimaginable scale of child abuse, murder and human sacrifice worldwide and how it is the very cement that holds the global Establishment together, locally, nationally and internationally.

There's loads to read so here is the full article which I'm sure Durham will find of interest although just one mention of Thatcher usually sends him off like a roman candle.

http://www.davidicke.com/headlines/75544-paedophile-rings-and-10-downing-street/

PS please give him my regards.