Greater Manchester Police Confiscate BNP “Stop Paedophile Rings” Banner

Written by Cigpapers

Red Mafia Starts To Crack In Greater Manchester:

On 9th April 2014 a BNP “Stop Paedophile Rings” banner protest was taking place on the East Lancashire Road in Greater Manchester, England. At about 8:00 AM this banners was safely secured with professional attachments above the East Lancashire Road in Greater Manchester by BNP activists.

2014-04-05 10.32.12

BNP “Stop Paedophile Rings” banner hangs between two commercial signs above the East Lancashire Road in Greater Manchester.The banners are secured with professional attachments before being swung over to the outside.

The banner was warmly supported by the majority of the public with only a few obscene hand gestures by multiculturalists. At around  8:45 AM a Police Officer approached the demonstration. The Police Officer ( Collar Number 14953 ) was friendly enough but had been ordered by his Inspector to take the banner down, then confiscate it and take one demonstrator’s name and details under Section 5 Public Order Act. We’re not sure about his understanding of the legal position here regarding Electoral Law and the Public Order Act.

How offensive is a "Stoo Paedophile Rings" banner? What sort of person would be offended enough to telephone the Police?

How offensive is a “Stop Paedophile Rings” banner? What sort of person would be offended enough to telephone the Police?

The Greater Manchester Police seizing this banner, which has been warmly supported around Greater Manchester, shows a few cracks appearing in the red Mafia of the Greater Manchester Police and the local Labour Party. There is a video of the confiscation by Greater Manchester Police here:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KO7Jvy90Vy4

The confiscation of this banner led to the cancellation of a planned “Stop Paedophile Rings” demonstration outside Manchester Town Hall against Labour Party paedophile rings. Whether this was deliberate or coincidental is impossible to say.

The same banner at a previous bridge banner flash demonstration in Tameside.

The same banner at a previous banner drop flash demonstration in Tameside.

The Police Officer in charge of the election in Greater Manchester is Chief Superintendent O’Hare of Greater Manchester Police ( telephone 0161 872 5050)  who had previously stated he wanted a good, clean election.

The BNP's banner was confiscated for opposing paedophile rings but what if you complained that you are offended by this celebration of communism and genocide?

The BNP’s banner was confiscated for opposing paedophile rings but what if you complained that you are offended by this celebration of communism and genocide in Manchester?

These “Stop Paedohile Rings” campaign banners have been well received by tens of thousands of members of the Greater Manchester public. The banners are very good for bridge drop flash demonstrations, or for hanging or holding at other demonstrations. Each banner should also last several years/elections if looked after.

Section 5 Of The Public Order Act 1986:

(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—

(a)uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or

(b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.

(2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling.

(3)It is a defence for the accused to prove—

(a)that he had no reason to believe that there was any person within hearing or sight who was likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress, or

(b)that he was inside a dwelling and had no reason to believe that the words or behaviour used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation displayed, would be heard or seen by a person outside that or any other dwelling, or

(c)that his conduct was reasonable.

(4)A constable may arrest a person without warrant if—

(a)he engages in offensive conduct which a constable warns him to stop, and

(b)he engages in further offensive conduct immediately or shortly after the warning.

(5)In subsection (4) “offensive conduct” means conduct the constable reasonably suspects to constitute an offence under this section, and the conduct mentioned in paragraph (a) and the further conduct need not be of the same nature.

(6)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

BNP Rescue Banner 10th April 2014:

On April 10th 2014, Gary Tumulty (North West Regional Organiser) went to Swinton Police Station to demand the return of the “Stop Paedophile Rings” banner. Here is the video of what happened:

Female Paedophile MP Abused Boy In State Care

Written by Cigpapers

Co-Investigation by Watt Tyler

This article appeared on the Coleman Experience blog here:

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2014/01/12/who-was-the-female-mp-assaulted-child/

It’s an article describing a young boy in State Care being sexually abused by a VIP paedophile ring including a female MP. At the end of the article we’ll narrow down the possible offending female MP.

Female MP Abused Boy in CareVicitm Andrew AshGeoffreyDickensMPHouses Of ParliamentBuckinghamPalaceCharles and palPaedo Ring Number 10MP Vice ChargesHouseMissing BoysMissing Martin AllenVIPHellthatcher and savileSavile SatanTop Tory AbuseThatcher and Cameronfilthy britainElm Guest HouseEGH AdvertElm ListRichmond CouncilWarwickSpinksJason SwiftIslingtonCentrepointPrincess Diana CentrepointGrafton CloseNo to Secret CourtsSecret Family CourtChildSnatcherDerek Laud Big BrotherIan Greerdolphinsquare pimlicoScallywagScared FilthThatcherCabinetBanthePIEBBC PaedosJill DandoRolf Harris Mark Speightesther savileesther savile Savile and RantzenChildlineNaughty Esther RantzenThatcherandSavileBryn Alyn Abuse HomeBryn Alyn HallJillings ReportWestminster CouncilWestminster Councillors- Simon Milton and Robert DavisMaida Vale SignFreemason Brothers in the ShadowsFreemason SymbolFreinds ReunitedJanner and GellerSavile and QueenSavile and Philip

If you thought for one minute that Britain is really as it appears to be, you’re very sadly mistaken.

Beneath the pomp and pageantry lies a network of paedophilic depravity, so vile and despicable, it literally beggars belief.

From the Elm Guest House scandal to North Wales care home abuse via Dolphin Square; to sickening Warwick Spinks and the Amsterdam connection; from Jersey’s Haut de la Garenne to Kincora in Northern Ireland; from the vile BBC to complicit police and government authorities; from MP’s through to the Royal Family themselves; the whole filthy lot of them are in on it.

The VIP paedophile ring has been able to operate by ensuring all sections of society are controlled by abusers and then children are snatched from Britain’s streets or stolen from loving families (via secret family courts) and thrown into care homes to be trafficked by filth.

This shocking article from the Sunday Express sheds more light on the role of politicians in this sordid and sickening web:

” Andrew Ash (pictured at 14) claims he was abused by two MPs in London in the 1980s [HULL NEWS & PICTURES]

She is alleged to have forced a boy in care to perform a “vile”  sex act at one of a series of drug-fuelled parties in Westminster in the Eighties where boys and girls as young as 13 were allegedly abused.Last night her alleged victim told the Sunday Express: “I want justice.”

Andrew Ash, now 45, said he has given Scotland Yard the name of the former MP. We cannot name her for legal reasons.

Mr Ash claims he was frequently ferried down to London from the North of England, where he was in care, to take part in sex parties.

He says they were organised by a paedophile ring involving David Smith, Jimmy Savile’s former chauffeur who killed himself last year before he was due to stand trial for sex offences.

He said: “It wasn’t just politicians, there were also a number of celebrities, including Jimmy Savile, who seemed to have a lot of good links to MPs and powerful businessmen.

“There was usually drugs like cocaine and speed available as well as bottles of champagne.”

Of his encounter with the female MP, he said: “She was extremely drunk and was laughing as she did it.

“I didn’t really know what was going on but the others around her were goading her on.

“I must have been about 13 years old at the time and felt humiliated.” We can also reveal that security services have been working closely with Yard detectives because of the highly sensitive nature of the allegations.

The Sunday Express understands police seized video footage and photographs of an alleged sex party from a well-known paedophile last year.

Mr Ash claims officers have footage which shows a senior male MP in the same frame as him, although no abuse takes place on camera. He said he is speaking out now because he is frustrated by the lack of action after being interviewed for 70 hours by the Met Police’s Paedophile Unit.

He says he was abused by the male MP on another occasion too. He said: “I remember being filmed with this MP, who was abusing me in a garage of a very prominent building behind a Rolls-Royce.

“Another politician turned up with a video camera but the man abusing me just smirked and joked, ‘OK, OK, I’ll vote any way you want’ as if he was being blackmailed. What I want to know is why they haven’t arrested him yet if they have this evidence.“All I want is justice and for the truth to come out because these people have been protected for far too long.”

Mr Ash said two Met officers called at his home in Yorkshire last May.

Interviews were conducted mainly at a safe house in Bridlington, East Yorkshire, but also in London. “The interviews were usually carried out in blocks of three, normally every Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday.

“On at least two occasions there were two other officers present that I didn’t recognise. They didn’t ask me a thing, they just scribbled notes.

“I asked who they were but all I was told was that they were from ‘upstairs’. It was clear from the tone that they were intelligence officers.

“They had obviously been made aware of the high-profile names and the sensitive information I had given police.”

Dutch intelligence officers attended at least one interview because Andrew told of being trafficked to Amsterdam on a number of occasions to be abused by a group of paedophiles including convicted child killer Sidney Cooke.

He claims Cooke, now 84, made him film the paedophile abusing another young boy on video. It is feared Cooke may have abused and killed young boys in the Netherlands.

Mr Ash also told police he was abused by a big-name celebrity.

He said: “This particular person was able to get youngsters into glitzy nightclubs in the West End. After one evening he invited me and a young girl back to his house where he made us have sex before joining in.”

Mr Ash is being helped by anti-abuse campaigners Bill Maloney and Chris Fay.

Mr Fay said: “The police have spent a good deal of time with him, listening to his evidence, and now potentially have compelling information that Andrew was at one of these parties with at least one prominent former MP.

“He hopes by speaking out, other victims may come forward.”

This appalling account of VIP abuse is just the tip of the iceberg.

When we finally discover the full extent of just how wide the filthy paedo ring operating in this country really is, it may well mean the end of Britain as we know it.

The clock is ticking on Britain’s dirty secrets.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/453381/Female-MP-abused-boy-in-care

A List Of The 19 Female MPs Elected in 1979:

Josephine Richardson (Labour) 1923-1994 (deceased) MP from 1974 to 1994

Margaret Thatcher (Conservative) 1925–2013 (deceased) MP from 1959 to 1992

Sheila Faith (Conservative) born 1928  (retired) MP from 1979 to 1983

Jill Knight (Conservative) born 1924 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Knight of Collingtree) MP from 1966 to 1987

Sheila Wright (Labour) 1925-2013 (deceased) MP from 1979 to 1983

Ann Taylor (Labour) born 1947 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Taylor of Bolton) MP from 1974 to 1983 and 1987 to 2005

Gwyneth Dunwoody (Labour) 1930-2008 (deceased) MP from 1966 to 1970 and 1974 to 2008

Joan Lester (Labour) 1931-1998 (deceased after serving in House Of Lords as Baroness Lester of Eccles) MP frpm 1966 to 1983 and 1987 to 1997

Sally Oppenheim (Conservative) born 1930 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Oppenheim-Barnes of Gloucester) MP from 1970 to 1987

Shirley Summerskill (Labour) born 1931 (retired) MP from 1964 to 1983

Judith Hart (Labour) 1924-1991 (deceased after serving in House Of Lords as Baroness Hart of South Lanark) MP from 1959 to 1987

Elaine Kellet-Bowman (Conservative) born 1924 (retired) MP from 1970 to 1997

Janet Fookes (Conservative) born 1936 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Fookes of Plymouth) MP from 1970 to 1997

Peggy Fenner (Conservative) born 1922 (retired) MP from 1970 to 1974 and 1979 to 1997

Joan Maynard (Labour) 1921-1998 (deceased) MP from 1974 to 1987

Dr. Oonagh McDonald (Labour) born 1938 (retired) MP from 1976 to 1987

Lynda Chalker (Conservative) born 1942 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Chalker of Wallasey) MP from 1974 to 1992

Betty Boothroyd (Labour) born 1929 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Boothroyd of Sandwell)  MP from 1973 to 2000

Renee Short (Labour) 1919-2003 (deceased) MP from 1964 to 1987

A List Of The 23 Female MPs Elected in 1983:

Josephine Richardson (Labour) 1923-1994 (deceased) MP from 1974 to 1994

Elizabeth Peacock (Conservative) born 1937 (retired) MP from 1983 to 1997

Jill Knight (Conservative) born 1924 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Knight of Collingtree) MP from 1966 to 1987

Clare Short (Labour) born 1946 (retired 2010) MP from 1983 to 2005

Marion Roe (Conservative) born 1936 (retired 2005)  MP from 1983 to 2005

Judith Hart (Labour) 1924-1991 (deceased after serving in House Of Lords as Baroness Hart of South Lanark) MP from 1959 to 1987

Lady Ann Winterton (Conservative) born 1941 (retired  2010) MP from 1983 to 2010

Gwyneth Dunwoody (Labour) 1930- 2008 (deceased) MP from 1966 to 1970 and 1974 to 2008

Margaret Beckett (Labour) born 1943 (currently MP) MP from 1974 to 1979 and 1983 to present

Edwina Currie (Conservative) born 1946 (retired 1997) MP from 1983 to 1997

Margaret Thatcher (Conservative) 1925–2013 (deceased) MP from 1959 to 1992

Sally Oppenheim (Conservative) born 1930 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Oppenheim-Barnes of Gloucester) MP from 1970 to 1987

Elaine Kellet-Bowman (Conservative) born 1924 (retired) MP from 1970 to 1997

Peggy Fenner (Conservative) born 1922 (retired) MP from 1970 to 1974 and 1979 to 1997

Angela Rumbold (Conservative) 1932-2010 (deceased) First elected in 1982 by-election then MP from 1983 to 1997

Harriet Harman (Labour) born 1950 (currently MP for Peckham) first elected MP in by-election 1982 to present

Janet Fookes (Conservative) born 1936 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Fookes of Plymouth) MP from 1970 to 1997

Anna McCurley (Conservative) born 1943 (retired 1987) MP from 1983 to 1987

Joan Maynard (Labour) 1921-1998 (deceased) MP from 1974 to 1987

Dr. Oonagh McDonald (Labour) born 1938 (retired) MP from 1976 to 1987

Lynda Chalker (Conservative) born 1942 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Chalker of Wallasey) MP from 1974 to 1992

Betty Boothroyd (Labour) born 1929 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Boothroyd of Sandwell) MP from 1973 to 2000

Renee Short (Labour) 1919-2003 (deceased) MP from 1964 to 1987

Jewess Harriet Harman in butterfly brooch.

Jewess Harriet Harman QC MP in butterfly brooch.

The most obvious suspect is Harriet Harman QC MP of the Paedophile Information Exchange but we need more clues than we have already. However Harriet Harman is still an MP. Here’s an article on the evil Harriet Harman:

https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/04/02/harriet-harman-in-butterfly-brooch/

However if the accused is really an ex-MP and is still alive the 17 suspects are:

Sheila Faith (Conservative) born 1928  (retired) MP from 1979 to 1983

Jill Knight (Conservative) born 1924 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Knight of Collingtree) MP from 1966 to 1987

Ann Taylor (Labour) born 1947 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Taylor of Bolton) MP from 1974 to 1983 and 1987 to 2005

Sally Oppenheim (Conservative) born 1930 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Oppenheim-Barnes of Gloucester) MP from 1970 to 1987

Shirley Summerskill (Labour) born 1931 (retired) MP from 1964 to 1983

Elaine Kellet-Bowman (Conservative) born 1924 (retired) MP from 1970 to 1997

Janet Fookes (Conservative) born 1936 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Fookes of Plymouth) MP from 1970 to 1997

Peggy Fenner (Conservative) born 1922 (retired) MP from 1970 to 1974 and 1979 to 1997

Dr. Oonagh McDonald (Labour) born 1938 (retired) MP from 1976 to 1987

Lynda Chalker (Conservative) born 1942 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Chalker of Wallasey) MP from 1974 to 1992

Betty Boothroyd (Labour) born 1929 (now in House Of Lords as Baroness Boothroyd of Sandwell)  MP from 1973 to 2000

Elizabeth Peacock (Conservative) born 1937 (retired) MP from 1983 to 1997

Clare Short (Labour) born 1946 (retired 2010) MP from 1983 to 2005

Marion Roe (Conservative) born 1936 (retired 2005)  MP from 1983 to 2005

Lady Ann Winterton (Conservative) born 1941 (retired  2010) MP from 1983 to 2010

Edwina Currie (Conservative) born 1946 (retired 1997) MP from 1983 to 1997

Anna McCurley (Conservative) born 1943 (retired 1987) MP from 1983 to 1987

Justice Denied Blog Names Their Five Top Suspects:

The Justice Denied blog has named their five top suspects as:

1. Edwina Currie – an MP at the time, now retired and not deceased.Edwina Currie appointed Savile to run a taskforce in charge of Broadmoor mental hospital in the 1980s, where he is accused of sexually assaulting patients

2. Margaret Thatcher – an MP at the time (actually Prime Minister), now retired and deceased.

3. Virginia Bottomley –  not an MP until 1984, now retired and not deceased. Her husband Peter Bottomley is named on the Elm Guest House paedophile VIP party list.

4. Harriet Harman – an MP at the time, not retired and not deceased.Major player in the Paedophile Information Exchange.

5. Ann Winterton – an MP at the time, now retired and not deceased.

If the abuse happened in 1982 or 1983, as it seems, then the only two out of the five fitting the description ( MP at the time, now retired and not deceased) would be Edwina Currie and Ann Winterton. Read more from Justice Denied here:

http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/so-who-is-woman-mp-who-abused-mr-ash.html

BBC Climate Panel 26 January 2006

pic005

In 2006 the BBC hosted a climate-change seminar to decide on its reporting of alleged climate-change. The BBC has spent tens of thousands of pounds trying to keep secret who attended this seminar. The publicly funded broadcaster fought off requests for the list of people who attended under Freedom of Information (FOI) laws.

This surreal story is only partly about climate change: the disclosure raises questions about the evidence submitted to the information tribunal by the BBC and Helen Boaden – it’s Director of News who stepped down in 2012.

The case also highlights once again the BBC’s corporate strategy of using an FOI derogation, or legal “opt-out” clause, to withhold a wide range of material from citizens who wish to know whether the BBC is fulfilling its statutory obligations for impartiality under its Royal Charter.

And it raises further questions about the effectiveness of the BBC Trust. The trust, which replaced the Board of Governors, was created with a mission: an “unprecedented obligation to openness and transparency”.

pic005

A ‘brainstorm’ that became historic

The seminar whose attendees the Beeb sought to keep secret was founded by three organisation. In 2004, the International Broadcasting Trust – a lobby group funded by a number of charities, including many involved in campaigning on climate change – devised the first in a series of seminars on development issues, where the lobbyists could address broadcasters.

One event on 26 January 2006 was a “brainstorm”, in the IBT’s own words, “focusing on climate change and its impact on development”. The BBC sent 30 senior staff, and 30 outsiders were invited. The event was also organised by CMEP, its second parent – a now dormant or defunct outfit operated by BBC reporter Roger Harrabin and climate activist Dr Joe Smith, and at one time funded by the Tyndall Centre at the University of East Anglia (UEA) and various pressure groups.

Harrabin later explained that the BBC’s head of news in the 1990s, Tony Hall, had invited him “to devise meetings with politicians, business people, think tanks, academics from many universities and specialists (science, technology, economic and social sciences, and history), and policy experts and field workers from NGOs – particularly from the developing world”.

The third parent of the seminar was the BBC.

 The following year ( 2007) a BBC Trust report  on impartiality cited the 2006 seminar and said it had settled the argument once and for all  (as far as the BBC was concerned) on climate change.

pic005

Filmmaker John Bridcut wrote:

The BBC has held a high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts [our emphasis] and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus [on anthropogenic climate change].

The BBC is under a statutory obligation to remain impartial, so this gave the “brainstorm” a historic significance.

An independent blogger, Tony Newbery, was struck by the difference between contemporary evidence that the seminar was educational and composed largely of activists (as confirmed by Harrabin) and the BBC Trust’s insistence that it was a sober scientific presentation that could justify a historic policy change.

Fresh light was shed on Harrabin’s CMEP in 2010, in the second batch of Climategate emails. An email from Mike Hulme, the director of the Tyndall Centre for Climatic Change Research at UEA,complained about a BBC Radio 4 item broadcast in February 2002. The broadcast featured global-warming sceptic Professor Philip Stott and Sir John Houghton, who was a Met Office chief and the editor of the first three IPCC reports on climate change. Houghton came off worst, and an infuriated Hulme wrote:

Did anyone hear Stott vs Houghton on Today, Radio 4 this morning? Woeful stuff really. This is one reason why Tyndall is sponsoring the Cambridge Media/Environment Programme to starve this type of reporting at source.

Newbery filed his FOI request for the seminar’s attendees to the BBC in 2007 and was denied the information, leading to a second round of information tribunal hearings in November 2012. The cross-examination of the BBC’s Helen Boaden in a court room was reported here.

The BBC is regarded as a public authority by the Freedom of Information Act 2000, but it can withhold information held “for the purposes of journalism”.

In an earlier and separate FOI case against the BBC, Supreme Court Judge Neuberger argued the opt-out should be interpreted narrowly – otherwise the BBC could withhold information about “cleaning the board room floor” using the journalism get-out clause – an obvious absurdity.

In the Newbery case, the BBC maintained that archival material on the seminar could not be found, but also it should not be found: as a back-up argument it argued that the seminar was held under the Chatham House Rule – an agreement of etiquette, rather than a law, to prevent quotes being attributed to particular speakers at a meeting – information that Newbery had never asked for.

In November 2012 the tribunal ruled against Newbery and for the BBC.

pic005

Case closed? Think again

However science writer Maurizio Morabito has unearthed the list of attendees.

It confirms the accuracy of Harrabin’s description of the composition of the invitees, with most coming from industry, think tanks and NGOs. And as suspected, climate campaigners Greenpeace are present, while actual scientific experts are thin on the ground: not one attendee deals with attribution science, the physics of global warming. These are scarcely “some of the best scientific experts”, whose input could justify a historic abandonment of the BBC’s famous impartiality.

Intriguingly, Tony Newbery had been supplied with a later version of this document, he tells us – but with the attendee list stripped out.

How much of the Public's license fee did the BBC spend on lawyers to cover up this list of attendees at their Climate Panel in 2006?

How much of the Public’s license fee did the BBC spend on lawyers to cover up this list of attendees at their Climate Panel in 2006?

The dramatic appearance of the list raises many questions. Did the BBC know the information was publicly available? If so, why were corporation lawyers spending thousands of pounds to keep a public document “secret”? (FOI requests for public information typically state, quite simply, “this information is public”.)

Questions abound  online about the ability of the BBC Trust to maintain its duty to transparency. The BBC’s legal strategy entails the indiscriminate application of its FOI derogation “for the purposes of journalism” – this effectively rewrites the 2000 Act, and redefines the BBC as a private body. The trust is surely aware of this; it has a small mountain of correspondence on the subject. But it has yet to enquire, let alone pronounce on whether this is healthy – or legal.

All the names on the revealed seminar list

Here’s the list – according to the FOI Act reply.

January 26th 2006, BBC Television Centre, London

Specialists:
Robert May, Oxford University and Imperial College London
Mike Hulme, Director, Tyndall Centre, UEA
Blake Lee-Harwood, Head of Campaigns, Greenpeace
Dorthe Dahl-Jensen, Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen
Michael Bravo, Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge
Andrew Dlugolecki, Insurance industry consultant
Trevor Evans, US Embassy
Colin Challen MP, Chair, All Party Group on Climate Change
Anuradha Vittachi, Director, Oneworld.net
Andrew Simms, Policy Director, New Economics Foundation
Claire Foster, Church of England
Saleemul Huq, IIED
Poshendra Satyal Pravat, Open University
Li Moxuan, Climate campaigner, Greenpeace China
Tadesse Dadi, Tearfund Ethiopia
Iain Wright, CO2 Project Manager, BP International
Ashok Sinha, Stop Climate Chaos
Andy Atkins, Advocacy Director, Tearfund
Matthew Farrow, CBI
Rafael Hidalgo, TV/multimedia producer
Cheryl Campbell, Executive Director, Television for the Environment
Kevin McCullough, Director, Npower Renewables
Richard D North, Institute of Economic Affairs
Steve Widdicombe, Plymouth Marine Labs
Joe Smith, The Open University
Mark Galloway, Director, IBT
Anita Neville, E3G
Eleni Andreadis, Harvard University
Tim Jackson, Surrey University
John Ashton, Director E3G
BBC attendees:
Jana Bennett, Director of Television
Sacha Baveystock, Executive Producer, Science
Helen Boaden, Director of News
Andrew Lane, Manager, Weather, TV News
Dominic Vallely, Executive Editor, Entertainment
Emma Swain, Commissioning Editor, Specialist Factual
Fergal Keane, (Chair), Foreign Affairs Correspondent
Fran Unsworth, Head of Newsgathering
George Entwistle, Head of TV Current Affairs
Glenwyn Benson, Controller, Factual TV
John Lynch, Creative Director, Specialist Factual
Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy
Jon Williams, TV Editor Newsgathering
Karen O’Connor, Editor, This World, Current Affairs
Catriona McKenzie, Tightrope Pictures
Liz Molyneux, Editorial Executive, Factual Commissioning
Matt Morris, Head of News, Radio Five Live
Neil Nightingale, Head of Natural History Unit
Peter Horrocks, Head of Television News
Peter Rippon, Duty Editor, World at One/PM/The World this Weekend
Phil Harding, Director, English Networks & Nations
Steve Mitchell, Head Of Radio News
Sue Inglish, Head Of Political Programmes

Fran Unsworth,Head of Newsgathering
Pete Clifton, Head of News Interactive
Liz Cleaver, Controller Learning
Keith Scholey, Head of Specialist Factual
Sarah Brandist, Head of Development, Drama Commissioning
Michael Hastings, Head of Corporate Social Responsibility
Lorna Walsh, BBC TV
Roger Harrabin, Today Programme

The Ruling Stones: The Jewish Ethnic Activism of Richard Stone

Written By Tobias Langdon

Who is England’s patron saint? If you think it’s St George, you’re behind the times. In fact, it’s the martyr St Stephen. But not the Stephen stoned to death in Palestine 2,000 years ago. No, the Stephen stabbed to death by Whites at a bus-stop in London in 1993. He was a young Black male, but that didn’t make his death unusual or worthy of special attention.

Black power: St Stephen Lawrence

Black power: St Stephen Lawrence

It wasn’t until 2012, after huge expense by the London Metropolitan police and the abolition of the centuries-old principle of double jeopardy, that two White men were found guilty of the murder and given long jail sentences. Cries of joy greeted the conviction in all sections of the media, particularly at The Guardian and BBC. But further suspects are still free and Doreen Lawrence, mother of the murder victim, wants to see more millions spent on pursuing and convicting them.

Doreen has become a familiar and highly respected figure in the UK. She has recently been elevated to the House of Lords, where she will sit as Baroness Lawrence and continue to promote the martyr cult. She was prominent at the twentieth-year commemoration of her son’s murder, which was attended by the leaders of all three main political parties. And you may have seen her helping to carry the flag at the 2012 London Olympics. It was a further honour in recognition of her long campaign for justice, equality and tolerance in the UK.

The image of an aspiring young Black architect slaughtered by thuggish White racists continues to be reinforced through every medium of news, art and commentary. Doreen has often appeared in the media to criticize Britain for failing to live up to the high standards she demands of it as a British Jamaican. And the government listens. Here she is in the closing days of 2012 with fellow activist Dr Richard Stone, who will be the main focus of this essay:

Advertisement



Coalition responds to Doreen Lawrence over race equality

David Cameron and Nick Clegg have moved to head off an embarrassing row with race equality campaigners after the Guardian highlighted an uncompromising attack on the coalition [between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats] by the mother of the murdered black teenager Stephen Lawrence. It has emerged that 24 hours after Doreen Lawrence castigated ministers, accusing them of backtracking on the government’s commitment to equalities, the prime minister and deputy prime minister penned a joint reply from Downing Street aiming to reassure her and to bolster the government’s credentials.

The timing of the letter is significant, as Lawrence and Richard Stone, an adviser to the Macpherson inquiry into Stephen’s death, had written to Cameron and Clegg – and Ed Miliband [leader of the Labour Party] – a month earlier outlining concerns about government equality policies. Lawrence said her letter had been ignored, adding that improvements in equalities prompted by the Macpherson inquiry were being imperilled and race no longer appeared to be on the agenda. …

In their reply to Lawrence, Cameron and Clegg write: “We recognise how important it is to ensure the legacy of Stephen’s murder and Lord Macpherson’s report will never be lost.” … Lawrence was not available for comment, but Stone, co-signatory to her letter, said he had hoped for a more positive response. “We sent our letter a month ago. It is good to have a reply from the prime minister and deputy prime minister. But it is written very carefully. There is nothing concrete here.” (Coalition responds to Doreen Lawrence over race equality, The Guardian, 23rd December 2012)

So who is Richard Stone, the man playing such a prominent role in calling the government to account? Thanks to the media’s untiring work, Stephen and Doreen Lawrence are now familiar to millions of ordinary Britons, but very few of them would recognize the name or features of Richard Stone. This is a pity, because he is an interesting man. Here is the biography at his personal website:

Dr Richard Stone

Dr Richard Stone

Dr Richard Stone is a medical doctor who also has extensive experience working against social exclusion, homelessness, and in the grant-making charitable sector. He is a leading expert in social cohesion, anti-racism, and Islamophopia, and is a regular speaker around Europe at conferences on these topics. Richard was a panel member of the 1997/99 Home Office inquiry into the murder of Stephen Lawrence. He served as a Cabinet Advisor to the Mayor of London, President of the Jewish Council for Racial Equality, and spent 5 years on the Runnymede “Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia”, from 2000 to 2004 as chair. He has also been a trustee and vice-Chair of the Runnymede Trust [an “anti-racist” organization founded by Jews] and a Council and Board member of Liberty [the British equivalent of the ACLU]. His work bringing together British Jews and Muslims includes being a founding trustee of the Maimonides Foundation in 1985, and of Alif-Aleph UK in 2003 [alif and aleph are the initial letters of the Arabic and Hebrew alphabets] … In 2010 he was awarded an OBE [Order of the British Empire] for “public and voluntary” service. (See Biography at Dr Stone’s website)

Identity on the Agenda

Despite his presidency of the Jewish Council for Racial Equality, Dr Stone claims to self-identify as a member of the White British majority:

Enough of this anger-creating suppression of the hopes and opportunities of people from black backgrounds. My message to white (mainly) men (like me), who have the power to discriminate is this: just stop doing it. (Where are the black police officers?, Dr Richard Stone, The Guardian, 4th January, 2012)

In Britain, the vast majority of power is wielded by middle-aged, middle-class white men – like Dr Stone. (An Independent Commentary to Mark the 10th Anniversary of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry (2009), Dr Richard Stone, pg. 17)

I don’t know whether Dr Stone also self-identifies as self-righteous, but that is a label some might be inclined to give him. They might even add that he is self-important and arrogant too. Dr Stone seems to enjoy issuing orders and demands on behalf of ethnic and religious minorities. For further examples, let’s examine his behaviour at the Macpherson Inquiry. This was the official inquiry set up by the New Labour government into the police failures surrounding the murder of Stephen Lawrence. What role did he have there? It’s described at the website of the organization ROTA (Race On The Agenda), where Dr Stone is a patron with the British-Nigerian Lord Victor Adebowale, CBE (Commander of the British Empire). Here is part of Dr Stone’s biography:

Dr Stone was a panel member of the “Stephen Lawrence Inquiry” into racism in policing (1997/99) as Adviser to the judge Sir William Macpherson. He was also on the panel of the 2003/04 NHS “David Bennett Inquiry” into the death of a Black [sic] patient during restraint in the white-staffed [sic] medium secure psychiatry unit in Norwich. (See the biography at ROTA’s website)

Despite their advisory capacity and lack of specialized legal training, Stone and the other panel members, like the dedicated self-publicist John Sentamu, a British-Ugandan bishop, would often take the role of prosecuting counsel during the inquiry:

Bishop John Sentamu dives for publicity

Bishop John Sentamu dives for publicity

In a criminal court the accused is not there so that he can be compelled to confess his crimes; still less so that he can confess his sins; much less again so that he can disclose the sins of his subordinates. English law expelled those abhorrent ideas long ago. But confession was the spirit of much of the Macpherson proceedings, partly due to the effect of the “truth and reconciliation” proceedings in post-apartheid South Africa. This was especially clear in the interruption by one of Sir William’s three advisers, Dr Richard Stone, of [the Metropolitan Police Commissioner] Sir Paul Condon’s evidence in Part II of the inquiry. ‘It seems to me, Sir Paul,’ he said, ‘that the door is open. It is like when Winnie Mandela was challenged in the Truth Commission in South Africa by Desmond Tutu to acknowledge that she had done wrong …’ Sir Paul might well have been taken aback by his being put in the same category as a convicted kidnapper, and his relationship to racist attitudes and conduct in the Metropolitan Police in the same category as Winnie Mandela’s relationship to the Mandela United Football Club and the murderers of Stompie Seipei. Dr Stone continued: ‘She just did it and suddenly a whole burden of weight, of sort of challenge and friction melted away … I say to you now, just say, “Yes, I acknowledge institutional racism in the police” … Could you do that today?’ (Please see here, pg. 15)

That quotation is taken from a very interesting study of the Macpherson Inquiry called Racist Murder and Pressure Group Politics (2000) by Norman Dennis, George Erdos and Ahmed Al-Shahi, who are English, Hungarian and Kurdish, respectively. They all also appear to be left-wing or liberal in the traditional sense. I can recommend their study highly to anyone who wants an alternative perspective on the Macpherson Inquiry – “alternative,” that is, to the perspective offered by all respectable opinion in the UK. Recall that, in the Guardian extract above, the prime minister and his deputy referred respectfully to the “legacy” of “Lord Macpherson’s report,” as though it were some highly valuable contribution to British public life.

Uproar from the Gallery

In fact, the inquiry overseen by Lord Macpherson seems to have been a cross between a Stalinist show-trial and a hearing by the Spanish Inquisition, with a garnish of kangaroo-court and a sprinkling of lynch-mob. Here is Dr Stone again, sniffing hard for heresy:

‘You have heard me say …’, Sir Paul said in the course of being interrogated. But he was interrupted by Dr Richard Stone. ‘You have told us ten times you are not in denial … I say to you now, just say, “Yes, I acknowledge institutional racism in the police …”’

‘It was an approach that pleased the public gallery’, writes Cathcart [former deputy editor of the Independent on Sunday and author of The Case of Stephen Lawrence (1999)], ‘and the pressure on the Commissioner was intense. Sir William chipped in: “You have been given the challenge, or the question, Sir Paul. What is your answer?”’

His answer was that it would be very easy to please the panel. It would be easy to please the people in the public gallery — ‘this audience’, as he called them. It would be easy, also, to gain the favour of ‘superficial media coverage’. But he would not do what would please any of them, because it would be ‘dishonest’. Over the uproar from the gallery, Sir William called for quiet and moved the discussion into other areas.

Sir Paul’s stand attracted critical headlines. But whose judgement, freed from the enthusiasm of a righteous crowd, would conclude that Sir Paul’s opinion, reasoning, and sense of reality and responsibility were inferior to those expressed in the ‘uproar from the gallery’ or … to the semi-religious appeal of Dr Stone? (Op. cit., ch. 3, “The Crowd in Hannibal House,” pg. 28)

Why was there uproar from the public gallery? Because it was full of anti-racism activists from groups like the Nation of Islam, who applauded witnesses whom they liked, such as Doreen Lawrence, and jeered witnesses whom they did not like, such as the police:

During the police evidence, and particularly when [the radical barrister Michael] Mansfield was in action, laughter and groans would greet answers from police officers. This would not normally be allowed in a court of law. In order to protect Inspector Groves from the gallery crowd (and, though he perhaps did not think of it in this way, from the crowd influences that could be affecting the performances of all the witnesses, all the barristers and the judgement of all the assessors) counsel for the MPS [Metropolitan Police Service], Jeremy Gompertz QC [Queen’s Counsel], rose to complain about ‘constant interruption and background noise’ from the gallery.

Though he said that his warning was ‘crystal clear’, Sir William’s intervention could scarcely be described as full-hearted. If the laughing did not stop, he said, he would clear the gallery. He reminded Mansfield that he was not addressing a jury. Inspector Groves did not need to be ‘pilloried’ — (slight pause) — ‘unnecessarily’. The pillory in its literal sense is essentially an instrument of control by a crowd. What had being figuratively ‘pilloried’, necessarily or not, to do with ascertaining the facts of the case? (Ibid., pg. 25)

Reality Shmeality

But there was no need to ascertain the facts of the case, because they were known well in advance: both the murder of Stephen Lawrence and the failure to jail the murder-gang were the result of “an endemic and universal English racism which has severe consequences generally in the lives of members of ethnic minorities” (ch. 2, “The Methods of Inquiry used by Macpherson,” pg. 12). The role of Doreen Lawrence at the inquiry was to describe the racism of British society; the role of the police was to admit their complicity in it. The role of Judge Macpherson, Dr Richard Stone, Bishop Sentamu et al was to assist the former against the latter. The methods they employed might, in another context, be taken as deliberately satirical or absurdist: “To question whether the murder of Stephen Lawrence was a purely racist crime was, in itself, adduced as evidence of racism” (Summary, pg. xix).

Distance was no obstacle to the inquiry’s hunt for the evil and injustice perpetrated by Whites: inter alia, the inquiry drew on the Rodney King case in Los Angeles, thousands of miles away, though the relevance there might seem “indirect,” at best (ch. 4, “Mr and Mrs Lawrence’s Treatment at the Hospital as Evidence of Police Racism,” pg. 34). Any negative interpretation of police behaviour by a Minority Ethnic had to be accepted; any attempt to deny police racism was further proof of police racism.

But the sceptical authors of Racist Murder and Pressure Group Politics conclude that:

The Macpherson report has had a detrimental impact on policing and crime, particularly in London. Police morale has been undermined. Certain procedures which impact disproportionately on ethnic groups, like stop and search, have been scaled down. The crime rate has risen. Nevertheless, the Macpherson report has been received with almost uncritical approval by pundits, politicians and academics. It is still routinely described as having ‘proved’ that the police and British society are racist. (Summary, pg. xx)

Elsewhere, the authors point out that the rise in the crime rate, “the first in six years, was largely due to increases in two police areas, London and the West Midlands, the areas with the highest concentrations of ethnic minorities. In London the increase was nine per cent, in the West Midlands 16 per cent” (ch. 3, “The Crowd in Hannibal House,” pg. 29). In other words, there have been more murders of young Black males as a result of the Macpherson Inquiry, not fewer. There have also been more murders of individuals from other, less important groups. And more rapes and other crimes of violence. Nor has the report helped the cause of equality: the police now devote more resources and attention to cases in which they can prove their devotion to fighting White racism.

Unpunished Murder

Compare the racist murder of Richard Everitt in London in 1994, a year after the murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993. This was not a highly unusual crime, because it involved violence by a gang of Minority Ethnics against a White. Only one member of the fifteen-strong Bengali-British gang was jailed and he is now free again. In the Stephen Lawrence case, the Metropolitan Police have promised “to go on looking ‘forever’ for evidence that would convict the murderers” (Preface, pg. xv). They have made no such promise about Richard Everitt. Nor have “resources in money and specialist support” been made “available on a scale more often seen in anti-terrorist investigations than a civil murder,” as they were for Stephen Lawrence (Ibid., pg xiv).

Many other non-Whites are still at liberty after the brutal murders of British Whites: Charlene Downes and Gavin Hopley are merely two examples. But those murders have not received the prolonged attention of the media, nor provoked harsh criticism of the police and served as damning indictments of British society. The murder of Stephen Lawrence is quite different in all respects. Of the many people responsible for elevating Stephen Lawrence to his role as England’s new patron saint, no-one has worked harder or more effectively than Doreen Lawrence and her good friend Dr Richard Stone. I don’t question Doreen Lawrence’s motives, though I do question her intelligence, common sense and ability to see the harmful effects of her campaign on the Black community, among others.

Thorny Issues

I do, however, question the motives of Dr Richard Stone. It may be cynical of me, but I have detected little benevolence or philanthropy in Dr Stone when I have seen or heard him appear in the media. He strikes me, in fact, as cold, manipulative and even sinister. He also strikes me as lacking in honesty. In his self-aggrandizing Independent Commentary to Mark the 10th Anniversary of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry (2009), he lamented the way in which:

[during] the past decade, the issue of ‘institutional racism’ seemed to slip down the agenda. Maybe some of those in leadership positions sighed with relief that this thorny issue did not have to be dealt with. It could perhaps be left for the next Commissioner, the next Chief Constable, or the next government Minister. But every year, with damaging regularity, racism seems to explode back on to the police agenda. This causes damage to police and community relations, but also to the reputation of the very leaders who had hoped the issue had gone away. (Op. cit., pg. 7)

But who has worked harder than Dr Stone to make racism a “thorny” issue? Who has been more eager to help racism “explode” regularly on the police agenda? And who has been more willing to issue self-righteous pronunciations on the topic? Here is another extract from his Independent Commentary:

Racism is not in the heads of BME [Black and Minority Ethnic] people, just as Islamophobia and anti-semitism are not in the heads of Muslims or Jews. There is not much that BME people can do to change the racism exhibited by white people, any more than Muslims can do much to change the Islamophobia of non-Muslims, or Jews the anti-antisemitism [sic] of non-Jews. The people who have to change are those outside who hold prejudices and stereotypes in their heads which lead them “unwittingly” or to be frank, ‘wittingly’ to disadvantage people from these communities. (Op. cit., pg. 17 – all anomalies of punctuation are in the original)

To be frank, such an important topic deserved better proof-reading. It is also ludicrous to claim that all beliefs held by “BME people” about the motives and behaviour of Whites must automatically be correct. In making this claim, Dr Stone is not assisting the cause of objective analysis and impartial justice. He is, however, assisting the cause of BME grievance, paranoia and self-pity.

Saints and Demons

But why is he doing this? What are his motives for encouraging antagonism between BME people and White society? Why does he wish to demonize ordinary Whites and elevate BME people to infallible sainthood? I would suggest that he is, unwittingly or otherwise, following an ethnocentric agenda and seeking to advance the interests of his own ethno/religious group. When Dr Stone self-identifies as a “middle-aged, middle-class White man,” I think he is being dishonest or disingenuous. In reality, he belongs to the Jewish elite, not to the White middle-class. He is the son of the Labour peer Lord Stone and a nephew of the Conservative peer Lord Ashdown.

I don’t believe that Dr Richard Stone truly regrets the murder of Stephen Lawrence. Given the chance to travel back in time, would he try to prevent it? I don’t think he would. The Lawrence murder has been far too useful as an ideological weapon against ordinary Whites. Dr Richard Stone, son of a Labour peer, nephew of a Conservative peer, has been working on behalf not of Minority Ethnics but of the hostile elite – the Ruling Stones of the UK who want to dispossess the historic majority and secure their own power and profit in perpetuity. Lord Glasman broke ranks from that elite and pointed out its treachery and lies on immigration. He was heavily criticized and forced into silence.

By contrast, Dr Stone continues to spout his self-righteous, self-serving gas about “an endemic and universal English racism which has severe consequences generally in the lives of members of ethnic minorities.” He is, in fact, one of Britain’s most dedicated and hard-working hate-mongers:

One of the easiest ways to unite people is to mobilise their hatred for others. It is infinitely more difficult to unite them on the basis of constructive proposals. This unity of having an enemy in common gives rise to various kinds of sociological formation. In the short-term there is the specialised and transitory hatred of ‘the lynch mob’. There is the longer-term unity of hating communists, or hating capitalists, or hating Protestants, or hating Catholics, or hating blacks, or ‘hating whitey’. (Racist Murder and Pressure Group Politics, 2000, pg. 21)

“Hating whitey” is what Dr Stone specializes in. He is a card-carrying member of the UK’s hostile elite, bent on completely gutting the people and culture of traditional of the UK. His tireless work on behalf of Stephen Lawrence has not benefited Blacks or other minorities, but then it has never been intended to. Instead, it has been intended to incite hatred, grievance and discord. Why can’t Minority Ethnics get no satisfaction? Because the Ruling Stones don’t want them to. Using mass immigration and multi-racialism as weapons of mass destruction, they want to destroy the historic nation of Britain and enjoy power and profit here in perpetuity.

Britain’s message for the United States and all other Western nations is simple: Nomine mutato, de te fabula narratur – “With a change of name, the tale is told of you.” The same hostile, hate-filled elite are at work everywhere in the West, lying, cheating, betraying and using mass immigration to divide and destroy those who stand in their way.

Is There More To Crimestoppers Than Meets The Eye?

Is there more to Crimestoppers than meets the eye?

by thecolemanexperience

crimestoppersNick RossEsther Rantzen Jimmy SavileChildlineJill DandoDianaCrashCarSavileBBCDiana and CliffNews InternationalQueenMet PoliceHouseDolphin SquareBlairSavileCharlesSavileSavile Satan

The Crimestoppers organisation, seems, at first glance, to have very noble intentions.

It offers the opportunity to report crimes anonymously via a freephone telephone number and apparently helps the police with their work.

Could it be though, that as with so many other things in filthy Britain, Crimestoppers is not really as it appears to be?

Could it be that Crimestoppers is actually being used as a way of “gatekeeping” to filter out callers who may be reporting VIP criminality in the UK.

Take the example of a whistleblower or victim who wants to report child abuse but is too scared to contact the police directly.

Isn’t it probable they might call Crimestoppers, naively believing them to be impartial, and tell them all about the abuse they’ve suffered or witnessed?

They may even name important names and give detailed information in the hope that the perpetrators will be investigated and punished.

But as the phone goes down, who exactly gains access to all of that information?

We’re beginning to understand just how far the authorities are willing to go to cover-up their filthy activities as recent reports on VIP abuse scandals have revealed.

Could Crimestoppers be yet another layer of the cover-up?

If we look at who exactly runs Crimestoppers, it becomes even more mysterious.

Here are the names of some of the organisation’s Trustees:

1) Nick Ross

The former colleague of murdered presenter Jill Dando. He recently said he’d watch child-porn given half the chance. His wife Sarah Caplin, is a cousin of Esther Rantzen and a founding director of Childline. Suspicions have been raised that Childline is also a “gatekeeping” front organisation which is used to gather data on any child abuse reports that may involve VIPs. The Crimestoppers helpline conveniently stopped working at the time of the Jill Dando murder appeal.

2) Michael Ashcroft

The controversial Tory donor who pays no tax and has non-dom status. He has been described as ruthless and “not a man to cross”. Made a Baron by the Queen.

3) Peter Imbert

A former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police who was in charge from 1987-1993 and may have a lot of information about why child- abuse claims made between these dates were ignored. Made a Baron by the Queen.

4) Lord Waheed Ali

The first openly gay peer in Parliament and a wealthy entrepreneur. Owns a business, Shine Entertainment, with Rupert Murdoch’s daughter Elisabeth. Is a close friend of Tony Blair. Made a Baron by the Queen.

5) Peter Clarke

A former Metropolitan Royal protection officer in charge of guarding Princess Diana at the time of her death. Made a CBE by the Queen.

6) Sir Ronnie Flanagan

A former Chief Inspector of Constabulary. Was previously in charge of policing in Northern Ireland and Iraq. May have a lot of information about why child-abuse rings have been covered up.

Is Crimestoppers really a force for good?

Is Crimestoppers board of trustees really as it appears to be?

Is Crimestoppers really a force for good?

Is Crimestoppers in fact a “front” organisation with sinister ulterior motives?

Is Crimestoppers actually the very last number you should call if you want to report a crime?

We haven’t got a bloody clue.

Have you?

http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org/how-we-help/how-were-run-6512741/trustee-directors

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/the-curious-case-of-nick-ross-vip-child-abuse-filthy-comments-operation-yewtree-crimestoppers-and-the-death-of-jill-dando/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Imbert,_Baron_Imbert

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Shine_Limited

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Clarke_(police_officer)

http://opencharities.org/charities/1108687

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/jill-dando-unmanned-phones-and-the-mysterious-crimestoppers-mailbox-message/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/10/25/elm-guest-house-vip-child-abuse-perverted-royals-and-the-mysterious-death-of-princess-diana/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/barry-george-jill-dando-jimmy-savile-bbc-paedophiles-cliff-richard-alan-farthing-nick-ross-and-britains-dirty-secrets/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1368007/Founder-Childline-loses-job-ITV-amid-claims–BULLYING.html

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/who-is-michael-ashcroft/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/who-killed-jill-dando/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waheed_Alli,_Baron_Alli

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/23/why-are-the-police-covering-up-vip-child-abuse/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronnie_Flanagan

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/mysterious-sco19/

Join An Anti-Paedophile Campaign – Don’t Just Sit There!

A campaign organised by http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com that I am happy to join, endorse and publicise:

I ask everyone to send a copy of the ‘Open letter to David Cameron’ to their MP with a personal message.

Time to stop sitting at home tut tutting over Child rape and doing nothing – either you’re part of the solution or you’re part of the problem!

Send via this website: http://www.writetothem.com/

Send a message in your own words, or if you’re pressed for time you could use this draft email template below.

Please contact me or http://spotlightonabuse.wordpress.com blog when your MP has replied so their responses can be collated – any MP not assisting we want out at the next General Election.

Dear [my MP]

I call your attention to an open letter to David Cameron (below) which seeks to expose child abuse – both historic and current.

Whilst the letter is addressed to the Prime Minister, I look to all Members of Parliament to put pressure on the Cabinet and those in governmental office to demand investigation of all paedophiles – no matter of their standing in society or high office.

As my MP, I trust you to represent me on this matter and assist in exposing these horrendous crimes.

Do you support the request, summed up in the final paragraph of the open letter, for an independent inquiry and an immediate national police investigation?

Yours sincerely,

[your name]

Dear Mr. Cameron

On the very day, 24th October 2012, that Tom Watson asked you a PMQ re. the possibility of a link between a very large and highly organised paedophile ring and No 10, you made a number of quotes to the mainstream media.

You were in fact referring to the Savile/BBC/NHS scandal.

I made a note of some of those quotes :-

”The Government will do all it can do, other institutions must do what they can do, to make sure that we learn the lesson of this and it can NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN”

“Collusion should NEVER happen again ”

”The measure of how our society is, is how we treat its most vulnerable members”

There are no more vulnerable members of our society than children who have been taken in to care and then re-abused by the very people charged with the responsibility of caring for them and protecting them,and even worse then passing them on to be further abused by the very people who make the laws in this country and are expected to lead the way on the moral compass of that society.

I have no doubt that you have watched or been made aware of Channel 4′s Dispatches on 12th September and the allegations that arose from it regarding the role of senior politicians, the security services and the Crown Prosecution Service in covering up the horrendous abuse carried out by Cyril Smith over 5 decades.The overlap with Savile in terms of who knew about this abuse were laid bare.

I also have no doubt that you are aware that your colleagues in your party, Edwina Currie,Gyles Brandreth and Rod Richards have made very damning statements of how well known in Westminster circles it was that Peter Morrison was a dangerous paedophile, and yet his career was unaffected as he rose to be Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party, Mrs. Thatcher’s PPS in 1990 and her campaign manager that same year despite this knowledge having been around for many years.

I also have no doubt that you are aware of the statement of Tim Fortescue,Edward Heath’s Chief Whip from 1970-73, made public on Michael Cockerell’s BBC Documentary in 1995 called “Westminster’s Secret Service “.
Talking about the role of the chief whip, Fortescue said ” For anyone with any sense who was in trouble would come to the whips and tell them the truth ………….. it might be erm erm a scandal involving small boys ……….. we would do everything we can because we would store up brownie points ……. and if I mean, that sounds a pretty,pretty nasty reason, but it’s one of the reasons because if we could get a chap out of trouble then,he will do as we ask forever more.”

I don’t need to tell you of the revulsion I feel towards our political masters having worked with sexually abused children for over 30 years when I heard of how the Whips ran the Dirt Book system.

Your colleague, John Whittingdale, in his role as Chair of the Culture Committee,put himself forward as the moral voice of Parliament in the days following the exposure of Savile on national TV.
He lost no opportunity to appear on every news channel for many days to demand in effect the head of the Director General of the BBC.To date I have not heard you or Mr. Whittingdale demand such investigations in to your own institution despite the mountain of concern a small proportion of which I have referred to above.
Just on Savile alone without looking any further why was there no investigation along the lines of the many BBC inquiries in to why a British Prime Minister was so close to Savile that he allegedly attended 13 consecutive New Year’s Eve parties at Chequers and why the same Prime Minister allegedly persevered for many years in insisting that such an evil man long identified as having a deviant sexual history should get a knighthood,ignoring the advice of her closest advisers.
Why was the same man so welcome in Prince Charles’s properties despite the security services and similar vetting institutions having enough opportunity to tap in to the ” gossip” about Savile that was around for decades.

I would dearly like to go in to more detail but until the Metropolitan Police’s Operations Fernbridge and Fairbank are completed then for obvious reasons I can not.

In the aftermath of the Lord McAlpine affair I was extremely disappointed by the confusion you attempted to create by making accusations of gay witch-hunts. There is no connection whatsoever between being gay and being a paedophile.
This is about and only about people who abuse young children regardless of whether the abuser is heterosexual or gay.
There is no witch-hunt against gay people and it was most irresponsible for a Prime Minister to make such a statement when the abuse of our most vulnerable was the issue.

Now is the time for you to show the genuine commitment expected of a Prime Minister and do what you preached in those statements last October especially ” COLLUSION SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN ” and the demand that ALL institutions look inwards and examine their role in past collusion/cover up.

A starting point, and to give Parliament and Government any credibility in this heinous historical scandal, is for you to put all party political considerations aside and arrange an urgent meeting with Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband to draw up a blueprint as to how your own institution will be investigated along the lines of the way you and colleagues demanded that people be brought to account in the BBC or NHS for their failure to blow the whistle on Savile.

It would be better if you led such an exercise before it is forced upon you by public demand.
The latter will happen in time.

A starting point would be an immediate statement that there will be urgent cross-party talks to set up an independant body to examine who ordered these cover ups of people like Smith and Morrison, after ordering an immediate Police investigation by the National Crime Agency and ensuring that the latter body has sufficient resources to go wherever the evidence takes them and however long it takes. This must include the investigation of living politicians, police officers,civil servants,security services personnel etc.

Yours sincerely,
The source of Tom Watson’s PMQ

Who The Fuck Is Chris Spivey? Written by Matt Taylor

If you haven’t heard of Christopher D Spivey, well I don’t blame you. He’s the up and coming voice of the alternative media.
Chris Spivey [pronounced Spy-Vee] first hit the head lines as a feature writer for the Sovereign Independent Newspaper. He’s a tattoo artist and body piercer, a single father [whose 18 year old daughter has recently given birth to a healthy baby boy] and the man most likely to trigger a British revolution.
I first heard of him via Facebook in 2012, after the Jimmy Savile scandal broke. As far as I can gather he’s just a normal guy from Rochford in Essex. He’s got two Rottweiler dogs and he’s built like a brick-shit-house. He raised his daughter alone since she was 6 months old, and by all accounts he’s a loving father who cares about the world around him.
Like the vast majority of the population, I got my news from such places as BBC, Sky, Channel Four and ITV news programmes. I used to pride myself on having a comprehensive understanding of the world around me by investing in the 45 minutes of Newsnight and the hour of Channel Four news everyday. It was only when I got a Sky box that I discovered other news channels such as Press TV, RT and the news channels from India, France and China. Slowly but surely I found myself watching these channels in favour of the old, finding them more informative and balanced. Surprisingly, I got really upset when Press TV [the Iranian news channel] was taken off the airwaves by Ofcom.
I soon came to realise there was a choice in the type of news you could get. Either the mainstream [MSM] namely BBC, Sky, ITV or the alternative [AV] which is made up of a diverse set of blogs, newspapers, websites and programmes screened on obscure TV channels such as Showcase TV, Edge Media TV and Paradigm Shift TV.
Chris Spivey’s articles stuck out as a high-light and my view of the world has been changed irreversibly ever since.
I was once a Royal Military Policeman who pledged an oath of allegiance to the Queen of England. I joined the Army ready to kill and be killed for my country. Kill and be killed on behalf of who I thought then was a great and illustrious Queen.
But reading Monsters Inc by Chris Spivey [the first article which I read of his] I now consider our great and illustrious Queen Elizabeth II to be a monster, a charlatan and an immoral person. Chris Spivey would describe her differently, maybe as a ‘cunt and a slut’ but that’s just how he talks, ‘Don’t cha know’.
Now, I have been called naive before but I’ve never really agreed with that description. I like to think of myself as an intelligence free thinking individual who takes people at face value and who is willing to listen to what anyone says with an open mind.
If someone tells me they’ve seen a UFO, I’ll believe them until such time it’s proven that they’ve lied. If someone says they’ve seen a sex video of the London Mayor Boris Johnson having rampant sex with Samantha Cameron, the Prime Minister’s wife, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt until such time I’ve seen the tape myself or when they’ve been exposed as a liar. I like people and take people at face value until such time they have been exposed as frauds or liars.
I’ve read books recommended by Chris Spivey such as The Falsification of History by John Hamer which totally threw me of kilter and which I’m still recovering from. But I’ve also read other books which he doesn’t recommend about the subjects he covers, to get a balanced view. Many personalities in the alternative media ask the reader never to take them at face value and to do their own research on the subjects they cover.
The reason I’ve taken Chris Spivey’s articles on board is because they are well crafted, articulated, researched and written. Another major factor is that I like them. He injects humour, personality and passion into every piece. If any of you have read his articles you know he swears like a trooper and if you haven’t yet, you’ll be shocked by the language he uses. Then there are his pictures he accompanies with his articles. You have to see them to appreciate their artistic value. But I understand why he uses such language and images. Number one, he’s real and doesn’t hold his punches and number two, he’s pissed off and angry with the status quo.
Make no mistake, Chris Spivey is writing and circulating articles with libellous accusations. Quite frankly I am shocked with everything he comes out with. And that is only because I believed the MSM to be the authority on news and that if it wasn’t reported by the BBC then it wasn’t true. The AV has changed all that.
Okay, let’s get down to the nitty gritty…. WHO THE FUCK IS SPIVEY?
This man writes well crafted and researched articles which tell, amongst many things:
  1. Tony Blair tried to rape his daughter. [See here for article]
  2. The Royal family are Satanists. [See here for article]
  3. Prince Philip is a paedophile. [See here for article]
  4. That all the Parliamentarians and Lords in the House of Commons are paedophiles. [See here for article]
  5. That Gordon Brown is a paedophile. [See here for article]
  6. That the Woolwich hacking murder was a fake and an acted scenario. [See here for article]
  7. An ex South African terrorist worked for the NSPCC. [See here for article]
  8. That David Cameron may have sacrificed his first born to the Devil. [See here for article]
  9. That Lord Mc Alpine is a nonce [as he likes to call paedophiles]. [See here for article]
  10. and that Madeline McCann is buried under the drive way of Robert Murat. [See here for article]
‘Unbelievable’ wouldn’t you say? How can someone circulate such disgusting accusations and get away with it? Surely this man should be arrested for libel and slander and thrown into a dark dungeon for the next one hundred years…
But no…. Chris Spivey backs up every accusation with well researched and verified public evidence. The proof is there right under the surface and all you have to do is scratch and see for yourself that he’s onto something. He’s got a point… What he says rings true… And the blaring FACT that he hasn’t been thrown in prison says a lot about what he says; namely that the accused daren’t take him to court for libel because what he says is true.
After all, Sally Bercow, the wife of the House of Common’s speaker John Bercow, recently lost her libel case in the High Court for sending a tweet which didn’t specifically accuse Lord Mc Alpine of being a nonce but yet Chris Spivey specifically calls Lord Mc Alpine a nonce in dozens of his articles but yet no lawyer has got in touch.
Giving credit where credit is due he covers a wide spectrum of subject matters. Exclusives are common-place. If it wasn’t for him we wouldn’t have known about former ANC/MK terrorist Heinrich Grosskopt holding and abusing an important position within the NSPCC. If it wasn’t for him we wouldn’t know the true nature of the renowned MP Tom Watson. If it wasn’t for him we wouldn’t have known where Madeline McCann’s body maybe buried. If it wasn’t for him we wouldn’t known a lot of things. Most importantly, if it wasn’t for him we wouldn’t have known that the British Establishment and Royal family is invested with perverts, murderers and Satanists.
img143
He writes about subjects which are important and relevant. He comments on the news of the day and wipes away the cloak of mediocrity to unveil the stark truth and reality of the subject matter. He doesn’t hold punches and lays the facts on the line. He’s fearless of bullies and doesn’t give a hoot about threats from Lords, Kings or Queens. The man is a brick wall of opinion and righteous stance. He fights passionately for the rights of children, the downtrodden and abused. If ever you were in a war, Chris Spivey is the type of guy you’ll want standing next to you.
Chris Spivey seems untouchable… And as a consequence very likely to be the one who triggers a British revolution which will see every MP in the country and Royal family member put in jail for either sex crimes or treason… [Don’t think it hasn’t happened before!]
He seems even more determined than ever to bring the House of Cards crashing to the ground after the birth of his Grandson.
“Young Clay makes me more determined than ever to see the downfall of these wholly corrupt, nonce infested, so called democratic governments. I will not rest till there is real change for the better in this country.
My new little man deserves better. Your children and grandchildren deserve better… Let’s go to war.”
You might think that he hasn’t been pulled up because he’s simply irrelevant. A lone voice in the throng of bloggers and alternative journalists who are epidemic across the internet…
You’ll be wrong. Firstly, I’ve heard of him, and I’m your average Joe-the-public type of guy. I visit his website [www.chrisspivey.co.uk] once a day for any new articles and I’m not alone because 30,000 to 40,000 others do the same everyday too. He’s a prolific blogger who checks the newspapers so we don’t have too. If there is any news worth mentioning, Chris Spivey will bring it to our attention. His following is increasing everyday and it’ll only increase further with his appearances on the radio and up coming festivals.
Chris Spivey is a clear and present danger to the British Establishment and I amongst many, welcome it.
After all I agree totally with his sentiment:
“THIS IS WHAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK FORWARD TO YOU FUCKING PLEBS.
The elites raping our kids and getting away with it. And why?
BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL FUCKING NONCES THAT’S WHY!  THE ROYAL FAMILY, THE GOVERNMENT, THE POLICE TOP BRASS, AND THE FUCKING JUDGES TOO. VILE, EVIL, CHILD RAPISTS.
The quicker the blind cunts who think the likes of us are mad realize that fact, the sooner we can protect our children. Until that time comes, the sick cunts with money and power will keep on and on.
WAKEY, FUCKING WAKEY.
I am so fucking angry at the moment, I would fucking hang the Monsters myself.
CUNTS.”
Suffice to say Chris Spivey is not going away. I am positive that once EVERYONE embraces the alternative media and switches of the mainstream news, then a British revolution is inevitable.
Chris Spivey has demonstrated through public record and research that our politicians are criminals, paedophiles and murderers. He has demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that the British Royal Family are Satanists, murderers and frauds.
Chris Spivey has proven beyond reasonable doubt that EVERYTHING we are told by the MSM is a lie and that there is an alternative point of view…
Read Chris Spivey at your own risk. Your opinion of the world will never be the same again…
Let’s go to war….
!Bw7b-h!!Wk~$(KGrHqN,!hEEv1+zyBfNBMLN9YlcZw~~_12