The Collapsing Crucible
Something very interesting has happened in the past few months. Johnny may have come lately, but he’s here at last. Beyond the bunkers that have sheltered common sense from an incessant shower of bile fired by obsessive insomniacs for three years, the merciless grip of fear is beginning to slip. An agenda that has precluded the democratic right to question, enforced by three Ps eager to extricate themselves from scandals that exposed their skewed morality to those they purport to serve, is finally being brought to task. Less than a year ago, to voice an opinion contrary to this agenda would leave that lone voice vulnerable to accusation, suspicion and potential reprisals. Dissent had been suppressed by tactics lifted straight from the Stasi manual, and the brave and the bold were faced with little option but to air their opinions in outposts dismissed as refuges for the apologist and the unhinged. Recognition that the truth was being spoken in the cyber shadows came from those too fearful to speak it in public, but only off the record and via channels reminiscent of Watergate – nobody’s name could be quoted and nothing could be printed when this clandestine network received a thumbs-up from figures faced with too much to lose to commit themselves wholly.
When the first wave of wild allegations was brought to the attention of these three Ps, it quickly became evident that here was the ultimate deflection mechanism to induce collective amnesia regarding their own misdemeanours. Their considerable clout in enforcing a climate conducive to their self-preservation was aided and abetted by an experienced exploiter of accusations, one that had set up shop in the mother country and was already engaged in corporate cannibalism to establish a sphere of avaricious influence. In tandem with a supposedly impartial public service falling into the hands of a crusading zealot, not to mention online attack-dogs rounding on anyone daring to dispute the agenda as well as provincial vigilantes seeking a TV career and a self-styled expert-cum-congenital liar extending the mantra into the intellectual vacuum of daytime television, the intimidating weight of the interested parties presented any opposition with a formidable challenge.
Many looked on at the law-man beating up the wrong guy, unwilling to intervene for fear of the wolves being summoned to their doors; they saw veteran residents of the food chain’s lowest regions dragged to the stake in the Court of Public Opinion and passively condoned the extinguishing of stars in a fantasist’s constellation, their silence supporting the groundless vengeance of those-who-must-be believed. Even the tentative criticisms that gradually dared to be aired by the few were obliged to include a cautious caveat, desperate to emphasise any minor questioning of perceived wisdom wasn’t necessarily questioning the in absentia verdict bestowed upon the deceased dispenser of medals to those whose dreams he had enabled to come true. Despite this, they were still shouted down with such vociferous fury that they scurried away and said no more.
Some refused to be subdued by the contents of bladders being jettisoned onto headstones and paid the price for their bravery. A barrister sharing the surname of an Irish Saint in shades was virtually the only one prepared to stand up and be counted in the mainstream media and was crucified as a consequence, her career threatened by the cardinal sin of saying what many were thinking and staying true to the actual principles of the profession she practiced rather than the corrupt perversion of it that was branding the innocent as war criminals without the evidence. And closer to home, the tireless research of an individual who was present at more than one scene of imaginary crimes was effectively blacklisted and denied the widespread awareness her exhaustive endeavours deserved whilst simultaneously subjected to a level of assault unprecedented in the anal annals of poison pen letters.
But as the loved as well as the loathed were slowly sucked into the orbit of the inquisition, the sanity and morality of the crusade was something that started to preoccupy polite conversation held on broadsheet pages. The extended bail with no end in sight, the aggressive advertising that encouraged the sinister subversion of unfulfilled teenage fantasies, the presumption of guilt by tabloid juries, the collusion between broadcasters and the old bill, the promise of inquiries to appease lobbies employing emotional blackmail to achieve their aim, and then the exhumation of public servants to support the casting of the net into the grandiose galleries of Westminster – the camel’s back was beginning to break.
Suddenly, heads that had become accustomed to the sand were now stretching their necks to the line. Every development was finally openly questioned in print, and though the scaremongers were still afforded airtime to prevent the releasing of the remaining hounds, their justification for their actions was sounding flimsy to more pairs of ears than ever before. And at last, the persecuted added their voices to the chorus. One stated his case in a remarkable press conference that pulled no punches and explicitly described the accusations levelled against him in the kind of graphic detail the media prefer to obliquely hint at. The gauntlet was thrown down to the long-term stirrers of shit who had been forced to stir in the absence of intelligence or ideology, and their failure to pick up that gauntlet spoke volumes.
Amidst rumours that respected dissecters of falsehoods are preparing their own exposés, the belated awakening of the ability to question by a body of scribes who have cowardly shirked their responsibilities and allowed others to do their job for them for the best part of three years is welcome indeed; but where were they when they were really needed, when the toil of the unsung heroes and heroines digging for the truth made them easy prey for every plague of locusts nobody saw fit to aim pesticides at? Whether doing their bit with words or pictures, they/we were left to our own devices with only each other to depend upon. Yes, Johnny-come-lately, you are the cavalry. But you should have been here a long time ago. We told you so, even though you wouldn’t listen.
Petunia Winegum
TRACK CAPTAIN RACCOON DAY 3: http://jst.org.uk/track-our-ships/
-
September 1, 2015 at 9:42 am -
Have I missed something?
Where’s Johnny? -
September 1, 2015 at 11:11 am -
Pet has been on the Good Stuff, been nicking The Landlady’s 18 year old special reserve WhiskEy again I see….No one, bar the Lord God Almighty himself, can write that well sober.
-
September 1, 2015 at 12:32 pm -
I suspect that contemplation of parliament, the police and the press, drove the lovely Petunia to jigger the lock on the secret storeroom and discover the last remaining bottles of Old Pulteney, Pittyvaich, Port Ellen…hence the three P’s of which she speaks.
With the landlady only three days gone, I’m a little alarmed that Petunia should have so soon produced purple prose, but probably nowhere near as alarmed as she will be when she realises the difficulty she’s going to have replacing the Pittyvaich before the landlady returns, all ‘Yo ho ho and a barrel of rum’. Presumably our Pet will have to pour the Johhnie Walker into the expensive bottles, hence Johnny (Johnnie) come lately.
-
September 1, 2015 at 2:21 pm -
Imaginary liquor from an imaginary stockroom in an imaginary boozer – sober as a judge, otherwise!
-
September 1, 2015 at 2:50 pm -
Good work, Petunia. I knew the house was in safe hands. But seriously – I’m far from home – has something changed? I understand that there were a couple of articles in the Sunday Times. Do you sense a wider change? Is the man on the street muttering about witch hunts? Is something happening to cause you such optimism?
-
September 1, 2015 at 3:52 pm -
Well, an article such as this one, which echoes more or less everything that’s been said on here for the best part of the last couple of years, certainly gives me grounds for cautious optimism…
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/09/the-paedophile-panic-has-more-than-a-hint-of-homophobia-to-it/
Bugger! Just seen Windsock beat me to it by an hour!-
September 1, 2015 at 4:11 pm -
Keep up, darling!
-
September 1, 2015 at 4:26 pm -
The curse of having other stuff to do, alas!
-
September 1, 2015 at 4:28 pm -
Nice one. Thank you.
-
-
-
September 17, 2015 at 12:17 am -
I find it rather sickening that the widespread media only starts to wake up and smell the witch-hunt when the gays start getting drawn into it. Shame they were quite willing to keep their traps shut or otherwise stoke the fire when it was just the boring ordinary heterosexual men getting thrown onto it, isn’t it?
-
-
-
-
-
September 1, 2015 at 11:12 am -
Have I got dementia coming on? I haven’t understood a word of this.
-
September 1, 2015 at 12:58 pm -
You are not alone. It’s pretentious waffle, driven by an urge to show off.
-
September 1, 2015 at 2:19 pm -
Or alternately, not basic enough for a thicko like you.
-
September 1, 2015 at 6:28 pm -
Your resort to school playground name-calling rather proves my point. And by the way, it’s ‘alternatively’; ‘alternately’ means every other.
-
September 1, 2015 at 6:59 pm -
A pedant as well as someone who can dish it out but can’t take it! If you can’t rise above playground name-calling yourself, don’t expect me to respond in language you clearly don’t understand. If you want journalism, stick to the Daily Star.
-
September 1, 2015 at 9:27 pm -
A clear case of psychological projection on your part. Where have I called you names? You are the one ‘dishing it out’, and making assumptions based on no evidence whatsoever, not me. I have simply expressed my considered opinion on the piece as I read it.
Pointing out the difference between similar words is hardly pedantry. Perhaps you don’t agree that the aim of writing is clarity of expression. I began my working career as a journalist almost 60 years ago (and from 1960 in Fleet Street). I have written and edited more articles than I can remember, so I know only too well the difference between good writing and bad. The aggressive tone of your responses suggests my comments must have touched a nerve or two.
-
September 1, 2015 at 10:53 pm -
September 2, 2015 at 12:58 am -
Radonel, did you miss the clue in the title and title picture? This wasn’t a ‘what-where-when-who’ piece of reporting, nor ‘what-where-when-who-WHY’ journalism. Somewhat unusually for Pet it wasn’t even a bit ‘what-where-when-who gives a crap?’ of gonzo.
Personally i think Pet pulled off the Milleresque portrayal of the modern Salemism pretty well.
-
-
-
-
-
September 1, 2015 at 2:41 pm -
You didn’t get it? I did, every word. Despite not considering myself that clever.
So, Pet. Any links to the press conference in question and your sources? Or do we going to have to go digging on our own?
-
September 1, 2015 at 2:54 pm -
I believe this might be pertinent:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/brendan-oneill/2015/09/the-paedophile-panic-has-more-than-a-hint-of-homophobia-to-it/-
September 1, 2015 at 2:57 pm -
Thanks Windsock.
-
-
September 1, 2015 at 3:51 pm -
Chris (Retrocool73) sent me a link to the press conference which I watched last week, but I can’t remember which site it was lifted from now. Perhaps he’ll interject at some point and provide it…
-
September 1, 2015 at 4:23 pm -
‘gonad_I_am’ kindly transcribed Proctor’s conference
https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/08/25/full-statement-of-harvey-proctor/
https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/08/26/on-the-harvey-proctor-allegations/
-
-
-
September 1, 2015 at 10:17 pm -
I don’t know what drove it but it certainly is an obscure style of writing. Did anyone understand what the point was?
-
-
-
September 1, 2015 at 12:06 pm -
People in far-off lands, where certain flames have yet to be extinguished, DID hear the voices of the dissenters. And although late to the game, some were early to fire certain shots across the bow:
https://davidhencke.wordpress.com/2015/02/02/leon-brittan-why-lawson-is-wrong-and-there-is-a-real-case-to-answer/“And “Nick” may well be highly credible, but what blows people’s minds over here in North America is your police declaring “Nick’s” allegations to be TRUE. Such a determination is still reserved for the conclusion of an investigation, here, and is generally left for judge or jury to make. For police investigations themselves to declare an allegation that someone committed murder to be true, and at the very beginning of the investigation, SOUNDS like they intend to ensure the accused gets convicted even if they have to “frame” him. Can you understand this?” – Feb. 14/15
-
September 1, 2015 at 1:00 pm -
There may have been a slight shift in media and public opinion, but it’s far too soon to be crowing. When the police and CPS state categorically and publicly that there is not a shred of credible evidence against the likes of Heath, Brittan and Proctor, just a lot of reheated and baseless rumours, we might be getting somewhere. When a mainstream newspaper undertakes a thorough review of all the official reports on Jimmy Savile’s activities and publishes the conclusions the Landlady already has, we might be getting somewhere. When the Goddard enquiry reports that serious wrongdoing happened in the likes of Rochdale, Rotherham and Oxford as a result of gross failures by public bodies, but that there is no substantive evidence of “an establisment VIP paedophile ring”, we might be getting somewhere.
When official efforts turn to uncovering current abuse of children, wherever it may be happening – including in publicly-run children’s homes, and stops obsessing about things that may or may not have happened forty years ago, we might be getting somewhere. Until then, justice is not really being done, and the public’s money is still being wasted on witch-hunts, some of which are being stoked for very low political reasons.
-
September 1, 2015 at 2:20 pm -
I agree. But remember where we were this time last year. There are more questions being asked in the MSM now than ever before. Not enough, I grant you; but it’s a start.
-
September 1, 2015 at 2:45 pm -
As far as MWT goes, his goose is, if not cooked, then at least being basted whilst the oven is pre-heating.
His ‘fans’ have taken against him, the comical Graham Wilmer “revealing” that his only interest was in being shoe-horned (Proctor’s?!?) into the inquiry. Now they’ve all set against him, suddenly investigating his dubious claims to have been a detective. Something has certainly changed when a link to a Moor Larkin-article is being tweeted by a ‘campaigner’ (and being re-tweeted by, of all people, Esther Baker, the alleged victim of all kinds of horrors)!-
September 1, 2015 at 3:18 pm -
That is an amusing turn of events. I hope they read more.
-
September 1, 2015 at 3:21 pm -
MWT’s article warning against a Witch Hunt (the gall of the man) reeks of him becoming aware that there is a shift in the mood, even if slight, and he’s getting in first.
But he really has told too many porkies, manipulated the truth and created far too many enemies. It’s a bit like that Hampstead Satanic craziness where all the main players have now turned upon each other and seem intent on clawing each other’s throats out.
Once the media turns as they inevitably will – there is just as much meat on the story from the opposite angle – it’s not going to be a pretty sight.-
September 6, 2015 at 8:24 pm -
MWT has now busied himself visiting refugees. #BreakingNews! He doesn’t half like to be the centre of attention, that one!
-
-
-
-
September 1, 2015 at 2:33 pm -
If only they WOULD “state categorically and publicly that there is not a shred of credible evidence” then we wouldn’t be where we are now. For example, the recent allegation against Heath – that he had raped a boy in 1961 – was plainly rubbish.
The ‘description’ of Heath’s home was easily proven to have been a nonsense with its pictures of sailing ships & shiny conductor’s baton on conspicuous display, although the tabloids chose to ignore the obvious & lie to the world. The police did, on this occasion, attempt to set the record straight, but in the most mealy-mouthed manner possible:“However, after a full assessment of the allegation there were no lines of enquiry that could proportionately be pursued by the MPS.”
I’m afraid that that is as close as they’ll ever voluntarily come to plain-speaking.
-
September 1, 2015 at 3:20 pm -
In defence of Plod (a rare task for me), they cannot prove that Heath didn’t rape a boy or boys sometime, somewhere, as that’s proving a negative which is very hard to do. The best they can ever do is state that there is currently no evidence on which further action could be based – OK, their version of words was a little more indirect.
I don’t know if Heath did any of those things alleged but, if credible evidence were ever forthcoming, then I would expect the authorities to pursue it, obviously not aiming at prosecution but, with regard to Heath’s position before, during and after being PM, if it could be validated, then questions should surely be asked of the security services etc., and whether knowledge of such behaviour ever compromised the nation’s position in any way. At this distance, that’s the only really productive direction – the rest is mere tabloid fodder.-
September 1, 2015 at 3:43 pm -
I agree up to a point, Mudplugger – the proving of a negative always being all but impossible.
But the Met’s statement was issued as a direct result of the ‘world exclusive’ appearing on the frontpage of The Mirror, a dreadful article which the author & paper knew to be false at the time of publishing. For example, the piece states that:“Detectives from Scotland Yard’s sexual exploitation unit have been informed of the claims from the man, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, and plan to interview him.”
Untrue.
“In April 2015 an allegation of rape was made to the MPS. An officer from Operation Fairbank interviewed the complainant that same month and obtained a full account. ”
They had no intention of interviewing the complainant (again), as they had already – and expeditiously – done so. There was no story to be told, but The Mirror weren’t going to let that stop them. I can understand the police treading carefully around alleged victims, but unscrupulous journalists don’t merit the same kid-gloves treatment in my opinion. Someone – who?!? – should be holding them to account.
http://news.met.police.uk/news/statement-concerning-allegations-made-against-sir-edward-heath-124725-
September 1, 2015 at 5:16 pm -
It’s not always impossible – the Ted Heath “1961” accuser, for instance, got basic chronology wrong: he had Heath in a big house in Mayfair two years too early, and interested in yachting several years too early, too.
-
September 1, 2015 at 6:13 pm -
@Richard – I have a question about that. Is it really true, that UK police are now prohibited from actively seeking such contradictory info, from or about a victim claimant, because that would demonstrate a less than complete “belief” in their alleged victimization? Because, that would be INSANE.
-
September 1, 2015 at 6:44 pm -
I think the police have avoided seeking evidence that contradicts in cases such as this for sometime. It was indeed something I experienced when trying to present evidence that would destroy the accusers claims. The investigating officer totally ignored all approaches by phone or email and presented the very one sided evidence to CPS. CPS then charged, but case fell apart at plea case management hearing.
This is not an uncommon state of affairs judging by the many falsely accused families . It seems something of a national blueprint. Some unfortunate individuals have even regretted presenting evidence to the police as they then reinterview the “victim” who then changes his/her statement to fit the newly presented evidence rendering any defence impossible.
The fact that a claimant is a few years out in terms of where someone was living is no longer an impediment to trial or even conviction. Such lapses of memory are explained away and excused due to “trauma”.
-
September 1, 2015 at 7:20 pm -
@faccused – how did Sarah Nelson become the Supreme Being of the UK, responsible for all laws & police procedures? When I tell my retired police buddies that, in the UK, and ADULT can be an anonymous accuser in a sexual assault case, they think I’m pulling their legs. They won’t believe me. When I tell them that, in the UK, you have squads of officers investigating sexual abuse claims against DEAD people, they don’t believe me. They think I’m making up sick jokes.
-
September 2, 2015 at 12:41 pm -
“The fact that a claimant is a few years out in terms of where someone was living is no longer an impediment to trial or even conviction. Such lapses of memory are explained away and excused due to “trauma”.”
But that’s outrageously transparent crapola! The catecholamine neurotransmitters triggered through the ‘fight or flight’ response all have to do with INCREASED memory retention, not decreased retention. And if a person genuinely dissociated in response to an intolerable emotional state, i.e., their “awareness of self” collapsed temporarily, there would be NO retrievable memory of the event – NOT a confused memory of it. The “sense of self” has to be functioning for there to be any biographical memory.
-
-
September 2, 2015 at 11:32 am -
One should read Jim Davidson’s book where he set out to prove allegations against him were untrue- against solicitor’s advice. Davidson thought that better to prove the claims false and avoid a debilitating trial which sounds reasonable but he encountered pretty serious disturbing actions from The Plod.
For instance he proved conclusively that it would have been impossible to abuse one claimant at the London Palladium as she claimed.
Yewtree plod then informed the claimant and she simply changed it to another theatre right outside London and on a different date but she got that wrong as well. (mind you such serious discrepancies did not help Rolf Harris with a judge who actively condemned Harris for a bad memory but praised the accusers for same due to the ‘trauma”)
The Davidson claims must have been just too bizarre in the end as he proved dates, locations etc were totally out of whack but they certainly put him through hell.## If you run into Jim in a pub – he’s a friendly bloke – i would advise against bringing up the name “Mark Williams-Thomas” as the reaction could be scary.
-
September 3, 2015 at 10:44 am -
I understood what was written here! Jim Davidson’s book is a must read – as I am sure Gambo’s will be when it is published – this month I think.
-
-
-
-
-
September 1, 2015 at 7:52 pm -
Or they could say that the allegations are an implausible load of crud, which could be the only conclusion of anyone who impartially reads the allegations of Nick. See the full transcript here:
https://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2015/08/25/full-statement-of-harvey-proctor/I would have thought any policeman with experience would regard it as utterly improbable that an MP who had just committed murder would – not once but twice! – simply give the main witness a lift home. It is a completely incredible tale and the police should be publicly saying so.
-
September 2, 2015 at 11:36 am -
I can confirm from much experience : police took claims of sex abuse in the 70s & 80s (and especially involving children) very seriously and the current claims that they did not are total hogwash and a libel against most good coppers.
What they did however is be very sceptical when there was no physical evidence and approached investigations with an open mind. Keir Starmer put an end to that.
-
-
-
-
-
September 1, 2015 at 3:54 pm -
Has Tom Watson crawled out from his hiding place yet? No, thought not. Funny that .
-
September 1, 2015 at 3:58 pm -
You’ve excelled yourself again Pet, brilliantly written! Let us hope that the tide is indeed beginning to turn in these matters, not before time, but in the words of Mr Winston Wolfe “Well let’s not start sucking each other’s dicks quite yet!” Or, if you prefer, in the words of Mr Winston Churchill “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end, but it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning!”
p.s. I have recently been disturbed to hear the news that, so it seems, both Messrs Wolfe and Churchill have fallen on such hard times that they are reduced to the selling of private insurance schemes on the commercial television. Oh the humanity!
-
September 1, 2015 at 4:05 pm -
It happened to Nelson as well, from what I recall of my extremely brief dalliance with daytime TV 20 years back.
-
September 1, 2015 at 4:26 pm -
I believe Nelson is now in the cruise-ship business but can’t even afford an engine or a professional crew, relying instead on wind-power and a motley assortment of amateur, if enthusiastic folk, including allegedly the odd semi-retired virtual licensee. Oh, how the mighty are fallen.
-
September 1, 2015 at 4:27 pm -
And closing in on ‘Dutch Holland’ as we speak…
-
September 1, 2015 at 4:45 pm -
Given the amount and severity of work related illness and injury that Nelson suffered from, I should think that he has a very good claim for compensation!!!
-
September 1, 2015 at 8:15 pm -
I may be wrong, but somehow I just can’t imagine the Landlady, however badly she may be injured in this reckless raft of rigging, calling Slater & Moron to support her claim for compo.
-
-
-
-
-
-
September 1, 2015 at 3:59 pm -
The UK may have lately come to the realisation that same-sex relationships are (indeed, have been throughout history) normal. It hasn’t yet accepted that prostitution — “the oldest profession” — is similarly normal, and should also be afforded legal protection. Until that happens, there will be women trafficked by the underworld, not to mention umpteen “charities” soliciting funding to fight the practice. Alas, those charities are barking up the wrong tree. There will always be women who choose that line of work. Giving them legal status would lessen the hold that pimps and traffickers can exert — and make it easier to complain about abuse by patrons.
Paedophilia is a whole other kettle of fish. It has as old a history as homosexuality and prostitution. The crucial difference is the age gap. There really is no justification for trying to prohibit what consenting adults do in their private lives. However, when one party is a minor who either cannot or dare not object, it becomes the worst form of exploitation. It would be far more productive if effort was being expended on trying to eradicate the current abuses. Instead, there’s the “paedo” flag — to be pinned, preferably, on those who are unable to refute any rubbish spouted. It’s all smoke and mirrors, innit?
-
September 1, 2015 at 4:30 pm -
Same argument applies to recreational drugs. You can’t univent them, criminalising only exacerbates the worst aspects of any prohibition, so time to get the political heads round some controlled legalisation. Trouble is, as with prostitution, they’re all on a ‘moral trip’ and can’t manage the politics of a trip to pragmatic reality.
-
September 1, 2015 at 5:04 pm -
The trouble with those who legislate by morality, instead of pragmatism, is that they are largely immoral themselves because they are happy to see people suffer consequences from their imposed righteousness.
-
September 1, 2015 at 8:19 pm -
Sounds a bit like John Major’s infamous ‘Back To Basics’ pitch while, all the time, he’s had Edwina Currie bearing (baring) down on him in her high hormonal heavings. (Sorry, some readers may still find that particular image beyond distressing.)
-
-
-
-
September 1, 2015 at 5:17 pm -
September 1, 2015 at 6:50 pm -
Oh! And there was poor little me thinking you were banging on about global warming…
-
September 2, 2015 at 8:53 am -
I find it a little bit odd that it is now being claimed that this witch hunt has an anti homosexual slant to it. I don’t see how that can be argued in the cases of Jimmy Savile, Dave Lee Travis, Freddie Starr, Max Clifford or Rolf Harris to name but five amongst many. Whilst I welcome any sea change in public opinion concerning this appalling farrago, I find it a little disappointing that it’s only when the homosexual element is introduced that the MSM wants to take look at the other side of the story. It’s as if it’s perfectly okay to make any allegations against hetrosexuals, but not when the same sort of wild allegations involve homosexuals.
-
September 17, 2015 at 12:20 am -
Bingo! Throw all the old heterosexual men you like to the wolves on zero evidence, but suggest a gay man might be in it and suddenly it’s a witch-hunt. It always was, you twisted lunatics.
-
-
September 2, 2015 at 9:37 am -
Heterosexuality is not seen as intrinsically linked to paedophilia as is/was homosexuality. We “recruit”, don’tcha know?
-
September 17, 2015 at 12:22 am -
Normal male heterosexuality – i.e a liking for young, attractive girls not into menopause already – has been conflated INTO pedophilia in recent times by the misandric feminazi brigade, in case you hadn’t noticed.
-
-
September 2, 2015 at 3:27 pm -
Your justice system seems hopelessly fracked, to me. Rational people might consider leaving the UK at this time, so you don’t support this insanity with your tax dollars.
-
September 2, 2015 at 5:21 pm -
Tax £s I’ll have you know.
-
{ 65 comments… read them below or add one }