Posts Tagged ‘David Cameron’

Why Are Our Political Elite So Obsessed With Lowering the Age of Consent?

January 15, 2013

Why are UK politicians so preoccupied with lowering the age of consent? Who asked for it to be lowered in the first place? Not parents in Britain, that’s for sure. Listen to this bit of common sense before you start your debate…

UPDATE: British PM Rules Out Lowering Age Of Consent To 14…



Hounding Steve Messham, smears in the Mail, threats against MPs and police complicity

November 16, 2012

The Slog
John Ward

In what I admit is something of a risk, The Slog today tries to blow away some of the dry-ice being liberally sprayed about by the Establishment in relation to its long-standing record of depravity by the few, and complicit blind-eyes being cast by the many.

If there is a genuine desire to root out the tiny but powerful minority of paedophiles in our élite, political, social care and teaching professions, then I would respectfully ask that the Carter-Ruck’s of this world stay their hands… and assimilate instead this one simple point: are they suggesting that five separate documented cover-ups in 27 years, and 0ver 2000 witness statements, are all the work of malign and/or deluded conspirators?

Steve Messham: First abused, and then bullied by the establishment

The United Kingdom stands at a crossroads today. A much overused map reference perhaps, but a genuine one in this case. Thanks to some bungling in the BBC, a cynical campaign being carried out by the Murdoch Press against that organisation, and knee-jerk idle distraction concerning the fate of George Entwistle and background of Steven Messham, we are rapidly being pulled behind a bush somewhere quiet – and molested. Lascivious glee at the fate of Newsnight – a format whose anchor Jeremy Paxman is one of the few people, along with Ian Hislop, prepared to go for the hypocrite’s jugular – is woefully misplaced at best, and malign at worst.

I would ask everyone covering and reading this story to consider these opening questions:

1. We still do not know for certain who injuncted the BBC ten days ago, but there remains a very strong and widely-held suspicion that he is a political big beast in David Cameron’s Cabinet. David Cameron asks us to go to the police, who have  – in 4 out of the 5 coverups mentioned – either actively or passively conspired to derail enquiries….just as they did during the Hackgate enquiries. When is somebody going to tackle the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary about this?

2. Look into the history of Steven Messham, and you will discover a consistent catalogue of victimisation by the authorities. Why is nobody interviewing Mr Messham and allowing him to relate that history?

3. The Report from February 2000 into the North Wales cover-up and abuse (admirably covered by the Independent on Sunday this weekend) contains details and statistics to make even the most cynical hack’s blood run cold. When are more people going to read it, and more journalists drill down into it? (Have a look at it here)

4. In Britain’s local Courts, there are over 35 documented cases of rape and paedophiliac abuse in the local government system of the UK – predominantly involving Labour councillors – in the last eight years alone. When is Ed Miliband going to address that? When is the Shadow Home Secretary going to address that? When is Tom Watson even going to achnowledge that?

5. This morning, the Mail on Sunday has published an article by Sir Alfred McAlpine expressing disgust at the media in general and the BBC in particular. It is at best disingenuous. When is somebody in the media going to question the McAlpines on their convenient memory-loss in relation to cousin Alfred ‘Jimmie’ McAlpine?

For legal reasons, I cannot refer to a sixth example: but surprise surprise, if I could, somebody would have to act. However, in the temporary absence of that tale from the public domain, I’d like if I may to deal with Point 5 above first.

The Mail piece is remarkable for the vilification brought forth by Sir Alfred McAlpine. This extract is typical:

‘Now we know that all it took for my brother Lord (Alistair) McAlpine to be exonerated as a paedophile was for the victim Steven Messham to be shown a photograph of his alleged abuser. Both he and the BBC’s Newsnight programme have apologised for the terrible slur on a good man’s reputation. But the damage has already been done – to my brother’s name…. I only discovered last Tuesday from a senior Tory party member that Alistair was the person being traduced on the internet as the guilty party. I was completely taken aback. Of course, I had heard it was someone close to Mrs Thatcher but the idea of my younger brother being involved was so preposterous, I laughed it off’ …

Read more at the SLOG

‘DAVID CAMERON’S HIT LIST’: Govt supporters are ‘dead men walking’ in Syria

November 12, 2012

The new Syrian opposition coalition is now seeking official recognition from abroad, and aims to administer the flow of funds and potentially arms to rebels. UK Prime Minister is backing them with all they require, and recogizes the Free Syria Army (FSA) terrorists he’s arming as ‘more legitimate’ than the Assad government.

The FSA, and other Saudi and a Qaida terrorists supported by Cameron, Hague, Clinton and Obama – are now executing Syrian civilians whom they suspect are supporters of the national government in Syria. So, if Cameron and Co. support these terrorists. then Cameron and Co. support  the butchering they have been carrying out over the last several months. This is a shocking state of affairs for the West – akin to real war crimes now.

Is Cameron is now officially the new Blair?

But the anti-Assad forces may see direct assistance from foreign troops, as a British top soldier has said hundreds of UK troops could be deployed to Syria if ‘the humanitarian situation worsens’. Meanwhile, fears are mounting that rebel fighters are increasingly targeting civilians for simply showing allegiance to the government, as Maria Finoshina explains:

Bashar al Assad vs Our Gang, ‘The Friends of Syria’

November 10, 2012

21st Century Wire

Let’s compare Syria’s Assad to some of the ‘statesmen’ currently trying to overthrow his government through their Orwellian-esque named, “The Friends of Syria” project…

RT interviewed Syrian President Bashar Al Assad this week, and by all accounts, Assad came off as intelligent, sensitive and above all, as a statesmen. We may not agree with all of his policies, but non-psychopaths living in the west can all agree that Washington and London’s plan to flood Syria with terrorists and destroy it from within – is not a civilised way to go.

Alright, let’s compare the calibre of leadership. First, here’s the Syrian leader – showing admirable restraint in the face of criminal intervention by West and Gulf States. He was, by all accounts – impressive, to say the least…

As his people are being brutally butchered by the West’s proxies and mercenaries in Syria, here’s US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, showing the calibre of leadership we are left with in the west…

The reason Hillary finds all this such a lark, is that she has more important things to consider – namely, her celebrity aspirations…

…and she want to be President in 2016. It would be better if she became host of The View.

Now for David Cameron. How does statesman Cameron stack up against Syria’s Assad in terms of leadership, brains and pure toughness? The British PM supports FSA and al Qaida terrorists in Syria with guns and military intelligence, but when it comes to Britain itself, he’s keeping himself busy covering for paedophiles and child abusers at the heart of the British Establishment. The thought of a “gay witch-hunt” in Westminster made the PM turn yellow. Could be handle Assad’s workload then? How does Cameron stack up? You decide:

And finally, we have the British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, allegedly he is a ‘straight’ politician, so shouldn’t have to worry about David Cameron’s ‘gay witch-hunt’. Here’s a photo that should inspire international confidence…

There he is with Savile!

And they call themselves “Friends of Syria’, well, well.

It’s times like these, when you have to really feel like the world has been turned upside down.



November 9, 2012

Ben Fellows
21st Century Wire
Guest Columnist

Here’s how it’s played out: David Cameron got ‘carried away’ with ‘fluffy’ issues after becoming Tory leader, neglecting voters’ key concerns, one of his closest advisers said last night after getting the phone call from his Bilderberg masters.

It might be a surprise to members of the public why Planning Minister Nick Boles is suddenly coming out – in a bid to oust David Cameron as party leader; as Mr Cameron struggles to get to grips with the complex issue of paedophiles within politics.

The Planning Minister said the modernisers who seized control of the party in 2005 had become ‘overly obsessed’ with impressing Oxbridge-educated professionals while neglecting Britain’s ‘hard-working strivers’. Isn’t that just what the doctor ordered, someone who appears to speak utter sense making the British public feel that at least this guy gets it, but does he? Or was he told what to say in a private conversation with Bilderbergers last night and given the green light to begin the coup on the Tory Party leadership after Cameron’s latest “gay” paedophile gaffe with Philip Schofield on live national TV?

And by the way, Mr Cameron, what exactly did you mean by a “gay” witch-hunt in Whitehall?

Just for the record – being gay does not mean you are a paedophile. You cannot equate that depraved behaviour with homosexuality. Perhaps someone should tell this to the Cabinet Office and Prime Minister David Cameron after the Cabinet Office wrote to blogs in the past couple of weeks threatening to sue over my allegations.

My accusations involving an incident where *********************(redacted) Ian Greer’s office – are matter of fact, as far as I’m concerned. Yet, the Cabinet Office saw fit to send emails to blogs protesting that ********(redacted)  ‘wasn’t gay, so therefore he couldn’t be a paedophile’. To be clear, I have never accused any government minister of being gay – I could not care less about his or any other person’s sexuality. But I did make accusations of gross misconduct. This just demonstrates the government’s general ignorant belief that to be a paedophile you have to be gay, which of course, simply diluting the debate by introducing the gay card – in order to escape the reality that paedphilia is a social disease which afflicts all sectors – as well as straight men and women. Shame on you all!

What’s coming for David Cameron, as if he didn’t know, and sooner than he could have imagined is a vote of “No Confidence” within the Tory Party. David Cameron like Margaret Thatcher before him will be replaced  – but by whom?

Clearly it’s now time for Nick Boles to come forward as the next government leader after attending the Bilderberg Meeting this year introduced by Minister Without Portfolio Kenneth Clarke.

Kenneth Clarke is a senior Bilderberg member and attends on a regular basis introducing the next Prime Minister or party leader. Reports from within Bilderberg say that new leaders are introduced to the cartel by having to serve high profile members drinks, as well as open doors etc. Both Bill Clinton and Tony Blair were summoned to attend in this capacity before they were anointed by their respective parties to lead. David Cameron attended before his premiership as it seems to be part of the grooming process. To be accepted you need to demonstrate that you are willing to humiliate yourself in front of people like luminaries like Henry Kissenger et al.

The Jimmy Savile paedophile abuse scandal, the Lord McAlpine incident, and the rest, seems to be proving too much for David Cameron – and after his latest ‘all paedophiles are gay’ gaffe on ITV yesterday – it looks like enter stage left… for Nick Boles, right on cue.

Question: do we really want to be led by anyone who attends clandestine meetings with the world’s power brokers who decide ours and the world’s fate each year – laid out in the annual Bilderberg agenda? From orchestrating the economic global collapse, to the depopulation – in order to save the planet (of course), or inching the west towards a World War 3 situation.  Bilderberg does it all, in the name of progress, moving us ever closer towards a global, One World Government, which they themselves often refer to as, The New World Order.

What is all this Bilderberg nonsense about?

Bilderberg takes its name from the hotel in Holland where the first meeting took place in May 1954. That pioneering meeting grew out of the concern expressed by leading citizens on both sides of the Atlantic that Western Europe and North America were not working together as closely as they should on common problems of critical importance. It was felt that regular, off-the-record discussions would help create a better understanding of the complex forces and major trends affecting western nations in the difficult post-war period. Sounds good right? No, for example it is illegal for American politicians to attend as it violates what is called the Logan Act.

The Logan Act is a United States federal law that forbids unauthorised citizens from negotiating with foreign governments. It was passed in 1799 and last amended in 1994. Violation of the Logan Act is a felony punishable under federal law with imprisonment of up to three years. However, no one who attends from the United States government ever gets arrested; just journalists and protesters who stand in the cold attempting to hold to account world’s politicians and expose this most vile of world institutions.

The Bilderbergers are people who say they are helping humanity just so they can make billions. They appear in the shadows, as arrogant as Lucifer and no more sympathetic than he is towards mankind. They live under the “golden rule” – whoever has the gold makes the rules. Rockefeller himself admitted they are conspiring against the best interests of the Unites States to form a one world government. A surveillance led global totalitarian regime which is a mixture of fascism and communism rolled into one.

The Bilderberg Group is much more than just a social club. It has played a major role in shaping the direction of the world since it was created in 1954. The Bilderberg Group created the European Union and the euro. This year efforts to save the euro are rumoured to be high on the agenda.

Past Bilderberg attendees have included Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, Prince Charles, David Cameron, Tony Blair, Henry Kissinger, Bill Gates, Angela Merkel, Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner, Rick Perry, David Rockefeller, Herman van Rompuy, Jean-Claude Trichet, Jeff Bezos, Chris R. Hughes, Eric Schmidt, Craig J. Mundie, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Richard Perle, Paul Volcker, Lawrence Summers, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden.

This year they welcomed all the way from the United Kingdom to Chantilly Virginia, where this Lord Peter Mandelson, John Micklethwait – editor and chief of the Economist, Gideon Rachman from the Financial Times, Martin H. Wolf from the Financial Times, Peter Voser – CEO Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Marcus Agius – Chairman Barclays Plc and former BBC Trust Board of Directors, Kenneth Clarke – Cabinet Minister without portfolio and, drum role please… future Tory Party leader Nick Boles.

David Cameron could well do an IDS, and be ousted very soon for Nick Boles to take over the Tory party leadership.

Will it be Boles?? Just remember, you heard it here first.







David Cameron just doesn’t get it – the police and judiciary are part of UK abuse problem

November 9, 2012

Full public inquiry and special commission must happen now

Peter Sterry
21st Century Wire

As the rippling waves emanating from the cesspool that is Sir Jimmy Savile’s legacy break on the shores of the British establishment, it is becoming increasingly clear how the establishment is attempting once again to protect its own.

In response both to Tom Watson’s questioning in the House of Commons – and the fabulous impromptu exposure by Philip Schofield (an event surely set to become legendary in television history) British Prime Minister David Cameron’s singular response is that anyone with any evidence should go to the Police, regardless of how powerful the accused may be. Is Cameron aware that multiple victims in the North Wales inquiry names the same high ranking Tory politician, and in at least one case, the police deemed their testimony as “fantasy”? For a Prime Minister, it is a breathtakingly, though probably deliberately naive approach. It feels like a government’s greasy denial that paedophiles are operating in positions of power. North Wales abuse victim Steve Messham testified that his life was threatened by his abuser, which is a common intimidation tactic seen in many abuse cases. Death threats change the playing field considerably.

Cameron: confused, or just waiting to pass the buck on?

So where exactly is David Cameron suggesting survivors take their evidence ? The serving police officers referred to by some of those abuse at the hellish Bryn Estin in North Wales? Or is the Prime Minister proposing just walking in to your local cop shop ( if you can still find one of course, given the aggressive programme of police station closure now being implemented by Cameron’s government) and saying “Hey! I was raped by ********* twenty years ago”?

Sensitive matters such as child rape require sensitive solutions. Cameron’s response is not only inadequate, it is simultaneously ignorant, insulting and ludicrous. Lest anyone has missed it, serving police officers and members of the judiciary are among those named by Bryn Estyn victims. It is increasingly clear that the original inquiry was a cover-up, and let us not forget the Masonic connection.

The Waterhouse Tribunal set the tone for its approach to freemasonry right from day one.

In the very first session the barrister for one of the groups of former residents of care homes made an application about masonry. The barrister, Nick Booth, asked that “the Tribunal should keep a register of the masonic membership amongst its staff, the members, its representatives and witnesses who appear before it”. He explained: “The duty of loyalty to a brother mason and his duty of impartiality if he is involved in the administration of justice is not a new one and it’s one that’s very much in the public eye, particularly at the moment.”

“The Tribunal will be aware of the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee which is investigating the issue,” he added. “Sir, I stress, if I have not stressed it before, that I am not making any suggestion of disreputable conduct, merely to put the matter beyond the reach of any possible public comment which might undermine the public confidence in the Inquiry.”

Sir Ronald Waterhouse, who chaired the Tribunal, felt that the application was a slur on the integrity of the Tribunal’s staff.

The chairman of the Tribunal, Sir Ronald Waterhouse, and the two other members of the Tribunal, retired for a brief adjournment.

“It will not surprise you that the application is refused,” said Sir Ronald on their return. “As far as the staff are concerned,” Sir Ronald said, “in so far as the application carries any reflection upon the integrity of the staff of the Tribunal it’s repudiated, wholly unwarranted; there is no evidence whatsoever to support any suggestion that they have not acted with complete integrity… ”

“The members of the Tribunal are in this position: the Tribunal was set up by Parliament and the members of it were appointed by the Secretary of State for Wales and the [criticism of the composition] should be addressed through the proper channels.”

He said that the Tribunal’s own Counsel, Gerard Elias QC, was appointed by the Attorney General. “Any criticism … should be addressed through the usual Parliamentary channels,” he suggested.

Gerard Elias said nothing during Booth’s application and he remained silent after Sir Ronald had made the Tribunal’s ruling.

Gerard Elias QC. Leading counsel to Tribunal kept silent on discussion about a register of freemasons. He himself is a freemason…

Yet both Sir Ronald and Gerard Elias knew something that journalists reporting on the Tribunal would have wanted to know.

Gerard Elias is a mason. He’s a member of perhaps the most powerful masonic lodge in Wales, Dinas Llandaf. The lodge, which meets in Cardiff, is made up mainly of legal professionals and members of the Conservative party, although there are members from other political groups. This in and of itself is not a problem, but there is a problem if fellow members have an oath of loyalty to each other which supersedes their oath to uphold law and conduct due diligence in any proper investigation into organised crime.

British ‘Justice’ done in the dark

Imagine a mafia trial where the prosecution and the defense had members of the mafia embedded in key positions. What would be the chances of full disclosure?

We have to ask ourselves, is it possible to have an investigation free from private allegiances stemming from Masonic interference? The British people will demand both a full public enquiry  into the extent of child abuse , rape and murder in Britain both past and present, and a new independent Police investigation with a remit to arrest and prosecute, headed by officers prepared to DECLARE PUBLICLY that they are members of any secret society.

David Cameron can do this now, and retain some personal integrity, or wait until his hand is forced, and retain none.




November 9, 2012

21st Century Wire says: Politicians normally don’t like surprises, or having to answer tough questions off the cuff. Even Question Time is a staged routine where party leaders pretend bite back for the camera – pure Punch ‘n Judy. But ITV’s This Morning Show turned out to be an unlikely arena for this prime ministerial showdown… but was it real?

PANIC STATIONS? PM David Cameron appeared to get the shock of life Thursday morning when a seemingly harmless character, host Philip Schofield, challenged the PM about the government’s policy of denial regarding any paedophiles, past, present or future, in No.10, or anywhere else in Westminster  for that matter.

Question: Was this whole incident staged by Whitehall and ITV producers? If it was, Schofield had to have been put up to it, possibly coerced into it.

Schofield is last guy you’d expect to go for the PM like this, but now thousands are Tweeting and Facebooking support for Schofield, and his ‘street cred’ index for 18-35’s has just shot into orbit.

The only line Schofield crossed, was to rightly challenge a public politician on a serious issue. If the incident was genuine, it was a rare display of balls in the mainstream media – which has made him a sort of people’s presenter. No doubt, and all too predictably, ITV will be pressured by Downing Street and Ofcom to sack Schofield for his challenge to the PM – let’s see if ITV have got some of the family jewels that the BBC clearly lack. But if they cave in, ITV will have cut loose what appears to be its coolest asset in years.

What did Cameron mean about a ‘witch-hunt’? Last time we checked, no one is looking for witches, we were just hoping the Tory government might be kind enough to assist in hunting down delinquent paedophiles who have been allowed to roam freely in British public institutions.

Call it a gaffe, but what Cameron said in this interview was very revealing, however, because host Schofield at no time mentioned anything about ‘gays’ in Tory government, but there it is.

Westminster’s ‘Gay’ Secret?

Cameron has somehow injected bizarre ‘gay’ talking point into No.10 paedophile debate.

Cameron may have inadvertently revealed a commonly known secret within the halls of Parliament and something the public are mostly unaware of,  gay members of the government who are still ‘in the closet’, as it were. Is this what Cameron was referring to?

Cameron has raised a few important questions here. Firstly, are there gay MP’s who are in the closet? Of course there are.

Secondly, if you were a gay MP and still in the closet, would you wanted to be ‘outed’? Of course not.

So, could MP’s or politicos threaten to ‘out’ a gay MP, in order to gain some political leverage? That’s an important question, because the same logic would apply to any paedophile working within government. Hmmm, that could be a problem if that were to happen.

Bottom line: Britain, and not just the BBC, has an institutional child abuse problem, and it appears like the establishment are only interested in sweeping it back under the rug.

Maybe someone should be asking Cameron exactly what he meant when he referred to ‘gays’…




August 11, 2011

The British Prime Minister has vowed that rioters will pay for what they’ve done, as he addressed Parliament in the wake of clashes that engulfed the country. What started as a peaceful protest against police shooting a man in North London quickly grew into scenes of bedlam. London-based political analyst Sukrat Chandan believes the core of the problem is the lost generation of youth.


Unfair To Blame Technology For Assisting U.K. Rioters, Say Experts

August 11, 2011

By Lilly Vitorovich
August 11, 2011

LONDON (Dow Jones) – Blackberry’s BBM messaging network and social networking sites were Tuesday being blamed for helping rioters in London spread word about the next hot spot, but industry experts said it’s unfair to point the finger at technology.

Following three nights of rioting and looting in London, some police, politicians and media organisations singled out Blackberry’s messaging network as being a useful aid for troublemakers. It’s an “encrypted, very secure, safe, fast, cheap, free, easy way for disaffected urban youth to spread messages for the next targets”, according to Mike Butcher, editor of TechCrunch …


The Seeds of Sick Britain Were Sown by Cameron’s Own

August 10, 2011

By Giles Dexter
21st Century Wire
August 10, 2011

On Wednesday David Cameron finally admitted what many of us have known for some time: that parts of British society – what has come to be known as the ‘underclass’ – are “not just broken, they’re sick.”

Little does the Prime Minister realise that among youth the word “sick”, like the word “wicked”, now means something uber cool. So doubtless the rioters regard the epithet as a compliment.

It’s just one more example of just how appallingly out of touch the almost exclusively privately educated Tory cabinet are with great swathes of those they rule, but certainly don’t represent. They don’t even speak the same language.

THE IRON LADY: “There is no such thing as society, only individuals”.

The knee jerk reaction of a Conservative government when faced with civil strife has always been authoritarianism, their instinct being to demonise and criminalise. They are the ruling class, sustained by the bourgeoisie and the still deferential poor, and they always fight to defend their own. History has observed that save for exalting the market above all other social instruments, British conservatism isn’t really an ideology, it is a cadre of self-interest, whose overriding priority is the maintenance of its own wealth, position, privilege and power. In the current paradigm we are witnessing, it is safe to say that they are out of touch. And therein lie the seeds of the current malaise.

David Cameron is without a doubt the most intelligent and humane Conservative Prime Minister for half a century, now heading the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government, but we have some way to go before he acknowledges that the seeds of sick Britain were sewn in the 1980’s by his sometime idol, Lady Margaret Thatcher. In a remark that immediately revealed her to be Grantham’s answer to the simpleton Chauncey so brilliantly portrayed by Peter Sellers in ‘Being There’, Margaret Thatcher famously declared that there was “no such thing as society, only individuals”(sic).

Her government, and those of her proteges Messrs Major and Blair, took her at her word and between them – bit by bit, piece by piece, set about dismantling the civic, and very civil society that had evolved in Britain through the Great Reform Acts of the 19th century, Women’s Suffrage, Two World Wars and the founding of the modern Welfare State. Where once we all had a stake, now some are excluded. Until privatisation, each and every hoody and every single mum owned a tiny part of the enterprises that brought water to our taps, gas to our cookers and power to our lights, but no more. Where once we could travel around our capital and our country at modest expense on genuinely public transport, we no longer can. Where once education was free, it no longer is. Where we had public service and a common wealth, now we have only self service and private wealth. In a society shorn of any sense of public probity, where wealth distribution is skewed more strongly in favour of the rich (and more specifically the super rich) than in Victorian times and where money, possessions and celebrity are exalted above all and any other aims in life, is it any wonder that the often parentless, badly educated ‘underclass’ want to grab whatever they can ?

The smash and grab culture so unpleasantly displayed on Britain’s streets the last few nights is the unfortunate but inevitable result of a society that divides people sharply into ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ and where even many of the ‘winners’ have recently been unmasked as criminals of a very unpleasant kind. Of the few looters to be interviewed in the media, the overriding impression they give is that since no one cares about them, why should they care about anyone else ? While not overtly politically motivated, there is a more than dim awareness among most that while some banks are deemed too big fail, their government has no such qualms about watching them disappear down the plughole of society.

The millions that will never be an X-factor winner or play for Manchester United had been happy to spend most of the time hypnotised by the circus, but when that spell is broken, as it now is, the social cohesion based on shared values and principles that once held us together is missing.