Harriet Harman was one of the people who ran the NCCL. That's hardly a "vague association".

I really have little liking for Harriet Harman at all, I find her humerous at times but not very effective.
She is not a politician I have any admiration for.

However, this is over 30 years ago, it comes from the Daily Mail which hardly has any, if indeed it has any at all, decent morals whatsoever.

All the news has said today is that no one in parliament does or would have any belief she was a supporter of paedophilia.
She has said herself that this organisation was part of the organsiation when she joined.

This is a disgrace that this paper gets away with damning politicians like this, it's whole headlines at first glance, sets out to convey that these people from Labour, had involvement with supporting a paedophile group just because it was already part of an organisation that they had joined.

That is a disgusting slur and in my view, and is by me, should be condemned in the name of all decency.
It is the Daily Mail that should be apologising for its really disgusting headlines as with Ed Milibands Father too last year.

I see nothing Hattie Harperson should apologise for,to do so would then have them saying she had incriminated herself by apologising.
That is ridiculous and I would be saying this no matter what party the Daily Mail was getting at as to its MPs, even Lib Dems.

Why this rotten rag and the equally rotten Sun are even classed as genuine newspapers is beyond me and I would never believe anything either says because of the disgraceful way they headline and word their so called moral reporting.

Thank goodness I would never ever buy either of them, they should be removed from newstands in my opinion as they do far greater disservice to the Country than any service to it.

PIE was ejected from this organisation in 1983 it is reported, that is near 30 years ago,how can this be current news for goodness sake.

she ran the nccl so she should fry , simple as that

It was one of 1000 other action groups that the NCCL were aware of, should people start suggesting she is instrumental in supporting all those too?
As I've said people in glass houses ....
https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...vbs-report.pdf

Exactly, and why aren't all the people invovlved with the NCCL being pilloried like she is by the Daily Mail.
I am fed up of papers with these political vendettas against certain parties.
This is ancient news, this must have been known in the 70s and early 80s but it is getting massive attention now from the Daily mail, it didn't seem bothered at the time.

Sheer hypocrisy,it drives me mad and it amazes me that the Daily Mail and The Sun have anyone wasting money on them.

Harriett Harman is looking in line to be deputy PM in 2015 and that is all what is behind this Daily Mail hypocrisy, it failed with Ed Miliband and his Father so now it is raking up other nonsense.
I thouhgt all was ably explained by someone on Newsnight last night from the States who gave good and frank answers to this when asked but who also made no apologies and saw no reason for Harriet Harman to either.
He was there when she was and talked far more fairly and made more sense than anyone will ever get from the rag that is the Daily Mail.

Who buys it for goodness sake, why waste money on these awful people and line their pockets.I don't know of a single person who reads it, even my Dad who is usually Conservative wouldn't have the Daily Mail in the house.
I never see any reason whatsoever to buy a paper really, we have blanket news on radio and TV, which thankfully is presented more balanced most of the time than what we are served up by the gutter press like the Sun and Daily Mail.

For me, this is a pointless thing from the Daily Mail and although I can see faults with Labour as I can with all parties,this endless sort of witchhunt by the Daily Mail against prominent Labour MPs is really becoming tiresome now.
It looks and is stupid really.

Totally joey it is nothing more than an aggressive smear campaign against labour, it's just so screamingly obvious now they don't even attempt to mask it.

If it was they would take the paper to Court.

No they wouldn't, it's not worth giving the rubbish any more thought.

But it Goes On


The child sex attacker and Soviet spy
who was in the vile group legitimised by Harman and chums

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2uQKkQ29R

Well it's just getting ridiculous now...

It isn't, you are spot on Kizzy.
In fact it is a pity decent people have to even glance at the headlines of this vile paper in shops and stores,a publication that hardly itself has any good record as to decency on most things anyway.

Far better to let this die a death,(as was the case with the despicable slur as to Ed Miliband and his dead Father), than give the Daily Mail the added bonus of a likely lengthy court battle and the publicity that would come from that too.

The truth is, if this had been, for instance, Theresa May, this thread would read quite differently. The same people claiming it's a slur campaign, who are ignoring the facts because of who published them and thinking we should all turn a blind eye for Harman, would be baying for blood. No one moaned about the Telegraph, or as it's been called in this thread "The Torygraph", when it was ridiculing the Tories because of moats and duck houses... then it was all about the freedom of the press. It's actually, in a strange way, quite amusing.

If you mean me and we both know you do then you're wrong, the issue is with the bias of the DM livia, not ours.
At least the torygraph attempts to remain impartial, that's something to smile about at least.

You know I generally love to agree with you Livia but speaking for myself anyway, if this had been Theresa May, and she is a politician I dislike intensely.
I would still be stating this this is a ridiculous smear to be making.
Had there been an ounce of evidence that harriett Harman or anyone else had been supporters of paedophilia then I would be condemning them as much as this vile paper is.

As to the Telegraph and the expenses scandal, the difference there was what was exposed were a lot of truths that some have even gone to prison for and from all parties.
So a far fairer and balanced reporting of that issue from the Telegraph I would have to admit.
I have said all through, no matter who this current awful Daily Mail matter was aimed at, or from what party, I would be condemning 100% still the Daily Mail.

Harriett Harman is far from being one of my favourite politicians but as for anyone who would have been in this position with the Daily Mail,I have to say, I neither agree with how they have gone about it and no one should have to put up with their vile smearing practices any longer.
Enough should have been enough with the slur as to Ed Miliband and his deceased Father, likewise there too, I would have been saying that had they been getting at David Cameron's or Nick Clegg's Father.

For me the Daily Mail is indefensible just out of decency alone,just my view but I believe in fairness.
What I want from so called 'newspapers' is proper news, correctly reported and positions not used to engage in smear campaigns trying to make it look like there is more where there is in reality nothing to answer to really.

It would seem all attempts to bring the press to some accountability for their actions has been a waste of time and money.
If this goes on then I may even go as far as to say there should even be some curbs on the press in future as to what they print and how they print it.

To be thought of as responsible people need to prove they are and not engage in slurs and smears like this hiding behind the name of reporting and journalism.

We'll have to disagree on this one joey. While I agree with your thoughts on the Daily Mail, Harman is still responsible. She ran an organisation that affiliated itself knowingly to a group that supports paedophiles. That's the bottom line for me. What her involvement actually was is something that I'm sure will come to light eventually because the truth will out, and I'm sure other, more worthy newspapers will be picking up this story.

Well you know I always respect and most of the time take on board your opinion across the board.

However to be really fair, she was 'not' the only person actually running it or the only person in an influential position there,she herself called PIE a vile organisation.

She was only a legal advisor, maybe the only possible criticism as to her would be that as a legal advisor she could have said it would be better for PIE to be removed from this organisation, which in any case it was in 1983.
That however,to me, is still nothing to apologise for.
As the man from the States said on newsnight last night who was there at the time, he saw nothing to apologise for as to this issue either from him or from Harriet Harman.

Just where do we allow the press to go with these kangaroo type courts of reporting and the time it has taken for this to be headline news.
All through the late 70s and 80s it seems it was not a big issue then to make front page headlines,it is time these witchhunts were stopped and I still find it distasteful and unjust really.

I am sure a great number of politicians from every party and indeed others in public life have come across and even been semi close to dubious and very unpleasant organisations at some time and certainly when younger.

David Cameron I understand had close connections to some organisation that would have called for Nelson Mandela to be executed over 30 years or so ago.
There is another big issue for me but I am sure David Cameron has well and truly moved away from that stance and I would never say it was right that it was something to hold against him at the time of Nelson Mandela's death or now after all that time.
Not liking Harriet Harman, or any politician from any party,is no justification for crucifying them for their past involvements that they may have come across in their studying years or early work years either.

As you say thowever, we will have to agree to disagree because personally I see nothing that she has to apologise for, not really, and I am not going to speculate that more could be found as to her either.
I firmly believe that anyone cannot and should not be condemned for things not even said or things that are not even known acts.

labour stink theres no need for a smear camaign, bunch of crooks and war criminals

[Labour's Patricia Hewitt last night apologised
after The Sun confronted her for backing
a paedophile plan for the age of
consent to be Ten in certain cases.
The ex-Health Secretary put her name
to a document that also wanted
to legalise incest. She and Jack Dromey,
now a Labour MP, were members of a
committee recommending a
revolutionary change in child sex laws.
Our investigation showed how she backed the
work of the Paedophile Information
Exchange (PIE) in the
1970s and 1980s. She said: “I got it wrong
on PIE and I apologise for having done so.”
The call to lower the age of consent came in 1976,
when Ms Hewitt was general secretary of the
National Council for Civil Liberties
(NCCL) — whose links with PIE have provoked a storm.
Labour’s deputy leader Harriet Harman
and her MP husband Jack Dromey were
also NCCL members, but this is the first
time one of the party’s politicians has been
shown to directly endorse extreme views
on child sex. ]

from sun+online

http://media.skynews.com/media/image...-1-329x437.png



here we go again

In fairness Patricia Hewitt was far more senior at NCCL than Harriet Harman ever was. I think also the Sun headline is a bit of an over the top too.
I knew it would have to get in on the act eventually being such a great example of moral virtue itself,I think not.

I can just about bring myself to comment on the mail... but the sun? forget it!

Awful thing to be on the news stands Kizzy, I only see any of it when people post its headlines on here.

I even know someone who buys the thing every day of the week, never looks at it but on Saturday takes out the TV mag then all them just go in her bin.
Over £3 a week spent on it and she and no one connected to her ever even reads it.