[In the Drunk Tank]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I see the torygraph are piling on the pressure too.

Dismissing documented evidence and fact outright on the basis of the source, sounds like something Harman would do

[Jack_]

This disgusting rag having the audacity to accuse anyone of having any kind of association with paedophiles is ****ing appalling, since they exploit children and sexualise them every single ****ing day on their pathetic website.

I urge everyone to sign this petition and have this waste of paper finally have something to answer to.

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitio...ising-children

Preaching morality and standards is their editorial code, yet they plumb new depths every ****ing day. When will it be closed down?

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Jack_

This disgusting rag having the audacity to accuse anyone of having any kind of association with paedophiles is ****ing appalling, since they exploit children and sexualise them every single ****ing day on their pathetic website.

I urge everyone to sign this petition and have this waste of paper finally have something to answer to.

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitio...ising-children

Preaching morality and standards is their editorial code, yet they plumb new depths every ****ing day. When will it be closed down?

All very noble.... but what about Harman? Which is what this thread is about.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

I hardly call her link tenuous; her involvement with the organisation is a matter of record. And once some evidence regarding the others comes to light - and I wouldn't be at all surprised if it did - then those others must be held to account. But you can't ask people to apologise on the strength of someone's allegations.

Her involvement was with NCCL not PIE... Therefore it's not a direct link is it?
You shouldn't really ask someone to apologise for such a vague association, and it would seem that attitudinal change is what happens over the course of almost 4 decades.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Dismissing documented evidence and fact outright on the basis of the source, sounds like something Harman would do

Flashing a piece of paper on newsnight is not evidence...

[Christmas Dynasnow]

To be honest its about as big a story as the Milliband Dad hates britain one.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Livia

All very noble.... but what about Harman? Which is what this thread is about.

No, the thread is about the Mail bringing this story to the fore hence 'Harman vs the DM' in the title, and that petition was started to highlight their complete double standards - so it is absolutely relevant.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Her involvement was with NCCL not PIE... Therefore it's not a direct link is it?
You shouldn't really ask someone to apologise for such a vague association, and it would seem that attitudinal change is what happens over the course of almost 4 decades.

She was instrumental in an organisation that was affiliated to the organisation in question. Who DO we hold responsible then? PIE did not affiliate itself to NCCL without the knowledge of the people running NCCL. That's as direct as link as it's possible to be. Harman was right to apologise.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Jack_

No, the thread is about the Mail bringing this story to the fore hence 'Harman vs the DM' in the title, and that petition was started to highlight their complete double standards - so it is absolutely relevant.

But you've nothing to say about the subject of the story? Harman: right or wrong?

[arista]

Originally Posted by Livia

All very noble.... but what about Harman? Which is what this thread is about.

Yes Bang On Right


Typical of Jack
who should do his own thread about Owens Dream

[arista]

Originally Posted by Livia

But you've nothing to say about the subject of the story? Harman: right or wrong?

Yes even Labour MP's have said to Radio 5
Harman has not handled this well.

[arista]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Dismissing documented evidence and fact outright on the basis of the source, sounds like something Harman would do

Yes so typical of her

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

She was instrumental in an organisation that was affiliated to the organisation in question. Who DO we hold responsible then? PIE did not affiliate itself to NCCL without the knowledge of the people running NCCL. That's as direct as link as it's possible to be. Harman was right to apologise.

I disagree, here is an up to date less accusatory piece.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...-nccl-link-pie

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by arista

Yes so typical of her

Shurrup you! I am most wise

[arista]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Shurrup you! I am most wise

Yes
But I am talking about MP Cocky Harman

[arista]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I disagree, here is an up to date less accusatory piece.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...-nccl-link-pie

look at the beggers copying my Thread title

[arista]

Harman Denies Colluding With Paedophile Group

2 videos

http://news.sky.com/story/1216883/ha...edophile-group


She can stop all this and say Sorry

[arista]

Look at that Pathetic Labour MP
that photo is on many papers
kids on Holiday

[Nedusa]

Sorry !!! sorry for what ? for being a secret paedophile, for supporting paedophiles, for being unwittingly affiliated to a closet paedophile group who had deceitfully joined a mainstream civil liberties group in the sick perverted hope of trying to reduce or eliminate sexual age of consents.

Why exactly has this woman done to be sorry for ?

sorry for joining the N.C.C.L for which in the main campaigns for peoples rights ! sorry for trying to help people and make a difference.

What is wrong with people in this thread, why do so many think this woman is guilty and what is it they think she should apologise for ?

[arista]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

Sorry !!! sorry for what ? for being a secret paedophile, for supporting paedophiles, for being unwittingly affiliated to a closet paedophile group who had deceitfully joined a mainstream civil liberties group in the sick perverted hope of trying to reduce or eliminate sexual age of consents.

Why exactly has this woman done to be sorry for ?

sorry for joining the N.C.C.L for which in the main campaigns for peoples rights ! sorry for trying to help people and make a difference.

What is wrong with people in this thread, why do so many think this woman is guilty and what is it they think she should apologise for ?

Sorry for being Associated with that Group
Others have yesterday

[arista]

[Kizzy]

It's a smear campaign and I would say a very silly one...
Is there a members list for PIE I wonder?
If they want to start dirt digging from the 70s and 80s game on!
Lets start with fatty Cyril Smith or Sir Peter Morrison,or ask why Norman Tebbit gave the eulogy at Savilles funeral... the link is the freemasons I would say and the reason why there will never be a real investigation into abuses involving former MPs.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

It's a smear campaign and I would say a very silly one...
Is there a members list for PIE I wonder?
If they want to start dirt digging from the 70s and 80s game on!
Lets start with fatty Cyril Smith or Sir Peter Morrison,or ask why Norman Tebbit gave the eulogy at Savilles funeral... the link is the freemasons I would say and the reason why there will never be a real investigation into abuses involving former MPs.

Wrong

If it Was Conservative
they would Publish the same
the co-editor of DM has said.

C.Smith
has a thread
Do not go way off topic
Please

[Livia]

Originally Posted by arista

Wrong

If it Was Conservative
they would Publish the same
the co-editor of DM has said.

The MPs' expenses scandal was broken by the Telegraph. It wasn't political, they exposed MPs in all parties. No one should be protected because of who they represent.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by arista

Wrong

If it Was Conservative
they would Publish the same
the co-editor of DM has said.

C.Smith
has a thread
Do not go way off topic
Please

I disagree, there is plenty of dirt to be dug on conservatives but the mail would never do that because they are too bias, it's well known.
why not mention other MPs who are or knew about abusers?.... why is this woman being harassed by the mail due to a vague association with an organisation she was involved with in the 1970s?