The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

Post by Tony Bennett on 07.03.15 22:34

The government only gave way after being threatened with Court action



____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13972
Reputation : 2147
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

Post by Tony Bennett on 08.03.15 7:30

Cabinet office in child abuse cover-up: MoS beats attempt by No10 to gag VIP file that shows Thatcher knew about paedophile MP Cyril Smith


    By Chris Hastings and Martin Beckford for The Mail on Sunday


Published: 22:49, 7 March 2015 | Updated: 06:50, 8 March 2015

·  Downing Street tried to block release of files exposing scale of cover-up

· Cabinet Office only caved in after being threatened with High Court Action

· Papers expose how much Establishment knew about Cyril Smith's abuse

· Margaret Thatcher was told police had probed claims he abused teenagers

· She was warned that handing him knighthood risked damaging 'integrity of the honours system' - but went ahead anyway


Downing Street cynically tried to prevent the release of damaging files exposing the scale of the cover-up over paedophile MP Cyril Smith.

The Cabinet Office repeatedly blocked The Mail on Sunday’s attempts to see the bombshell documents – and caved in only after being threatened with High Court action.

After the shocking year-long fight, we can reveal the content of the papers, which expose just how much the Establishment knew about the late politician's sexal and physical abuse of young boys.






Margaret Thatcher (left) was personally told that police had investigated claims that Cyril Smith (right) indecently assaulted teenage boys in the 1960s

Nick Clegg and David Cameron, both Ministers in the Cabinet Office, have been accused of ‘colluding’ in the latest cover-up of evidence that could expose VIP paedophile rings.

The secrecy row will also focus attention on Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood, who has become known as ‘Sir Cover-Up’ after blocking the release of dozens of messages exchanged by Tony Blair and George W Bush ahead of the Iraq war.

Following The Mail on Sunday’s victory, it can be revealed for the first time that:

- Margaret Thatcher was personally told that police had investigated claims that Smith indecently assaulted teenage boys in the 1960s.

- Thatcher was explicitly warned that awarding a knighthood to the 29-stone Liberal MP risked damaging the ‘integrity of the honours system’, but went ahead anyway.

- A senior Whitehall mandarin took the ‘exceptional’ step of contacting the country’s top prosecutor and police to find out why Smith was never charged
 with abusing boys at a hostel he helped run.

 

Civil servants feared the secret Smith police file might be made public in 1982 – when a burglary at the Fleet Street offices of The Sun newspaper revealed the editor was in possession of a copy. This revelation will lead to speculation that the break-in was linked to attempts to cover up Smith’s crimes.

One insider told The Mail on Sunday that the matter is ‘on the Deputy Prime Minister’s desk’. The fact that the Cabinet Office blocked five attempts by The Mail on Sunday to see the papers will deepen fears of a cover-up at the highest levels over the activities of VIP paedophiles.

Labour MP Simon Danczuk, who exposed the scale of Smith’s abuse in Parliament, said: ‘Nick Clegg and David Cameron have colluded in covering this up. It involves their people and we should not have to learn about this piecemeal because of journalists pestering for information.

Clegg and Cameron accused over 'cover-up'

‘Both men need to come clean and make a personal commitment to revealing everything that is now held by Government departments.

‘The Prime Minister promised there would be no stone unturned into the inquiry of historic sex abuse in Westminster. But the Cabinet Office seems to be doing the opposite.

'Nick Clegg, who sits in this department, has already written to me refusing to carry out an investigation into who knew what about Cyril Smith in his party and it’s disappointing to see the Cabinet Office continuing this unhelpful approach.’


Smith was knighted in 1988 as recognition of his service as a councillor, mayor and MP in Rochdale, Lancashire.

After his death at the age of 82 in 2010, Clegg said he was ‘deeply saddened’ by the loss and said everyone in Rochdale knew him ‘as a friend’.

But two years later claims emerged that he repeatedly spanked and sexually abused boys in care homes and hostels, but the authorities saw to it that he was never brought to justice.

Channel 4's Dispatches uncover Cyril Smith's dark past (related)








Nick Clegg (left) and David Cameron (right), both Ministers in the Cabinet Office, have been accused of ‘colluding’ in the latest cover-up of evidence that could expose VIP paedophile rings


The Crown Prosecution Service revealed he had been investigated in 1970, 1988 and 1999 while Greater Manchester Police admitted there had been ‘overwhelming evidence’ that he abused boys both physically and sexually.

A year ago, after a battle with campaigners, the Cabinet Office was forced to reveal that former Liberal leader David Steel had proposed Smith for his knighthood.

Now The Mail on Sunday has finally been given unprecedented access to the Downing Street files on the case.

On April 28 last year, this newspaper put in a Freedom of Information request to the Cabinet Office asking for all No 10 correspondence on Smith’s knighthood, which should have been answered within a month.

But officials on four occasions put off providing a response, and then refused a request to review the case.

In October we complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office, which ruled last month that the Cabinet Office had broken the law by failing to respond to the original request. 


     

The secrecy row will also focus attention on Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood (pictured)


The regulator ordered the department provide the information or risk being reported to the High Court where ‘it may be dealt with as a contempt of court’.

A Minister in the Cabinet Office would have been called to court to explain why the information had not been disclosed.

On Friday the department finally released a 19-page dossier on the-secret discussions that led to Smith being knighted, although other pages were withheld on grounds of national security.

The Cabinet Office said: ‘We have released almost all of the information held about this matter. We concluded that the public interest favoured releasing this information rather than applying the usual exemptions that cover honours material. We are sorry that it has taken some time to consult all relevant officials.’

One undated letter, marked ‘secret’, from a leading member of the Political Honours Scrutiny Committee to Mrs Thatcher, warned of ‘the risk that such an award could give rise to adverse criticism’.

Lord Shackleton – son of the famous explorer – spelled out that police had investigated Smith in 1970 for ‘indecent assault against teenage boys’ between 1961 and 1966, but that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) had decided ‘there was no reasonable prospect of conviction’.

The letter mentions the case was reported in the Rochdale Alternative Press and Private Eye, adding: ‘One may regret this kind of press reporting but it could be revived if an award to Mr Smith were made.’

It also describes a little-known break-in at the The Sun newspaper in 1982 that led police to discover ‘the editor of The Sun had a copy of the 1970 police report’.

Lord Shackleton said it would be ‘slightly unfortunate’ if this ‘episode’ stopped Smith being knighted, but added: ‘We felt it right to warn you of our fear that the integrity of the honours system would be at some risk if the award were to be made and announced.’

A second note to the Prime Minister, dated May 1988, admitted the committee had ‘some hesitation’ about the award but concluded: ‘So far as we believe and have been able to ascertain, his past history or general character does not, in all the circumstances, render him unsuitable’.

A separate letter from the committee secretary says it decided to give Smith the ‘benefit of the doubt’ as he had never been prosecuted.




The secretary had earlier warned Sir Robin Butler, then Cabinet Secretary, that ‘the press might stir up adverse comment’ over Smith’s knighthood ‘if there is fire under this smoke’. To decide the issue they demanded to see the police evidence.

Sir Robin wrote to the DPP, saying: ‘The case for taking the exceptional step of writing to you in this way is to protect the Prime Minister (and The Queen) while also being fair to Mr Smith.’ He said the committee wanted to know ‘whether the case against Mr Smith was not well founded: or whether it was a sound case, but that the evidence was not likely to stand up in court’. No reply from the DPP is recorded.

The revelations will add to fears that the authorities knew high-profile figures were reportedly child abusers, but tried to keep the allegations secret.

The Cabinet Office is still refusing to release even the titles of four recently discovered historic files on child abuse, a decision called ‘disgusting’ by victims’ families.

An wide-ranging inquiry into historic allegations of child abuse in Britain has yet to get under way.

Last night the Lib Dems said: ‘Cyril Smith’s acts were vile and repugnant and we have nothing but sympathy for those whose lives he ruined. His actions were not known to or condoned by the Liberal Party or the Liberal Democrats.’


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2984529/Cabinet-office-child-abuse-cover-MoS-beats-attempt-No10-gag-VIP-file-shows-Thatcher-knew-paedophile-MP-Cyril-Smith.html#ixzz3TmD2fV5J

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13972
Reputation : 2147
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

Post by sallypelt on 08.03.15 11:11

@Tony Bennett wrote:Cabinet office in child abuse cover-up: MoS beats attempt by No10 to gag VIP file that shows Thatcher knew about paedophile MP Cyril Smith


    By Chris Hastings and Martin Beckford for The Mail on Sunday


Published: 22:49, 7 March 2015 | Updated: 06:50, 8 March 2015

·  Downing Street tried to block release of files exposing scale of cover-up

· Cabinet Office only caved in after being threatened with High Court Action

· Papers expose how much Establishment knew about Cyril Smith's abuse

· Margaret Thatcher was told police had probed claims he abused teenagers

· She was warned that handing him knighthood risked damaging 'integrity of the honours system' - but went ahead anyway


Downing Street cynically tried to prevent the release of damaging files exposing the scale of the cover-up over paedophile MP Cyril Smith.

The Cabinet Office repeatedly blocked The Mail on Sunday’s attempts to see the bombshell documents – and caved in only after being threatened with High Court action.

After the shocking year-long fight, we can reveal the content of the papers, which expose just how much the Establishment knew about the late politician's sexal and physical abuse of young boys.






Margaret Thatcher (left) was personally told that police had investigated claims that Cyril Smith (right) indecently assaulted teenage boys in the 1960s

Nick Clegg and David Cameron, both Ministers in the Cabinet Office, have been accused of ‘colluding’ in the latest cover-up of evidence that could expose VIP paedophile rings.

The secrecy row will also focus attention on Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood, who has become known as ‘Sir Cover-Up’ after blocking the release of dozens of messages exchanged by Tony Blair and George W Bush ahead of the Iraq war.

Following The Mail on Sunday’s victory, it can be revealed for the first time that:

- Margaret Thatcher was personally told that police had investigated claims that Smith indecently assaulted teenage boys in the 1960s.

- Thatcher was explicitly warned that awarding a knighthood to the 29-stone Liberal MP risked damaging the ‘integrity of the honours system’, but went ahead anyway.

- A senior Whitehall mandarin took the ‘exceptional’ step of contacting the country’s top prosecutor and police to find out why Smith was never charged
 with abusing boys at a hostel he helped run.

 

Civil servants feared the secret Smith police file might be made public in 1982 – when a burglary at the Fleet Street offices of The Sun newspaper revealed the editor was in possession of a copy. This revelation will lead to speculation that the break-in was linked to attempts to cover up Smith’s crimes.

One insider told The Mail on Sunday that the matter is ‘on the Deputy Prime Minister’s desk’. The fact that the Cabinet Office blocked five attempts by The Mail on Sunday to see the papers will deepen fears of a cover-up at the highest levels over the activities of VIP paedophiles.

Labour MP Simon Danczuk, who exposed the scale of Smith’s abuse in Parliament, said: ‘Nick Clegg and David Cameron have colluded in covering this up. It involves their people and we should not have to learn about this piecemeal because of journalists pestering for information.

Clegg and Cameron accused over 'cover-up'

‘Both men need to come clean and make a personal commitment to revealing everything that is now held by Government departments.

‘The Prime Minister promised there would be no stone unturned into the inquiry of historic sex abuse in Westminster. But the Cabinet Office seems to be doing the opposite.

'Nick Clegg, who sits in this department, has already written to me refusing to carry out an investigation into who knew what about Cyril Smith in his party and it’s disappointing to see the Cabinet Office continuing this unhelpful approach.’


Smith was knighted in 1988 as recognition of his service as a councillor, mayor and MP in Rochdale, Lancashire.

After his death at the age of 82 in 2010, Clegg said he was ‘deeply saddened’ by the loss and said everyone in Rochdale knew him ‘as a friend’.

But two years later claims emerged that he repeatedly spanked and sexually abused boys in care homes and hostels, but the authorities saw to it that he was never brought to justice.

Channel 4's Dispatches uncover Cyril Smith's dark past (related)








Nick Clegg (left) and David Cameron (right), both Ministers in the Cabinet Office, have been accused of ‘colluding’ in the latest cover-up of evidence that could expose VIP paedophile rings


The Crown Prosecution Service revealed he had been investigated in 1970, 1988 and 1999 while Greater Manchester Police admitted there had been ‘overwhelming evidence’ that he abused boys both physically and sexually.

A year ago, after a battle with campaigners, the Cabinet Office was forced to reveal that former Liberal leader David Steel had proposed Smith for his knighthood.

Now The Mail on Sunday has finally been given unprecedented access to the Downing Street files on the case.

On April 28 last year, this newspaper put in a Freedom of Information request to the Cabinet Office asking for all No 10 correspondence on Smith’s knighthood, which should have been answered within a month.

But officials on four occasions put off providing a response, and then refused a request to review the case.

In October we complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office, which ruled last month that the Cabinet Office had broken the law by failing to respond to the original request. 


     

The secrecy row will also focus attention on Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood (pictured)


The regulator ordered the department provide the information or risk being reported to the High Court where ‘it may be dealt with as a contempt of court’.

A Minister in the Cabinet Office would have been called to court to explain why the information had not been disclosed.

On Friday the department finally released a 19-page dossier on the-secret discussions that led to Smith being knighted, although other pages were withheld on grounds of national security.

The Cabinet Office said: ‘We have released almost all of the information held about this matter. We concluded that the public interest favoured releasing this information rather than applying the usual exemptions that cover honours material. We are sorry that it has taken some time to consult all relevant officials.’

One undated letter, marked ‘secret’, from a leading member of the Political Honours Scrutiny Committee to Mrs Thatcher, warned of ‘the risk that such an award could give rise to adverse criticism’.

Lord Shackleton – son of the famous explorer – spelled out that police had investigated Smith in 1970 for ‘indecent assault against teenage boys’ between 1961 and 1966, but that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) had decided ‘there was no reasonable prospect of conviction’.

The letter mentions the case was reported in the Rochdale Alternative Press and Private Eye, adding: ‘One may regret this kind of press reporting but it could be revived if an award to Mr Smith were made.’

It also describes a little-known break-in at the The Sun newspaper in 1982 that led police to discover ‘the editor of The Sun had a copy of the 1970 police report’.

Lord Shackleton said it would be ‘slightly unfortunate’ if this ‘episode’ stopped Smith being knighted, but added: ‘We felt it right to warn you of our fear that the integrity of the honours system would be at some risk if the award were to be made and announced.’

A second note to the Prime Minister, dated May 1988, admitted the committee had ‘some hesitation’ about the award but concluded: ‘So far as we believe and have been able to ascertain, his past history or general character does not, in all the circumstances, render him unsuitable’.

A separate letter from the committee secretary says it decided to give Smith the ‘benefit of the doubt’ as he had never been prosecuted.




The secretary had earlier warned Sir Robin Butler, then Cabinet Secretary, that ‘the press might stir up adverse comment’ over Smith’s knighthood ‘if there is fire under this smoke’. To decide the issue they demanded to see the police evidence.

Sir Robin wrote to the DPP, saying: ‘The case for taking the exceptional step of writing to you in this way is to protect the Prime Minister (and The Queen) while also being fair to Mr Smith.’ He said the committee wanted to know ‘whether the case against Mr Smith was not well founded: or whether it was a sound case, but that the evidence was not likely to stand up in court’. No reply from the DPP is recorded.

The revelations will add to fears that the authorities knew high-profile figures were reportedly child abusers, but tried to keep the allegations secret.

The Cabinet Office is still refusing to release even the titles of four recently discovered historic files on child abuse, a decision called ‘disgusting’ by victims’ families.

An wide-ranging inquiry into historic allegations of child abuse in Britain has yet to get under way.

Last night the Lib Dems said: ‘Cyril Smith’s acts were vile and repugnant and we have nothing but sympathy for those whose lives he ruined. His actions were not known to or condoned by the Liberal Party or the Liberal Democrats.’


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2984529/Cabinet-office-child-abuse-cover-MoS-beats-attempt-No10-gag-VIP-file-shows-Thatcher-knew-paedophile-MP-Cyril-Smith.html#ixzz3TmD2fV5J
It seems that Westminster has the same attitude to child sex abuse as the BBC has/had, when Esther Rancid work there, and that was to  "possibly ignore 'green ... room gossip', the implication being that it was classier to ignore it".

The whole establishment............FILTHY TO THE CORE!

sallypelt

Posts : 3305
Reputation : 524
Join date : 2012-11-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

Post by ChippyM on 08.03.15 11:22

I knew Thatcher knew....by the law of probability at least. She had sex offenders in her cabinet and turned a blind eye, she was chummy with Savile and it would seem neither her or her security detail noticed anything odd about the man, what are the chances?  It now seems 'official' that she knew about Smith and turned a blind eye.   One explanation would be that the security services knew all this and the tactic of letting it go on, or even setting it up and blackmailing MP's was taking place. Maybe Thatcher even knew Savile was involved in this and that's why she was so chummy with him.
      Searches are taking place in Leon Brittan's home now, maybe we will have another disgraced dead MP. When will they get to the living ones?

ChippyM

Posts : 910
Reputation : 129
Join date : 2013-06-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

Post by sallypelt on 08.03.15 11:24

@ChippyM wrote:I knew Thatcher knew....by the law of probability at least. She had sex offenders in her cabinet and turned a blind eye, she was chummy with Savile and it would seem neither her or her security detail noticed anything odd about the man, what are the chances?  It now seems 'official' that she knew about Smith and turned a blind eye.   One explanation would be that the security services knew all this and the tactic of letting it go on, or even setting it up and blackmailing MP's was taking place. Maybe Thatcher even knew Savile was involved in this and that's why she was so chummy with him.
      Searches are taking place in Leon Brittan's home now, maybe we will have another disgraced dead MP. When will they get to the living ones?

Here's another piece of the filth to add to the list, if it hasn't already been added on this forum:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11457405/Police-search-home-of-Lord-Bramall-as-part-of-paedophile-sex-abuse-inquiry.html

sallypelt

Posts : 3305
Reputation : 524
Join date : 2012-11-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

Post by sallypelt on 08.03.15 11:27

This is beginning to resemble the hunt for holocaust Nazis. They are either dead when it's revealed who they were, or they are so old they will die before they ever get to trial. Oh, unless you are a "small fish" and then you become a scapegoat.

Decent people, keep your heads down, because you are a threat to the whole filthy, rotten, stinking set-up

sallypelt

Posts : 3305
Reputation : 524
Join date : 2012-11-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

Post by Doug D on 08.03.15 12:34

Sallypelt:

'It seems that Westminster has the same attitude to child sex abuse as the BBC has/had, when Esther Rancid work there, and that was to  "possibly ignore 'green ... room gossip', the implication being that it was classier to ignore it".

The whole establishment............FILTHY TO THE CORE!'



Interesting that there was nothing on the BBC news or Andrew Marr earlier and whilst they showed the Mail front page (Cyril Smith), the Mirror (Brittan, Bramall, Proctor) did not even exist.

Only the Telegraph, Observer & Express get their front pages pictured on the BBC 'The Papers' website today for some reason, whereas normally about nine front pages are shown.

Doug D

Posts : 2147
Reputation : 639
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

Post by jeanmonroe on 08.03.15 12:42

@Doug D wrote:Sallypelt:

'It seems that Westminster has the same attitude to child sex abuse as the BBC has/had, when Esther Rancid work there, and that was to  "possibly ignore 'green ... room gossip', the implication being that it was classier to ignore it".

The whole establishment............FILTHY TO THE CORE!'



Interesting that there was nothing on the BBC news or Andrew Marr earlier and whilst they showed the Mail front page (Cyril Smith), the Mirror (Brittan, Bramall, Proctor) did not even exist.

Only the Telegraph, Observer & Express get their front pages pictured on the BBC 'The Papers' website today for some reason, whereas normally about nine front pages are shown.

Only the Telegraph, Observer & Express get their front pages pictured on the BBC 'The Papers' website today for some reason, whereas normally about nine front pages are shown

Because, as THEY keep, fondly, 'telling' US,

(BBC and 'politicians')

"WE ARE ALL "IN IT", TOGETHER!"

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5133
Reputation : 886
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

Post by Doug D on 08.03.15 17:46

Whilst on the subject of the BBC, this has just been highlighted from todays Guardian:
 
The sinister treatment of dissent at the BBC
 
Nick Cohen
 
The whistleblowers who broke the Jimmy Savile story have seen their careers nosedive while executives protect their own status
 
Guardian Sunday 8 March 2015
 
Nobody from John Humphrys in the morning to Evan Davis at night dares mention a scandal at the BBC. It undermines their reporting of every abuse whistleblowers reveal. It reinforces the dirty common sense of British life that you must keep your head down if you want to keep your job.

The scandal is simply this: the BBC is forcing out or demoting the journalists who exposed Jimmy Savile as a voracious abuser of girls. As Meirion Jones put it to me: “There is a small group of powerful people at the BBC who think it would have been better if the truth about Savile had never come out. And they aim to punish the reporters who revealed it.”

Jones was one of the BBC’s best investigative producers. He had suspected that Savile was not the “national treasure” the BBC, NHS, monarchy and public adored, ever since he had seen Savile take girls away in his car from an approved school his aunt ran in the 1970s. He broke the story which showed that Savile was one of the most prolific sex abusers in British history, and handed the BBC what would have been one of its biggest scoops. If it had run it. Which, of course, it did not. The editor of Newsnight banned the report. Thus began a cover-up which tore the BBC apart.

A week ago, Jones’s managers told him that a temporary assignment on Panorama was over. He should have been able to go back to his old job. But there was no old job to go back to. He had been fired.

Jones’s reporter on the Savile film was Liz MacKean, who documents the sufferings of the powerless – whether it be raped children in Britain or persecuted gay men in Putin’s Russia.

But she spoke out, so the BBC forced her out too. “When the Savile scandal broke,” she told me, “the BBC tried to smear my reputation. They said they had banned the film because Meirion and I had produced shoddy journalism. I stayed to fight them, but I knew they would make me leave in the end. Managers would look through me as if I wasn’t there. I went because I knew I was never going to appear on screen again.”
 
The BBC press office bridled when I described Jones and MacKean as “whistleblowers”. As the Pollard review of the Savile scandal had concluded that BBC management had acted in “good faith”, I must not call them that.

If you are tempted to agree, consider the sequel. Panorama responded magnificently to the news that the BBC had killed the Savile scoop. It broadcast a special documentary, which earned the highest audience in the programme’s history. Jones and MacKean described how their journalism had been suppressed, and Panorama went on to document Savile’s crimes. How open the BBC is, I thought. What other institution would subject itself to the same level of self-criticism?

What a fool I was. Since then, BBC managers have shifted Tom Giles, the editor of Panorama, out of news. Peter Horrocks, an executive who insisted throughout the scandal that the BBC must behave ethically, announced last September that he was resigning to “find new challenges”. Clive Edwards, who as commissioning editor for current affairs oversaw the Panorama documentary, was demoted. The television trade press reported recently that his future is “not yet clear” (which doesn’t sound as if he has much of a future at all).
Compare their treatment with those who did nothing to advance the public interest. As the Savile crisis deepened in the autumn of 2012, the BBC brought in Adrian Van Klaveren, the then head of Radio 5, to supervise news. He allowed Newsnight to falsely imply that Lord McAlpine was a child abuser – an allegation that every journalist who had investigated the child abuse allegations in North Wales could have told him was ridiculous. The disaster of Newsnight covering up the abuse by the BBC’s own celebrity rapist and then falsely accusing an innocent man led to the resignation of the director-general George Entwistle.

But Van Klaveren has been promoted, not squeezed out. He is head of something called “strategic change”. Helen Boaden, the BBC head of news at the time of the censorship, is now on the BBC’s executive board. Peter Rippon, the Newsnight editor who blocked Jones and MacKean, now has a comfortable job managing the BBC’s archive.

I could go on, but I am sure you are weary of bog-standard jobsworths. The wider point is that the interests of those at the top of an organisation and the interests of the organisation can be miles apart.

If the BBC had exposed Savile, viewers would have admired its honesty. If it had bent over backwards to ensure that Jones and MacKean did not suffer for speaking out, everyone would say that it was behaving as a free institution should, rather than looking like the official broadcaster of a paranoid dictatorship or the board of directors of HSBC.

In the banks, the NHS, the police or the BBC, the greatest threats to those in charge, however, are not threats to the institution but threats to their status. If subordinates can contradict them, how can they justify their salaries and the prestige that goes with them? The Pollard review into Savile showed that status anxiety was generating real hatred at the top of the BBC.

A senior BBC press officer vowed to “drip poison about Meirion’s suspected role”. He was later promoted. Peter Rippon said that if Jones spoke freely: “I will throw shit at him”.

The best aspect of modern culture is that it revolts against such hierarchical control. The computer revolution makes information sharing and cooperative ways of working easy to achieve. But hierarchies have men and women at their summits who will fight as ferociously as BBC executives to protect their position, and prevent democratic change.

The case of Jones and MacKean makes my point. I have reported on it in the Observer and Private Eye has covered it too. But the Tory press, which daily bashes the BBC, has avoided the story. You only have to look at the Telegraph to understand why it does not want to encourage insubordination. Its journalists must resign before they can protest against HSBC’s control of its news pages.

The power of hierarchies is hard to break. But if you want to fight fraud in the City or the rape of children, it has to be broken. A start can be made by insisting that everyone from John Humphrys in the morning to Evan Davis at night tells the truth about the purge of the BBC’s truth tellers.
 
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/08/bbc-whistleblowers-jimmy-savile

Doug D

Posts : 2147
Reputation : 639
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

Post by mad world on 08.03.15 17:52

We know they know that we know they all knew. Although i am not religious i hope satan and his minions are inserting instruments into these paedos rectums for eternity...while thatcher watches on roasting in the coal that the miners supplied. My idea of karma

mad world

Posts : 69
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2015-02-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

Post by Tony Bennett on 08.03.15 18:02

@Doug D wrote:Whilst on the subject of the BBC, this has just been highlighted from todays Guardian:
 
The sinister treatment of dissent at the BBC
 
Nick Cohen
 
The whistleblowers who broke the Jimmy Savile story have seen their careers nosedive while executives protect their own status
 
Guardian Sunday 8 March 2015
 
Nobody from John Humphrys in the morning to Evan Davis at night dares mention a scandal at the BBC. It undermines their reporting of every abuse whistleblowers reveal. It reinforces the dirty common sense of British life that you must keep your head down if you want to keep your job.

The scandal is simply this: the BBC is forcing out or demoting the journalists who exposed Jimmy Savile as a voracious abuser of girls. As Meirion Jones put it to me: “There is a small group of powerful people at the BBC who think it would have been better if the truth about Savile had never come out. And they aim to punish the reporters who revealed it.”

Jones was one of the BBC’s best investigative producers. He had suspected that Savile was not the “national treasure” the BBC, NHS, monarchy and public adored, ever since he had seen Savile take girls away in his car from an approved school his aunt ran in the 1970s. He broke the story which showed that Savile was one of the most prolific sex abusers in British history, and handed the BBC what would have been one of its biggest scoops. If it had run it. Which, of course, it did not. The editor of Newsnight banned the report. Thus began a cover-up which tore the BBC apart.

A week ago, Jones’s managers told him that a temporary assignment on Panorama was over. He should have been able to go back to his old job. But there was no old job to go back to. He had been fired.

Jones’s reporter on the Savile film was Liz MacKean, who documents the sufferings of the powerless – whether it be raped children in Britain or persecuted gay men in Putin’s Russia.

But she spoke out, so the BBC forced her out too. “When the Savile scandal broke,” she told me, “the BBC tried to smear my reputation. They said they had banned the film because Meirion and I had produced shoddy journalism. I stayed to fight them, but I knew they would make me leave in the end. Managers would look through me as if I wasn’t there. I went because I knew I was never going to appear on screen again.”
 
The BBC press office bridled when I described Jones and MacKean as “whistleblowers”. As the Pollard review of the Savile scandal had concluded that BBC management had acted in “good faith”, I must not call them that.

If you are tempted to agree, consider the sequel. Panorama responded magnificently to the news that the BBC had killed the Savile scoop. It broadcast a special documentary, which earned the highest audience in the programme’s history. Jones and MacKean described how their journalism had been suppressed, and Panorama went on to document Savile’s crimes. How open the BBC is, I thought. What other institution would subject itself to the same level of self-criticism?

What a fool I was. Since then, BBC managers have shifted Tom Giles, the editor of Panorama, out of news. Peter Horrocks, an executive who insisted throughout the scandal that the BBC must behave ethically, announced last September that he was resigning to “find new challenges”. Clive Edwards, who as commissioning editor for current affairs oversaw the Panorama documentary, was demoted. The television trade press reported recently that his future is “not yet clear” (which doesn’t sound as if he has much of a future at all).
Compare their treatment with those who did nothing to advance the public interest. As the Savile crisis deepened in the autumn of 2012, the BBC brought in Adrian Van Klaveren, the then head of Radio 5, to supervise news. He allowed Newsnight to falsely imply that Lord McAlpine was a child abuser – an allegation that every journalist who had investigated the child abuse allegations in North Wales could have told him was ridiculous. The disaster of Newsnight covering up the abuse by the BBC’s own celebrity rapist and then falsely accusing an innocent man led to the resignation of the director-general George Entwistle.

But Van Klaveren has been promoted, not squeezed out. He is head of something called “strategic change”. Helen Boaden, the BBC head of news at the time of the censorship, is now on the BBC’s executive board. Peter Rippon, the Newsnight editor who blocked Jones and MacKean, now has a comfortable job managing the BBC’s archive.

I could go on, but I am sure you are weary of bog-standard jobsworths. The wider point is that the interests of those at the top of an organisation and the interests of the organisation can be miles apart.

If the BBC had exposed Savile, viewers would have admired its honesty. If it had bent over backwards to ensure that Jones and MacKean did not suffer for speaking out, everyone would say that it was behaving as a free institution should, rather than looking like the official broadcaster of a paranoid dictatorship or the board of directors of HSBC.

In the banks, the NHS, the police or the BBC, the greatest threats to those in charge, however, are not threats to the institution but threats to their status. If subordinates can contradict them, how can they justify their salaries and the prestige that goes with them? The Pollard review into Savile showed that status anxiety was generating real hatred at the top of the BBC.

A senior BBC press officer vowed to “drip poison about Meirion’s suspected role”. He was later promoted. Peter Rippon said that if Jones spoke freely: “I will throw shit at him”.

The best aspect of modern culture is that it revolts against such hierarchical control. The computer revolution makes information sharing and cooperative ways of working easy to achieve. But hierarchies have men and women at their summits who will fight as ferociously as BBC executives to protect their position, and prevent democratic change.

The case of Jones and MacKean makes my point. I have reported on it in the Observer and Private Eye has covered it too. But the Tory press, which daily bashes the BBC, has avoided the story. You only have to look at the Telegraph to understand why it does not want to encourage insubordination. Its journalists must resign before they can protest against HSBC’s control of its news pages.

The power of hierarchies is hard to break. But if you want to fight fraud in the City or the rape of children, it has to be broken. A start can be made by insisting that everyone from John Humphrys in the morning to Evan Davis at night tells the truth about the purge of the BBC’s truth tellers.
 
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/08/bbc-whistleblowers-jimmy-savile
I cannnot think of a single whistleblower, ANYWHERE, that has been appreciated.

They are nearly always DETESTED

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13972
Reputation : 2147
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Cyril Smith paedophile ring WAS covered up by the Cabinet - Mail on Sunday 8 Mar 2015

Post by mad world on 08.03.15 18:05

Where are they ever appreciated...check out ed jesuadon case involving child death rates in an nhs trust..i can't find the link.

mad world

Posts : 69
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2015-02-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum