The BBC has long ignored the links between the NCCL and the Paedophile Information Exchange…or rather its links to certain members of the Labour Party….it is quite apparent that the NCCL knew precisely what PIE stood for and yet still allowed itself to be persuaded that PIE was a persecuted minority in need of the NCCL’s protection.
It is also clear that the NCCL actively worked in support of some of PIE’s aims as shown below in its attempt to lower the age of consent.
Harman, Hewitt and Dromey were intimately involved in the NCCL’s activities and cannot possibly claim not to know what PIE stood for…despite that Dromey now claims he fought assiduously against PIE….and yet PIE remained affiliated long after he left.
Today the BBC has decided to defend those members, helping Labour attempts to discredit the story (as the BBC did with the Mail’s report on Ralph Miliband…one all too true):
Deputy Labour leader Harriet Harman has accused the Daily Mail of running a “politically-motivated smear campaign” against her.
The newspaper has reported that a group she used to work for had links to paedophile rights campaigners.
The National Council for Civil Liberties forged “close links” in the 1970s and 1980s to Paedophile Information Exchange, it claimed.
But Ms Harman dismissed the “horrific” and “untrue” claims.
The BBC of course does nothing to investigate the claims and just provides a platform for Harman and Dromey to deny everything and claim they are victims of a political smear.
The first I heard on the BBC was on the Victoria Derbyshire show today (53 mins) in which she said ‘some commentators [unnamed] say it is a witch hunt and hysteria’.
Note her very careful wording that attempts to dismiss the story and claims there is a need to break through to the truth…to get to the origins of these [patently false] claims by a right wing rag.
She then brought on the Labour supporting Mirror’s associate editor, Kevin Macguire who said the Mail was probably wrong and guilty of bullying, intimidation and playing politics….but Harman and Co should come out and say so if that is the case.
No attempt to investigate the truth here either by the BBC.
So let’s have a look at some history and inconvenient truths that the BBC doesn’t want to dwell on…..
‘An awareness and acceptance of the sexuality of children is an essential part of the liberation of the young homosexual,’
Campaign for Homosexual Equality 1975
Patricia Hewitt was a member of the CHE.
Lord Smith….head of the Environment Agency is……
Vice-Chairman of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality.
A connection he didn’t seem to want to publicise widely.
CHE is delighted to announced that Lord Smith of Finsbury has agreed to become one of our Vice-Presidents. As Chris Smith he was Britain’s first openly gay MP and he’s currently Chairman of the Environment Agency.
A few months later…….
Pink News tells us that in July 2009 this happened:
The Campaign for Homosexual Equality has been disaffiliated from human rights organisation Liberty, allegedly over a motion which called for a time limit on reporting child sex abuse.
The contentious motion read: “We urge the government to introduce a Statute of Limitation which would debar any criminal prosecution in respect of alleged child abuse unless the matter was brought to the attention of the police within five years of the complainant reaching the age of majority.”
The group has claimed that in cases of historic abuse, evidence or acknowledgment of an accused man being gay can damage his chances of acquittal due to homophobia and confusion between homosexuality and paedophilia.
Liberty said…...”In particular, your motion on child sex abuse is also clearly contrary to the objectives of Liberty”
And remember this hero……
Peter Tatchell: Not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful.
‘The positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships is not confined to non-Western cultures. Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy.
‘While it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful.’
This is a submission by the NCCL in 1976 to Parliament urging changes to the age of consent…..which is surely in support of those who want to have sex with underage children…..paedophiles in other words….10 year olds were fair game it seems…as long as they ‘understood the nature of the act’…………so not really a ‘smear’ by the Daily Mail….
Here we can see the dates when the Labour trio were involved:
Former health secretary Patricia Hewitt was general secretary of the NCCL from 1974-83, Harman was its legal officer from 1978-82 and Dromey sat on the group’s executive committee for nine years, between 1970 and 1979.
During those years, the NCCL built links with PIE and lobbied parliament on behalf of its agenda. Close relations between the groups were apparently founded on the shared principle of social and sexual progressiveness.
PIE members maintained that sexual relations between children and adults did not harm the former.
In 1978, Harman claimed that sex abuse images should be given back to paedophiles by police who had seized them because doing otherwise would be censorship.
PIE was only disaffiliated in 1983…long after Dromey left.
The Guardian in 2012 ran this charming exercise in rebranding paedophiles as victims….
In 1976 the National Council for Civil Liberties, the respectable (and responsible) pressure group now known as Liberty, made a submission to parliament’s criminal law revision committee. It caused barely a ripple. “Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in with an adult,” it read, “result in no identifiable damage … The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage.”
The reclassification of paedophilia as a sexual orientation would, however, play into what Goode calls “the sexual liberation discourse”, which has existed since the 1970s. “There are a lot of people,” she says, “who say: we outlawed homosexuality, and we were wrong. Perhaps we’re wrong about paedophilia.”
Social perceptions do change. Child brides were once the norm; in the late 16th century the age of consent in England was 10. More recently, campaigning organisations of the 70s and 80s such as the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) and Paedophile Action for Liberation were active members of the NCCL when it made its parliamentary submission questioning the lasting damage caused by consensual paedophilic relations.
Harman says PIE ‘infiltrated’ the NCCL….that suggests a secret and clandestine operation….this suggests otherwise……
In the PIE Chairperson’s Annual Report for 1975-6, Keith Hose wrote that ‘The only way for PIE to survive, was to seek out as much publicity for the organization as possible…. If we got bad publicity we would not run into a corner but stand and fight. We felt that the only way to get more paedophiles joining PIE… was to seek out and try to get all kinds of publications to print our organization’s name and address and to make paedophilia a real public issue.’
This might also suggest otherwise…can Harman et al say they had no idea at all of the views of these people?…..
NCCL also set up a gay rights sub-committee at the same time, members of which included prominent paedophiles Peter Bremner (alias Roger Nash), Michael Burbidge, Keith Hose and Tom O’Carroll. And of course Walters and Locke were on the Executive.
The Daily Mail in December last year revealed the background to why PIE was accepted by the NCCL…..
‘The PIE somehow managed to convince feminists and the gay rights lobby that they had shared values and that we all belonged in the same club,’ recalls one feminist writer whose magazine was lobbied for support by the PIE after the Exchange won NCCL affiliation.
‘Anyone who spoke out against them feared being called a “homophobe”, which in Left-wing circles at the time was about the biggest insult anyone could throw at you. So they were invited into the liberal establishment.’
A PIE ‘information’ leaflet published at the time, called Paedophilia: Some Questions And Answers, shows how the organisation had managed to ally its cause to the gay rights movement.
‘Homosexuals are now widely regarded as ordinary, healthy people — a minority, but no more “ill” than the minority who are left-handed,’ it read. ‘There is no reason why paedophilia should not win similar acceptance.’
The NCCL — then under the chairmanship of Henry Hodge, the Left-wing solicitor who would go on to marry Labour MP Margaret Hodge — appears to have bought this argument hook, line and sinker.
‘The PIE was also being picketed by the National Front, so a lot of people also supported them on the basis that our enemy’s enemy had to be our friend,’ says the writer. ‘It seems terrifyingly simplistic now, obviously, but that was the political context.’
It doesn’t take long to dig up such information.
The BBC obviously either can’t be bothered or believes there is something to hide.
Here is a page from PIE’s manifesto in 1975 which proposes that there be no age of consent…in other words almost any child over the age of 4 (under 4 and it still wouldn’t be a ‘criminal’ matter) could be a victim:
This manifesto was widely available and handed out at various conferences for 50p a go.
“labour25”
http://labour25.com/
Wow – and there was me thinking that the Limp Dims were the party for people who prefer sex with the vulnerable.
This is pretty damning, and I bet there is loads more to come!
Truly shocking. (Thanks GeorgeR) others who should be listed are ‘Co-op Bank’ Bob Flowers as well as Cyril Smith (a Liberal MP). Others connected to the BBC media sexualisation agenda of ‘lowering the age of consent’ (a constant BBC theme) should be exposed as being clearly implicated along with Saville.
Contained within the above link is this:
In a North Lincolnshire Town, the public voted for Labour Councillor and paedophile David Spooner. Evil paedophile Labour Party David Spooner. Labour25 convicted and listed David Spooner had his eye on Two young boys from the local area where he sat as a Labour Councillor.
Is this true or not? You’ll search in vain for the bBBC to tell us.
NCCL vigorously opposed new cornerstone child abuse legislation. In a letter to the Home Office in April 1978, it argued fiercely that child pornography should not be banned as “indecent” unless it could be shown that the child depicted had been harmed. The NCCL official who wrote this letter was its legal officer, Harriet Harman.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/10653944/The-right-to-sleep-with-children-was-one-civil-liberty-that-NCCL-supported.html
PIE – NCCL – Savile – BBC
As somebody who was put into care during the 70s due to the Islamic penchant for physical violence. If I had been affected by any pedophile I would hunt him/ her down and in front of their family reduce that person to a nothing less than a fully paid up cripple. Anybody who supported that pedophile would receive the same treatment. These so called do gooders can thank their lucky stars nobody has been near my arse.
The Two Show with Harman just now…
Excuse my language, but what a complete f***ing bitch that woman is.
Well, newsnight have shown the interview with harperson by kungsberg…..it strikes me the bbc have decided it’s harriet or them, and self preservation has finally kicked in.
Having got themselves on a hook, pathetically excused by legal nonsense, they are mow rapidly trying to wriggle off it, and appear prepared to toss Harriden to the wolves.
Oh, and they have shown tomorrows mail front page….well well.
Twitter… Darling of the errati, does have its uses to those no longer legally able to watch live broadcast.
—
@TheRedRag: If you missed @bbclaurak paxo @HarrietHarman on #Newsnight you can watch in now here http://t.co/0Uu2BWLZzA (for next hour)
I too remain intrigued at was under lawyer’s orders before that is no longer.
All that has changed is the appearance of a protagonist in denial, rather than any existing factual claims from the public domain that have been everywhere bar the BBC for days.
Harman looked rattled. Could we finally be rid of her and Dromey? Oh God, let it be so.
I only saw the second half of her interview but it looked like Laura K had forgotten she was back at the leftie BBC and conducted a professional interview, refusing to let Harman off the hook, and pointedly discussing with Paxman where Harman was still wriggling.
Supplementary.
“Paedophile Information Exchange”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paedophile_Information_Exchange
I’ve just rewatched the Laura K interview. Harperson essentially accuses the Daily Mail of publishing indecent images. Room for a Dacre lawsuit?
Laura K impressive.
Harman disgusting. A moral vacuum, content to dance on the head of a pin in an effort to save her own skin.
Agree. May have to revise opinion of Ms. K.
She may have to hire some guards though, as the Harmanites are going ballistic at a BBC employee not covering for the Labour Deputy Leader.
The attempt at making moral equivalence between a trashy tabloid’s prurient imagery and much darker actual activities and advocacy was risible.
And I’m glad Ms. K was having none of it, rightly so. And she seemed appalled that Harperson, who has forged a career on guilt by association with her perceived foes, was gaily trying to claim that you could do whatever you liked under her legal oversight, so long as you stumped up a £10 fee to keep the funding levels up.
Fascinating piece, from the cringeworthy Miliband hand gesture performance at the start to the captioning.
Some serious convos off the record tonight and tomorrow, one would imagine.
Wading through all the twitter fun I notice Mr. Katz was not actually there. One may wonder if what oozed down the old Newsnight slipshod would have been the same if he had.
Another issue, but he also actually trotted out the now totally credibility-bereft excuse that there wasn’t time to do a proper job.
I have always believed that a story is only a story when it is on the BBC News. Harman was doing fine, she kept her mouth shut and the story was dying.
But then she went on the Beeb to attack the Daily Mail. But during the interview the Beeb ran over and kicked Hatty in the teeth.
She won’t get up from that one.
Tend to agree.
Silence was again proving golden, for all involved.
And then Newsnight had a fit of actual left hand, right hand lack of management oversight and/or maybe even discovered some journalistic integrity while Katz was away, only this time it went to air.
I just can’t figure out what went through Ed and her handlers’ minds here, unless she was being set up for a fall for the greater good.
Nothing added up. She’s a lawyer, surrounded by lawyers, from a party obsessive in ‘defending integrity’ by any and all means, and it was seriously suggested that lack of money, and the desire ‘not to dignify’ some pretty black and white facts with a response (calling them smears worked so well, from the skidmark sister), was the temporary excuse?
And on matters legal, I again wonder what changed internally with the BBC’s finest exemption squad, such that they sat, and sat, and sat on this until this point.
As Rennard found with Clegg, and any Tory with a mind of their own around Cameron, party trumps person.
It may be the Queen gets sacrificed early in the game lest the King is threatened when it’s too late to counter.
Not ideal, but this one was an an area where tribal political loyalties tend to count little with the most stalwart voters, and even the BBC buys one of those periodic chips it can wave about like Andrew Neil or a simply properly reported ME story that has the twitter mob baying to get back to where their ‘balance’ usually resides.
It would be interesting if and what forgettable convos were had in corridors or lobbies on this one.
The only thing I do note is the peripheral stance of ‘other’ media still. They are letting the DM fight this one, and staying with simply stating moves rather than ‘analysing’ as all love to do usually.
So Ms. Harman says… and the DM dismisses, etc.
Few are yet committing to look in detail at what lies behind. If the DM holds its nerve, and the BBC simply steers clear as it had done to now, she is already in danger of being sacrificed. Others start to get off the fence on their own bat (and that interview must have pushed some buttons on a professional basis) and that danger intensifies. The BBC actually stays with it, and treats it like it has previous blood in water political stories… she’s toast.
If so, it will be interesting how the others fare, and also how Statesman Ed gets painted.
If Ed doesn’t throw her to the wolves, his party is toast in the short term. They are unable to bury this story, even if a good day to bury bad news comes along to help them. A failure to kill it off now will only result in it laying dormant until just before the next GE.
Still waiting to hear anything on albeeba as to why they have stayed silent thus far, and hence why the change now.
Breitbart London carries the Newsnight interview – a corker !
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/02/25/VIDEO-Harman-responds-to-Mail-Claims
For balance the BBC should start every bulletin with
‘Three leading socialists of the Blair/Brown era…’
Shouldn’t they also add, ‘ and this time its true’ !
BBC R5 is now mentioning the Harman allegations and denials. Being careful to make sure it’s clear that these are allegations made by the Daily Mail.
I caught Nicky Campbell earlier this morning saying “There seemed to be no mechanism to remove them”, ‘them’ being PIE. Poor Harriet and co. Confounded by paedos with an affiliation fee. Nicky, how about ‘here’s your affiliation fee back, now eff off’.
‘Daily Mail’-
“Not one hint of remorse: Harman and Dromey’s statements, and the Mail’s replies”
By HARRIET HARMAN.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2567098/Not-one-hint-remorse-Harriet-Harman-Jack-Dromeys-statements-Mails-replies.html#ixzz2uK09to6d
The Five Live tactic was clear: push the defence, but barely mention the nuts and bolts of the accusations beyond the simple fact of the affiliation between the PIE and the NCCL. They effectively towed the Labour line, admitting only the thing they had to, and showing a distinct lack of curiosity beyond that.
It was clearly Harman’s line that anyone, group or individual, could affiliate with the NCCL at that time and there was no mechanism to prevent them or subsequently throw them out. What a shame we cannot test the response from the NCCL if the National Front or Peter Sutcliffe sought affiliation.
The core issue for me is simple. The foremost feminist cultural Marxist of her generation has had the truth of her stance on a range of issue brought into sharp relief. She would do anything, lie in the gutter with anyone, to advance her worldview one millimetre. Her moral corruption is matched only by her moral cowardice.
My sense is that unless the Mail has kept its powder dry and has more on her Harman has gotten away with it. The BBC sat on it until the very moment the Labour machine had to shove her above the parapet, and the other parties, fearful of their own skeletons in the cupboard, greater than the contents of any plague pit, have shoved their hands in their pockets and shuffled off staring at the ground.
Meanwhile, Five Live’s phone-in is on the deeply vexed question of… the Winter Olympics.
Anyone tweeting Campbell this morning asking why this has not been discussed can now be told “What are you talking about? We covered it this morning…”
Similar tactic on the Today programme, push the defence and minimise the accusations.
…and on radio news bulletins throughout the day.
Well done Kuenssberg on Newsnight, though – now Harman knows what it feels like to be a Tory politician on the BBC. If all political interviews were conducted like that, the BBC would be going some way to demonstrating impartiality (though there would still be global warming, the EU etc).
A disgrace on so many levels. Remind me again who is nasty out of the left and right?
For too long, Harman’s many despicable acts have either been overlooked or defended because she’d played the ‘gender equality’ card. Any criticism of her has been met by frothing, intellectually lazy accusations of sexism, same as with Julia Gillard and Louise Mench among others. This woman is a liability to everyone in this country.
Been a delight to seen the BBC smarming, smearing and throwing all manner of ack-ack into the air to deflect any proper targeting of this vile woman.
Kuennsberg made a good start-certainly far better that we`d expect of a BBC drone-but all I`ve heard today are variations on the Ralph Miliband/ a mere worker at the NCCL, and not their f***In legal adviser writing paedo policy for the Labour Home Office/ensuring that Labours advisers(Maguire) gets far more time than the Tory one(Young)…piece up to 8am on Today.
Still-given the myriad of excusues, cavilling and red herrings, I reckon that they`re stuffed but making it all up on the hoof-did Hattie think bestiality was OK back then too?
Fun to watch-let`s hope these three 70s PaedoPIEs are trashed, then banned form any contact with children until they`re cleared to work again…can`t be too careful you know…make no apologies for putting childrens welfare first.
Oh-and can we have Henry and Maggie Hodge on the bonfire too if we ask nicely….scum, Labour scum!
Well, poxo has just told her she made a mess of her harriet interview.
Thats right she made a mess of it! Why? Too abrasive?
Albeeba now rapidly rowing back.
Guess there must be an election coming up soon
Guess there must be an election onthe horizon.