ChatterBank1 min ago
Harriet Harman In Trouble !
http://
The DM may be up to its old smear tricks here but why on earth didn't Harman just admit that the PIE shouldn't have been allowed to be an associate member of the NCCL ? She was given plenty of opportunity on Newsnight but failed to do so. Even the DM is not trying to say that she is a fan of paedophilia but a simple apology would stop the DM's smear campaign dead in its tracks. I am afraid she has shot herself in the foot here.
The DM may be up to its old smear tricks here but why on earth didn't Harman just admit that the PIE shouldn't have been allowed to be an associate member of the NCCL ? She was given plenty of opportunity on Newsnight but failed to do so. Even the DM is not trying to say that she is a fan of paedophilia but a simple apology would stop the DM's smear campaign dead in its tracks. I am afraid she has shot herself in the foot here.
Answers
I thought it a train wreck of an interview on Harriet Harmans part, watching Newsnight last night. I do not think for a moment that HH, Jack Dromey etc were actively involved in promoting PIE or PIEs agenda, and I do think the DM have a political agenda in this. That having been said, Harriet Harman was asked,point blank, about 5 times by the interviewer if she...
09:58 Tue 25th Feb 2014
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.
Do you think parents taking innocent pictures of their children in the bath should have been prosecuted, Emmie? Because that was what Harman and the NCCL were arguing against.
Or are you really buying into the insinuations of the Daily Mail and thinking that Harmon was an active enabler of paedophile activity, or wanted to change the law in order for them to carry out their agenda?
Or are you really buying into the insinuations of the Daily Mail and thinking that Harmon was an active enabler of paedophile activity, or wanted to change the law in order for them to carry out their agenda?
I remember about that time that paedophiles were active in other organisations. There were a number of articles in 'Peace News' written by a Nottingham man who claimed he was being persecuted by the authorities because of his 'friendship' with a 14 year old boy. I think he eventually skipped bail and fled to Holland.
Well for those interested in stopping the sexualisation of children, there is a petition you might be interested in signing;
https:/
https:/
i don't understand the position of Harman now or then, she may have apologised, but if she or any of the others listed have done nothing wrong, why would they need to apologise. The Mail which comes in for more than it's fair share of criticism, broke the story, but it's been around a long time, i found links from the Times from many years ago, not to mention the Telegraph as posted, and any number of others.
i don't sign on line petitions, ever. I have my reasons, but child abuse isn't something that will be stopped by petitions, sexualisation of children is nothing new, nor will it stop until legislation is fully in place to prosecute all paedophiles, and any websites that have child porn should be immediately stopped. I am well aware how difficult that will be, but this is not a matter that will go away until decisive, clear action is taken by all the services, including the police. Taking snaps of your grandchildren having a bath is one thing, posting the stuff on the net could be quite another.
Its the DM leading the charge though, Emmie, and they are the ones making the insinuations. Other commentators will of course jump on any bandwagon going. If you want to hear HHs own rebuttal, in her own words, read my link from earlier.
And if you genuinely want to help in the prevention of sexualisation of children, you might want to take a look at the link to the petition I offered. The media, and the Mail Online in particular, are only too happy to post pictures of young girls - daughters or family members or celebrities in their own right, and comment about how they look "all grown up " or "flirty" etc.
I think the NCCL were wrong back then to take subscriptions from an organisation committed to "normalising" paedophilia, as PIE clearly were, and I think Harmon wrong not to have taken the opportunity to apologise for the link between NCCL and PIE - but I think the DM reprehensible in the insinuations they are attempting to make about Harmon, Dromey and Hewitt; To me that seems to be a political smear campaign.
And if you genuinely want to help in the prevention of sexualisation of children, you might want to take a look at the link to the petition I offered. The media, and the Mail Online in particular, are only too happy to post pictures of young girls - daughters or family members or celebrities in their own right, and comment about how they look "all grown up " or "flirty" etc.
I think the NCCL were wrong back then to take subscriptions from an organisation committed to "normalising" paedophilia, as PIE clearly were, and I think Harmon wrong not to have taken the opportunity to apologise for the link between NCCL and PIE - but I think the DM reprehensible in the insinuations they are attempting to make about Harmon, Dromey and Hewitt; To me that seems to be a political smear campaign.
-- answer removed --
"no i don't, show them what, how would one signature make a difference, and don't criticise me because you don't know the reason i don't, that would be my choice."
I know this much. A signature on a petition is more likely to influence the debate or effect a change than no signature at all. But hey, each to their own.
Oh, and I will criticize anyone if I feel it is warranted.
I know this much. A signature on a petition is more likely to influence the debate or effect a change than no signature at all. But hey, each to their own.
Oh, and I will criticize anyone if I feel it is warranted.
wonder when someone will go and link to some Tory grandee, caught with child porn, surprised no one has so far, they are only too happy usually.
is it simply because it's the mail, or simply that you think the timing is wrong, because there is an election next year, and that any smear campaign cooked up by them will likely keep Cameron and all in power, unlikely as they don't seem very enamoured of them either, if you ever read the paper. What is posted on line seems quite different from the paper you buy, i wasn't the only one to mention that either. I assumed they would be identical stories, but they aren't. Still Ms Harman has apologised, as did Ms Chakrabati, even though she wasn't remotely involved in NCCL, but the other three were.
is it simply because it's the mail, or simply that you think the timing is wrong, because there is an election next year, and that any smear campaign cooked up by them will likely keep Cameron and all in power, unlikely as they don't seem very enamoured of them either, if you ever read the paper. What is posted on line seems quite different from the paper you buy, i wasn't the only one to mention that either. I assumed they would be identical stories, but they aren't. Still Ms Harman has apologised, as did Ms Chakrabati, even though she wasn't remotely involved in NCCL, but the other three were.
The way the DM are framing the allegations, it is quite blatantly a smear campaign. Have you bothered to read Harmons rebuttals? Any comments on those?
And of course it is only right and proper in the context of the debate that people might point to the hypocrisy of an organisation making insinuations about a politician over historical events from 30-40 years ago whilst at the same time being more than happy to profit from leading stories which sexualise children. But hey, if you want to ignore that, that's your perogative.
And of course it is only right and proper in the context of the debate that people might point to the hypocrisy of an organisation making insinuations about a politician over historical events from 30-40 years ago whilst at the same time being more than happy to profit from leading stories which sexualise children. But hey, if you want to ignore that, that's your perogative.
i don't ignore it, i have already commented on that, some don't read others comments, or skip to the good bits, one person on here said with regards to getting a first page button, so you can go to the first response, because then you can skip over the dross. Many don't read all the responses, or links, perhaps it just takes up too much time. I have always hated the way that some newspapers depicts women, The sun, hate page 3, crass and boorish, as to the DM i do know that is double standards, its why i said it.
these PIE exponents wanted the law to change so they could have sex with children, proposed by the man who started the group.
many thought they were outside the law, some are only now coming to light, with the likes of Savile, a predatory sex offender, under the guise of a charity leading light, as many of those i linked to were. School teachers, local and central government officers, church and scout leaders, and the entertainment industry.
many thought they were outside the law, some are only now coming to light, with the likes of Savile, a predatory sex offender, under the guise of a charity leading light, as many of those i linked to were. School teachers, local and central government officers, church and scout leaders, and the entertainment industry.
