Jump to content

Recommended Posts

it was nothing to do with the debate, just an aside regards first mates pondering that if westminster was found to be a hotbed of sexual abuse in the past, might that have some connection to the fact that almost all of them came through the public school system.


It didn't seem an entirely unreasonable hypothesis.


You then had a go at him for homophobia and equating homosexuality with paedohpilia, neither of which did he do, you just misunderstood the word fag.


At no time did you say 'oh yeah whoops my bad'.


I just thought you'd given the chap an unwarranted bashing.

This takes the biscuit: I've just read that the Lord Chancellor Sir Michael Havers persuaded Geoffrey Dickens not to name the MPs in the house.


Baroness Butler-Sloss has just been appointed to lead the sex abuse inquiry. Who was her brother? The late Sir Michael Havers.


Excuse me for being a bit slow to take the idea of a vast cover up seriously

DaveR not sure if describe the wearing of a baseball cap in the British sense as unique to any class demographic, it's more complex than that, it has affiliations with all sorts of groups as a form of head ware. However, I take your point. I'd probably go for some sort of arty cloth cap with working class origins but now associated with a more affluent group.


Louisa.

Fair enough Jeremy and El Pibe. I will conceed that. I was thrown by the use of homoerotic, which still in my opinion has nothing to do with school bullying, and nothing to do with peadophilia. And in the past, peadophilia has been used to suggest homosexuality is akin to sexual criminality/ deviency (a ploy of homophobic lobbyists) - so that's where my accusation of homophobia stemmed from. A misjudged reaction I will though admit.

Daver, indeed as far as anyone knows it's just Cyril but there have been hints recently that it goes a bit deeper and there were others who either knew or helped facilitate.

But rumours are often baseless so we'll just have to wait for any more detail.


For the record I doubt public school would have any greater correlation to sexual abuse except insofar as grooming people for positions of power means you'll end up with more people in positions of power, with concomitant opportunities for its abuse in one form or another.


We might as well say that public school causes expense fiddling :-)

Fair Do's to you PT.


PokerTime Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Fair enough Jeremy and El Pibe. I will conceed

> that. I was thrown by the use of homoerotic, which

> still in my opinion has nothing to do with school

> bullying, and nothing to do with peadophilia. And

> in the past, peadophilia has been used to suggest

> homosexuality is akin to sexual criminality/

> deviency (a ploy of homophobic lobbyists) - so

> that's where my accusation of homophobia stemmed

> from. A misjudged reaction I will though admit.

steveo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This takes the biscuit: I've just read that the

> Lord Chancellor Sir Michael Havers persuaded

> Geoffrey Dickens not to name the MPs in the

> house.

>

> Baroness Butler-Sloss has just been appointed to

> lead the sex abuse inquiry. Who was her brother?

> The late Sir Michael Havers.

>

> Excuse me for being a bit slow to take the idea of

> a vast cover up seriously.


Hmm... Yes it's reassuring to know that in response of the government's paedophile cover-up stories the government has decided to order a new and comprehensive cover up.

Connections connections, there's always close intertwined connections at "the top".


The barristers' chambers headed by Michael Havers back in the late 70's/early 80's also had as a member the shadow attorney general at the time, John Morris Q.C. (Labour). So all political legal advice was pretty well "sewn up" back then.


It was also the chambers where Margaret Thatcher gained her grounding in the law, along with Angus Maude ( the then Paymaster General) one of her closest confidante, and where his son Francis Maude, now a (semi) prominent politician, also practised from.

Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In a thread of such sensitivity, it seems a shame

> that once again the EDF swings wildly off-topic,

> with yet another self-indulgent game of cat and

> mouse tactics regarding misunderstanding of use of

> words. Just an observation.

>

> Louisa.


Well said!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • If you have recently sold your flat in East Dulwich what was the difference between valuation and eventual selling price? I’m find that agent valuations vary so widely that it’s hard to get any idea of current actual property values.  Are any agents particularly known for overvaluing and by what sort of percentage?
    • It’s 3 AM - Anyone know when this horrendous noise is going to stop?! We’re on the Sainsbury’s Local end of Landells and am quite frankly sympathising with all of you nearer Peckham Rye. My ears are ringing! How is this ok?!  Edit: According to the website it should have finished by 22:30. What is going on and how is this acceptable (and not more people are complaining about the crippling sound levels we’re being subjected to?) - shocking.. 
    • https://chng.it/YXCH5XXVMY We live near and it’s absolute hell. The noise of the people coming and going from Peckham is the worse. They are so loud and obnoxious. This is my 5th year of this nonsense. People vomiting in my front garden, urinating in my neighbour’s gardens, throwing food into my garden. Screaming waking up my children while waiting for their Ubers. The people that organise this festival are 100% obnoxious. They told us there would be security along our road (there wasn’t). I asked them to put up my family in a hotel but they wouldn’t. It’s actually a human rights infraction for all of us this badly affected. Over the years I have spent so much money trying to be away this weekend but none of us should have to. The data also shows that most people coming are not local residents - so of 3000 tickets sold, hardly any to residents; it’s easy to argue that it disadvantages us residents way more than any conceivable benefit. My elderly neighbours are besides themselves. Every year the setup and striking of the festival blocks off the park during half term, plus the antisocial behaviour and loud noises mean actual children that live here are prevented from using the park and playgrounds. The police initially rejected the license last year… then suddenly changed their mind with no apparent reason… seems legit. Also the GALA team lie and make false statements in their advertising about consulting with us (they don’t they just tell us what is going to happen then are extremely obstinate and rude). My neighbour runs Friends of Peckham Rye and has been totally distressed by all the damage done to recent planting initiatives funded by the local community. GALA do not repair this, GALA pay off Southwark and then Southwark refuse to confirm what they are paid, or how much (if anything) is spent to repair the park.   This needs to be stopped once and for all!!   Petition asking Southwark to stop providing the license to GALA once and for all.    I mean I am sure they will listen to us just like they did about the LTNs…   https://chng.it/YXCH5XXVMY
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...