Censorship and cover-up

[From UK Column News 24 July 2018]

"The UK conservative government is now clearly operating beyond authority. We have a cabal running the country. Even backbencher MPs have no idea what`s happening in Westminster. So it`s simply the members of the Cabinet Office and the secretive P... Office. which is dealing with the global corporations and international banks with connections through to the Privy Council and this is all secret, certainly to other members of parliament but also to the public. So we have a cabal, many people would say a criminal cabal, running the country. Let`s remember that the fuel for UK politics is the abuse of children."

 

"Just an amazing headline here from the Daily Mail a few days ago. Forget the bit about the The `drink sodden world` of EU boss sneering at Britain, what we`re really looking at is the main headline. `What a cosy cover-up!`"

"And basically this was pointing out that MPs have voted for anonymity if they`re accused of sexual harassment and if there`s any hint of expenses fraud. And what the Daily Mail article pointed out was that minutes after this vote was taken a list of politicians under investigation vanished from Parliament`s website."

"Now I find this particularly interesting because a few weeks ago we actually made contact with the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner`s office to ask some questions about Mr Keith Vaz , but on that particular day back in June - I think it was the 22nd June - what we established was that this lady....Kathryn Hudson was going to step down as the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner and we were intrigued to see that she was going to be replaced by a new lady. This is Kathryn Stone; and her background is looking after children with special needs before becoming a qualified child protection social worker and mental health expert."

"And this just seemed a fascinating qualification to then move over to be Parliamentary Standards Commissioner. It just seems a little bit too interesting."
 

Keith Vaz

 

"Well at the time ... 22 June, we had a look at the Parliamentary Standards web page and one of the things we could see here was `under Investigation by the Commissioner`. We were interested in Mr Vaz; and apparently the Vaz inquiry is confidential. That`s what we were told. No information can be disclosed to the public in the interests of fairness. That is clearly fair to Mr Vaz. I don`t think it`s particularly fair to the public but of course the public doesn`t count. We were told that no comment could be made on whether the video of Mr Vaz forms the base of evidence. This is the video which appeared to show him in a room with some rent boys and there was a discussion of drugs. The inquiry, even though there`s video evidence, could take years."

Mike Robinson: "Was there any explanation as to why."

"No, except I have to say the lady I spoke to was unbelievably nervous as I asked some fairly reasonable and gentle questions. She did say that Mr Vaz had not been suspended and she was also happy to say the first police investigation had been dropped."

"But the important thing here is that even going to the government website I was able to find some information because I knew that something was going on. But now enter 2018. So there was that web page. It`s been replaced by this web page. And what`s significant? Well we have the same designator ... Sorry we`ve got `Complaints and Investigations` but on the original screen on the left we have names on the screen. On the right we just have the Complaints process. So all these names disappear and they`ve been whitewashed out Mike. And the other thing is the Current Inquiries bar has also disappeared from the government`s website. So the MPs clearly circling the wagons now to defend themselves when people come forward with allegations of sexual harassment or expenses fraud."  

 
"Well Mr Vaz seems to be doing OK because the probe, not investigation - it`s called a probe now, whatever that means - has already lasted two years and nobody knows when this is going to be completed. Now if we remind ourselves what happened: he stood down as Chairman of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, looking at matters to do with vice after the Sunday Mirror reported he had discussed buying cocaine with a rent boy (male prostitute). So the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner launched a probe into whether he was guilty of a conflict of interest because he had been leading a review of vice laws at the same time as the allegations. So that`s a very difficult thing for them to establish Mike, even with a video. So years have gone by and we`ve still not got any result but now the whole thing has become totally secret." 

"Something that was quite interesting was that the UK Column had a report, and I would say from a source that we would say was reliable, and in that report it was alleged that one or both of the rent boys who were apparently present at the incident with Mr Vaz were attacked and badly beaten in Poland by persons as yet unknown."

"So that`s the allegation that those rent boys were attacked and beaten very badly in Poland but there isn`t any evidence at the moment who did it. That`s what we are being told. We`ll see whether we get more reports on that."

"So here we are, a report in the Sun: police drop initial investigation, into the Leicester East MP 18 months ago and the new Standards Commissioner Kathryn Stone has told MPs she is referring the case back to the Met. But at the same time they`re apparently also looking into the fact people are not too sure where all his money is coming from."

"So what can we see? We can see our parliament becoming increasingly secretive, to the extent it`s not even worth making an allegation because this will simply stay undercover and you have no idea whether any investigation takes place."

Cliff Richard

"So couple it with Cliff Richard, and we`ve pointed it out before, but basically as a result of incompetence or possibly a planned action by the BBC, we can now see the law rapidly moving towards a position where you cannot make any public allegation against anybody because this will come back on you, in order to protect the identity of these individuals."

"So at least Ian Murray here of the Society of Editors said it had worrying consequences for Press freedom and the public`s right to know ... But of course Tory MP Nigel Evans dismissed those concerns over Press Freedom saying: they [the journalists] are worried that they can`t trash people`s reputations."

Prince Charles and Peter Ball

"And that brings us nicely to the so-called independent child abuse inquiry because in the last few days it`s emerged that Prince Charles`s lawyers have been arguing with the inquiry`s legal team over the manner in which he produces evidence in relation to Bishop Ball who was imprisoned as a result of sexual abuse. So we`re not going to find out really what Prince Charles has got to say but interestingly enough one of the lawyers working for survivors said this: `We wish to register our surprise and concern that the Prince has chosen to put his evidence to the inquiry in the form of a letter as opposed to a witness statement verified by a statement of truth in the normal way that survivors giving evidence to this inquiry have done`. So one rule for the survivors. Totally different one for Prince Charles. And he goes on to say: `Concerns around Charles`s letter include that it may be `less than entirely frank about his personal relationship with Peter Ball and that it contains matters to which he is reluctant to attach a formal statement of truth`. And this lawyer, Richard Scorer, also retweeted this little report by a lady called Linda Woodhead. She said: `IICSA today on the Peter Ball scandal hears of the extraordinary lengths to which Prince Charles`s lawyers went to wiggle out of complying with IICSA`s request that the Prince give a witness statement to the inquiry like everyone else. Even invoking European convention on Human Rights`."

"So obviously Prince Charles desperate that he does not have to give evidence in the same way that survivors or members of the public would. Why would he be so shy?"

"Well this tweet was sent through to me. And I`ve got to say I think the gentleman`s comments fit. So it`s a Brian P Willmot and he says  `Any person who is Not prepared to stand and tell the Truth has something to hide` and it certainly seems that this is the case on this one Mike."

Melanie Shaw

"And perhaps this leads us nicely into Melanie Shaw. And let`s remind ourselves that Melanie Shaw`s local MP is a gentleman called Chris Leslie. Several people contacted me to point out that here was Mr Leslie getting very excited about the standards in prison. So we`re going back to January here, but he said: `Shocking `urgent notification` from Chief Inspector into `fundamentally unsafe` Nottingham Prison, echoing concerns I raised in Commons debate last year: eight suicides recently; 200 assaults in past 6 months; 30% positive for drugs. New Lord Chancellor David Gauke must act now`. But remarkable that this gentleman Mike doesn`t want to act for Melanie Shaw who`s been brutalised by these very failings in other prisons."

Mike Robinson: "And he was even her employer at one point."

"Yes he was her employer at one point and there is a photograph ... where he`s sat next to her on a sofa holding her hand to show his level of support for child abuse victims. But it appears like many MPs Chris Leslie is duplicitous when it comes to actions to protect Melanie Shaw."

"Now I`d like to just look at this excellent letter that Robert Green sent to Christ Leslie and let`s read through."

"`Dear Mr Leslie,

I have contacted you, as have many others over the years, about the disgraceful ongoing plight of your constituent Melanie Shaw.

I do not propose to go through the details of this case, as I feel confident that you have been fully informed about the state`s unrelenting persecution of this poor, defenceless and acknowledged victim of multiple sexual abuse, committed whilst in the supposed `care` of the Nottinghamshire authorities. Indeed, one local authority employee, Andris Logins, has been convicted of  multiple rapes committed at the very care home in which Melanie was placed and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment. His wife, Helen Logins, another Nottingham council social worker, has also been convicted for aiding and abetting her husband.

I and others have been in regular contact with Amnesty International as the evidence suggests that Melanie, during her controversial imprisonment has been the victim of torture, administered by the UK state. The case is, I am told being currently considered by that international organisation...

We now know, due to recent revelations, that the British government is perfectly capable, not only of being complicit in torture, but also even prepared to publicly lie about it, as demonstrated by the misconduct of Jack Straw. At least one excuse, weak though it is, was that such torture was used on suspected foreign terrorists operating outside the United Kingdom.

Melanie Shaw, on the other hand, is a Nottingham woman and UK national who has apparently been tortured in British prisons because of the evidence she is prepared to put before the IICSA, in providing details of serious crimes committed at Beechwood Home that may implicate high-ranking public individuals, including, I understand, a person formerly a colleague of the current Prime Minister.

As Melanie is clearly an absolutely crucial, high-profile witness in the IICSA investigation into widescale child sexual abuse in the Nottingham area, I found it shocking that the inquiry has not already interviewed her, regardless of the incarceration that can only be explained rationally as a means of silencing her.

I have therefore sent key details to the IICSA`s current head, Professor Alexis Jay and her deputy, Liz Long, has written to me to confirm that these details have indeed been read by Professor Jay. There can now be no further excuse for the failure to interview Melanie.

And he ends by saying,  As her elected parliamentary representative, what are you going to do about it?

Yours sincerely,

Robert Green.`"

"So a truly excellent letter from Robert and I think this should provide a lead for many other people to write to Chris Leslie with that key question: what are you going to do to help Melanie Shaw, Chris Leslie?"

"Well if we remind ourselves that IICSA itself still refuses to take evidence from Melanie Shaw or even communicate with her, despite the fact that Melanie has said publicly she wants to speak to the inquiry, despite the fact that contact has been made with the inquiry on her behalf, including, it`s alleged, by Mr Chris Leslie himself, IICSA says `can`t act unless Melanie calls us` but of course Melanie can`t call them because she`s denied phone calls in prison."

"And we`ll finish the section by reminding people, of course, of the untimely haste with which Beechwood Children`s Home was sold off and demolished after Nottingham police fail to carry out a full and proper forensic investigation and, more recently, UK Column has informed people that reports about Beechwood have been pulled from mainstream media sites and the BBC as a result of collaboration between Nottingham City & County Council and Nottingham police."

"So censoring of the news there Mike in order to help silence and cover up abuse of children."

 

"So we`ll come back to Robert here because this was such a wonderful statement. Robert said this: So Melanie Shaw is desperate to give evidence to IICSA and it has so far refused to take it.  Meanwhile Prince Charles is desperate to avoid giving evidence to IICSA.... What is going on?"

IICSA and NSPCC

"Well there can only be one answer. We`re witnessing a cover-up by the British government. And if we come back to the inquiry itself, a very big thank you to the person who pointed this out to us. The inquiry commissioned this report. It`s called A Rapid Evidence Assessment: What can be learnt from other jurisdictions about preventing and responding to child sexual abuse. And ... the University of Lancashire has been commissioned to carry out this piece of work by the so-called independent child abuse  inquiry."

"What did they do? They looked at information on the internet Mike."

"Really?"

"Yeah. So we have these people: Lorraine Radford, Helen Richardson Foster, Christine Barter and Nicky Stanely. They carried out this work for the so-called independent child abuse inquiry. Fascinating report. I would encourage people to see it online. Here`s the Executive Summary."

"This Rapid Evidence Assessment was commissioned by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse in England and Wales which is investigating  whether public bodies and other non-state institutions have taken seriously their duties to care for and protect children and young people from child sexual abuse and exploitation. The question for the review was: What can be learnt from jurisdictions outside of England and Wales, about the role of institutions, including accountable state and non-state organisations with responsibility for children in preventing and responding to child sexual abuse and exploitation?"

"What they seem to have done here, Mike, is to produce the answers for a whitewash. `No jurisdiction has everything right. While overall robust research on what is effective is limited, there is plenty of promising evidence that can be developed further to inform work in England and Wales`."

"So we got it wrong. but don`t worry because in the future we can put it right. `Adequately resourced, comprehensive, multi sector approaches that aim to prevent and respond to child sexual abuse and exploitation are likely to be the most effective approaches.` But these are the approaches that have failed. We`ve got a nice circular argument."

"What`s special about the research team? Well I did a little bit of an investigation and I find by an amazing coincidence they`re all linked to NSPCC and in their own report of course they`ve then used a lot of NSPCC information saying how NSPCC is apparently stopping the abuse of children. This is all independent you understand."

Mike Robinson: "And there`s no possibility that the NSPCC could ... be criticised by the independent public inquiry if the independent inquiry was doing their job properly."

Brian Gerrish laughs. "eh Yes And we remember that it was NSPCC that was first of all taking phone calls and there was such outrage amongst the abuse survivors and others that they had to drop the contract."

"Right. So they were running the call centre for the independent inquiry at the beginning and whereas many of the survivors were saying, `well hold on`, the NSPCC was involved in the abuse, or at least helped cover it up in the past; so what are they doing taking phone calls off of us?"

"Yes. ... Well this is what independence is about Mike. But it gets better because I did a little bit of research before the news today on IICSA`s site and here we`ve got their own documentation showing that in Rochdale going back into 1974 - 1989 we`ve got NSPCC taking over child protection from the local authorities. So seemingly here NSPCC must be implicated in the very failings that the independent inquiry is now asking an NSPCC experienced team to report on."

"Good stuff."

"But it`s not a cover-up."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH4A4UL1KDY

Networking child abusers

On UK Column News, 12 March 2018, Brian Gerrish and Mike Robinson were joined by David Scott of Northern Exposure via video link.

"Of course," begins Brian Gerrish, "Over the week-end on Saturday, Edinburgh, they had the launch of the FreshStartFoundation. FreshStart [are] looking to conduct a public inquiry into child abuse in Scotland and ... this has become necessary because of the total lack of public confidence in the official government run child abuse inquiry. So we`ll just bring on screen the advert for that event... Here we are - The People`s Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. I must say, in my opinion, it was a great success but we`ve gor David Scott to speak to us directly about what took place."

FSF facebook page

 

"Yes, we also were very pleased ... We found that we finished the day better informed than we started it. The comments from the floor and the quality of the people who were coming along and getting involved was excellent and it was a really first class day and a very good start to the ... road show programme."

"Yes, and David I have to say it`s always an emotional time when you are with people who have been through the system. They`re survivors, really remarkable to have endured what they have; but, of course, what comes forward from them very strongly is that they are still very much searching for justice; and they have little to no confidence in all of the organisations which the government would have us believe are protecting children. So whether that`s the local authority or it`s some of the major charities, like NSPCC or Barnardo`s or some of the other organisations that are publicly funded to assist, it`s really - I`ll say sad - but I think a much stronger word is needed - it`s very sad that we`ve got so many people who`ve been abused in the system as children and yet they have absolutely no confidence in the government, be it in Scotland, or down in Westminster, to actually take the necessary action..."

David Scott: "One of many things I learned during the event was that there were people there who had been instrumental, who had themselves been harmed by sexual abuse, and they had been instrumental and devoted years to working with the government to build institutions and build a mechanism by which truth and justice and some form of remedy could be provided. And they`re telling me that these institutions, that they`ve helped build to address the problem, are themselves being subverted by government; are being essentially destroyed. So yes, we are seeing people who are looking for somewhere to go ... We hope we`ll be able to provide a point for these people to gather together and work together and make something happen."

"We hope to provide a means of resisting further attacks because the use of language, the use of policy ... the use of attacks on families... the use of attacks on children, via policy, via changes in language, via ideas being introduced ... are not conducive to human thriving and to protection of children ... We hope to be able to address this as well and provide people with the language and the understanding to fight back."

Brian Gerrish: "The other point I`d like to make is that as far as I was aware there was absolutely no attendance from so-called mainstream or indeed local press or media at that event, nor did I see attempted engagement by local authorities` child care social services themselves. So it appears when the survivors get together to speak out: what`s really happened and what they really think about the system, the system itself runs away. They don`t want to know; they don`t want to publish; they don`t want to broadcast that people are starting to meet in order to address this thing themselves. You could also say that`s very sad, but I have to say it`s more sinister than that. I think this is an orchestrated cover-up. There`s a blanking of reporting these type of events."

Mike Robinson: "Right, so that was Saturday. The next one, David, is 17 March, next Saturday and John Wedger will be attending that. That`s in Stirling.  Details are on screen at the moment [5.26] and we`ll put the details on the UK Column events page as well, on the UK Column website."

"But David you were talking about policy a second ago and where`s the policy coming from? You have published this article on the UK Column yesterday.  Curiouser and Curiouser: Paedophile Networks and the Children`s Rights Movement. This article is already starting to move on social media and so on. Just give us the background to this because it`s a massive story."

"Yes. Peter Newell, he was reported in the mainstream media... Peter Newell, who was described as a children`s rights campaigner, had been convicted of multiple rape back in the sixties. This is a very old case. Like so many of these, it takes a long time to come forward.  He was tried; he was convicted and he was sentenced to over eight years in prison; and that seemed to be the story."

"It really wasn`t and people started to say: `Well look more closely at this man; he`s everywhere`. He indeed is."

"Now we`ve looked - I suspect we`ve only got some of his links in this article - but we started off with a look at one of his charities which was campaigning to end smacking.and hence change the legal position of children. And that was called The Children are Unbeatable and this was linked to an enormous network of children`s charities in the UK.  And so huge was this network, so well connected was this man, that the only way we could describe it was to actually list them... The article contains an enormous list of all these interconnected  children`s charities; and they were all supporting, funding, paying his salary and of course this is a convicted paedophile. " 

"But when we looked further, the links went much further than that; they went international. So he was linked to overseas and international charities and these tie up all across the globe. He`s in Africa; he`s in South America; he`s in Asia and then he is also in the UN.  And it transpires that this is the man who wrote the [implementation] handbook for the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child. Now this is a huge three volume work; he wrote it together with his wife; it`s still the official line on everything to do with the rights of the child; it`s policy in the UN.  It has been implemented in Scotland, England, Wales, all across the world and it was written by a paedophile."

Mike Robinson: "In the article, towards the end, David, you draw parallels with Kinsey. And it does seem strange, when we look at serious policy regarding children, we have some pretty dodgy characters involved in formulating that policy."

David Scott: "Yes the policy is coming in and the policy ... strikes people as strange; it strikes people as odd. They notice in schools; well we`re having these strange forms of education - you know sex ed and all the rest of it - and we feel uneasy about it. And some people are starting to... say these policies come in, the problems actually get much worse.  We didn`t have a problem with teenage pregnancy but now we`ve got this new education programme ... all of a sudden we do. Then when you start following this back to the individuals that generate this policy - yes you`re quite right. Dodgy is being generous." 

"Peter Newell: Coordinator of the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children, launched in 2001, and of the `Children are Unbeatable` Alliance in the United Kingdom. He chaired the Council of the Children`s Rights Alliance for England from 1992 to 2002. He was a member of the NGO Advisory Panel for the United Nations Secretary- General`s Study on Violence Against Children and also of the Independent Expert`s Editorial Board for the Study, 2004 - 2006. He has written various commentaries on children`s rights in the United Kingdom and also a detailed proposal for a children`s rights commissioner, published as Taking Children Seriously." 

https://www.unicef.org/publications/files/Implementation_Handbook_for_the_Convention_on_the_Rights_of_the_Child_Part_1_of_3.pdf

Mike Robinson then takes the discussion towards the Telford child sex abuse scandal: He says: "This situation seems to be running right across the UK. We`ve had Rotherham. We`ve got Telford. We`ve got other examples - Glasgow as well..."

View more here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=771eTvV2H7Q

More allegations against charities come to light

"Oxfam has been accused of covering up the use of prostitutes by staff in Haiti in the wake of the deadly earthquake in 2010. Allegations that prostitutes were used by staff in Chad in 2006 have also emerged." 

"It has denied a cover-up, but the charity's chief executive has said nine members of staff `behaved in a way that was totally unacceptable`."

https://news.sky.com/story/step-up-and-do-more-charities-warned-amid-oxfam-prostitution-scandal-11248243

 

Mike Robinson spoke on UK Column News about some of these matters: "I just caught this headline on Sky News. Oxfam: Former development secretary Greening `absolutely shocked` by claims against Oxfam. "

"She was speaking to Sky News. She said she was absolutely shocked. She said: `I don`t recall being aware of those allegations` [while she was in post] `but I certainly know that when I had any instances raised with me, they always would have been followed up. I`m not the kind of person who would have ignored anything like that. Why would anyone?` "

Mike Robinson found this statement interesting given the involvement of the Charity Commission into allegations against Oxfam.

"Well the Charity Commission for England and Wales has announced that they are opening a statutory inquiry today into Oxfam and they are going to improve safeguarding in the charity sector as a whole, they claim. They say that this has come after the allegations made against Oxfam regarding misconduct by staff involved in the humanitarian response in Haiti. They said that they have concerns that Oxfam may not have fully and frankly disclosed material details about the allegations at the time in 2011; about its handling of the incident since; and the impact that these have had on public trust and confidence."

"But this is quite interesting because actually the Charity Commission had already been investigating Oxfam during the course of 2011 and they had produced a report which came out in December."

"It said in 2017 `We engaged... with Oxfam over a number of concerning allegations about recent and non-recent safeguarding incidents involving senior programme staff including allegations of sexual harassment of other staff... `"

What the Charity Commission found:

"Oxfam cooperated fully with us. We established that the charity has a strong policy framework around protecting staff and beneficiaries from sexual exploitation and abuse, which is underpinned by the activities of a dedicated safeguarding unit. We also saw evidence of several examples of best practice including the publishing of data and trends about allegations of sexual abuse or exploitation against Oxfam staff and partners."  

"Many of the allegations reported against senior country staff relating to sexual abuse and exploitation were not substantiated, and the Commission has seen no indication to suggest that the risks to staff at Oxfam are any greater than those facing staff in other similar organisations. However, there clearly have been incidents of behaviour that did not meet the organisation’s culture and values and which have brought into question how confident trustees could be in the charity’s wider people management systems." 

"We also identified some weaknesses in how trends in safeguarding allegations were picked up, reported to trustees and management follow up properly agreed."  

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/charity-case-report-oxfam/oxfam-case-report

"They said that many of the allegations reported against country staff - senior country staff - relating to sexual exploitation and abuse were not substantiated. Well, they`ve been substantiated now. So I`m questioning here how good is this statutory investigation going to be... when they ran an investigation last year and they found nothing."

"It goes on, though. But we concluded there`s further work for the charity to do in respect of its HR culture and overall governance and management of safeguarding. The Commission considers that the charity needs to be more mindful of the allocation of resources which enables an appropriate balance between proactive preventive activity in the investigation of individual allegations."

"So basically they said nothing of any use. They apparently found nothing particularly wrong with the charity but then we have these revelations over here and apparently today more revelations about alleged sexual abuse taking place involving children in Oxfam charity shops."

Brian Gerrish concurs: "It`s amazing isn`t it Mike? And of course when UK Column was pointing a finger at the UK charity Common Purpose... what was discovered?  Matthew Byrne, one of the Merseyside Common Purpose advisory board members. Horrific crimes. I will leave people to look him up for themselves. Was there an investigation by Common Purpose?  Nothing that was made public. Was there any police investigation into him and his links with Common Purpose? No investigation at all. Was there any follow up of the fact that Common Purpose had been providing training in many schools across the country particularly in the Sheffield area with no CRB checks. Nothing was followed up on that at all."

"So what we consistently see is that when allegations come to the surface, or evidence comes to the surface, overwhelmingly there`s a close down."

"But it`s beginning to grow, so people might have missed this from a couple of days ago. It`s focusing in on Brendon Cox. This is the Daily Mail and the article is that it`s alleged that Mr Cox grabbed here hips, pulled her hair and forced his thumb into a lady`s mouth in America, in a sexual way. This was a lady working in a US government job. She reported the incident to the police as a sex assault claim...And what comes to light again in this article ... So it included a text which he sent to her later."

"He left Save the Children after there had been numerous other complaints about him. So quite remarkable. Of course here we`ve got people tied in with the mainstream political parties. These are all allegations at the moment. They seem to be building up. But is any action taken against these major charities?"

"And of course one of the things we have consistently said in our UK Column report is that child abuse survivors simply laugh when you say `Well didn`t you get any help from NSPCC or Barnardos or any of the other major charities? Those survivors have simply laughed and said `Well of course the abusers are embedded within those charities as well`. Maybe we`re beginning to see it."

"And just to bring things full circle. We`ll bring in the Open Government Partnership. Now we mentioned them a couple of days ago. This is bringing us back towards George Soros. But I was intrigued to see that we`ve got Helle Thorning Schmidt as one of the Open Government Partnership ambassadors but she`s also there as Chief Executive of Save the Children International. So remarkable isn`t it? All these people clustered around the mainstream parties. Of course this lady married to ... Stephen Kinnock. Here she is working with a major children`s charity. That charity now coming under the spotlight alongside Oxfam."

Police whistleblower

"Well, we`ll contrast that with what? The testimony of a very brave Metropolitan policeman, John Wedger.  This man speaking out to UK Column on audio... and video, clearly saying that the British government, MPs, charities, local authorities covered up child abuse in London, including the deaths of children.  He was villified, hounded at work."

"He`s doing a walk from London to Manchester. This is his JustGiving page. He was after just £5,000 and I`m delighted to say that today I can report that that JustGiving target is up to £6,255. Now the additional money over his target of £5,000 is going to go to a charity. And if you go to the JustGiving site you can actually have a look at that. So some good news there Mike, but it`s taken John Wedger to suffer so much in order to get that story out.  Mainstream press, the BBC in particular, simply will not follow through on the evidence."

https://www.ukcolumn.org/  [13 February 2018]

What lies behind the child abuse cover-ups ?

UK Column News [10 August 2017]

"We reported about a week ago that we were getting concerned because people were telling us about events in Sheffield where the children of immigrant families were being targeted by Sheffield social services supported by the police. They were taking children - certainly taking children away from protective parents, whether that was the mother or the father - and the child ultimately being taken away for fostering or given to the abusive parent."

"Now what I want to say is we`ve had a steady stream of information coming in on this but we still can`t report fully because of an ongoing court case but we`ve now got other individuals who`ve come forward as a result of our reports talking about this being a template aimed at immigrant communities, or the children of immigrant communities, which is taking place in other areas. So this is what is being reported through to the UK Column and I can assure you that we`ve done enough research to date to know that the people contacting us are telling the truth about what they`re seeing."

"This is the image though that the mainstream press are trying to put across. So we`ve got Sarah Champion  in a Telegraph article and she`s on the subject of Pakistani and Asian men. She said: `People are more afraid to be called a racist than they are afraid to be wrong about calling out child abuse... We have got now hundreds of men, Pakistani men, who have been convicted of this crime..."

"Why are we not commissioning research to see what is going on and how we need to change what is going on so that it never happens again? ... if such crimes were being committed by, for example, a `motorbike gang` we would recognise that as an indicator and we would deal with it`..."

"Now I think this lady`s heart is in the right place but I think she`s utterly falling into the trap which is being set, which is that the only cases which are being brought to court at the moment, or the majority of cases being brought, are heavily focused on Asian gangs - absolutely correct, those men are abusing the children - but in the background we have massive abuse of children, white children, Christian, Asian, all sorts of children, which is being carried out by the local authorities themselves with the help of the courts and the police and of course none of this is being reported; neither are we seeing any investigation into the reports of abuse within the walls of Westminster. "

"So I think the agenda here Mike in the mainstream press, they are using the child abuse issue as another stick in order to try and deflect people into hatred between races or religions."

 

Mike Robinson. "I`m going to say that`s absolutely right. This was the front page of the Daily Mail this morning `How many more girls` lives torn apart by sex gangs? Now look Brian, it is a fact that we have been criticised quite often in the past for our coverage of this subject. We`ve been accused of glossing over the fact that these sex gangs are mostly Asian and Muslim. We`ve even been accused of apologising for them which of course as you`ve just said we absolutely are not. But what we are doing is trying to encourage people to focus on why these gangs are allowed to operate. Because they are being allowed to operate. Who`s behind the cover-up of this activity? Because until we deal with that question we can`t find any permanent fix to the issue of sex gangs whether they`re Muslim or otherwise. "

The Rotherham Common Purpose
 

"So again I urge people to read the Common Purpose Effect series of articles written by Martin Edwards mainly, and absolutely superb articles. If you want to understand how this is happening, you`ve got to understand that."

 

"And let me also remind you of this article from the BBC. Why wasn`t mother warned of paedophile? This was on the BBC website a few days ago which highlighted the fact that it was Thames Valley chief constable Sarah Thornton who had covered up for the child abuser at the centre of this story. And this is the same Sarah Thornton as we mentioned last week who systematically covered up the abuses of Oxford and Cherwell Valley College which we were working on bringing to the public domain since 2011. "

"And this particular article appeared in 2013. And this is the same Sarah Thornton who`s now head of the National Police Chiefs` Council.  So this woman has questions to answer. Common Purpose has questions to answer because if you look at the places where the grooming and the sex gangs were operating we find a massive Common Purpose presence among the people who are making the decisions about whether people were to be prosecuted or were turning a blind eye in many cases; and you`ve got to ask the question: was this intentional or was it not? Were they permitting this activity to take place or were they not? Were they permitting it to take place because at some future date it would give them the opportunity to encourage people to look in the direction of Muslims rather than looking in their own direction. There are lots of questions to be answered here. "

"And let`s just get back to Sarah Thornton chairwoman of the National Police Chiefs` Council and of course one of her colleagues is the chief constable of Northumbria Police and the news is full of this story today: Police use of child rapist informant in underage abuse case `beggars belief`, says NSPCC. Because this is an incredible situation where the Northumbria Police recruited a child rapist to spy on parties where the police believed that underage girls would be present and they would be abused. And even the NSPCC has come out and said that this situation beggars belief. So this child rapist informant was paid £10,000 by the police to assist the investigation. The Chief constable claims that this man was not committing any offences in the process of work he was doing for the police and you know I`m almost speechless... The situation we`re in at the moment Brian where we have cover-up after cover-up and evidence after evidence; but we don`t look at parliament; we don`t look at the police; we don`t look at local councils and social services and Common Purpose. Instead we look at Muslims."

"And Asians."

"And the Asians. If they`ve committed an offence they get taken to court and they get convicted and they go to prison; that`s absolutely right; but this will continue to happen until we start looking at the source of the problem."

"Indeed... What struck me with this headline is of course the comment is from NSPCC. We know from survivors of child abuse that many of those survivors are highly suspicious of charities like NSPCC. They say, don`t trust them; they`re too close to the abuse going on ... we asked the Metropolitan police why they were using NSPCC to answer their numbers on the Met police website - so if you called in thinking you were speaking to the police you`re actually put through to the NSPCC. So no separation of powers here Mike."

"No. And just as a closing comment on the chief constable for Northumbria... he is really keen to achieve a Common Purpose with partners. And this is the key problem. It says Common Purpose with partners. This is what allows the cover-up to take place. Because as you say, no separation of powers and this is a heading from Northumbria police accounts. Ensuring the Force and Partners Work Together to Achieve a Common Purpose with Clearly Defined Functions and Roles. It seems to me the clearly defined functions and roles at the core of that is the words cover-up."

"Indeed. And of course Mike... well several years ago you and I and another lady were in one of the police stations in Plymouth ... reporting that a little baby boy was being abused - not sexually, but neglected, as the abuse, in South Wales - and far from being received with care, concern, interest, we had a sergeant in that police station shouting at us in a very aggressive way. In fact we were told to get out of his interview room. Clearly he was not interested in any evidence about the abuse of children...Looking back at that incident [I think] that particular officer was scared of the information we had. "

http://www.ukcolumn.org/ukcolumn-news/uk-column-news-10th-august-2017

The British Values agenda

Talking About Terrorism

"The book, Talking About Terrorism, published weeks before the Manchester Arena atrocity, describes the indiscriminate mass murder of innocent members of the public as a `type of war`."

"It tells primary age children that terrorists kill people because they believe they are being treated `unfairly and not shown respect`."

"It gives examples of `terrorists` whose ideas then turn out to be right: `The Suffragettes used violence and were called terrorists...` it stated..."

"In an activity recommended for pupils aged seven to 11, teachers are urged to `invite children to write a letter to a terrorist. If they could ask a terrorist six questions, what would they be?`"

"The book, published by Brilliant Publications and containing a foreword by Peter Wanless, the chief executive of the NSPCC, has been slammed by critics who say it is potentially dangerous."

"Chris McGovern, chairman of the Campaign for Real Education, said the letter task would confuse and potentially upset pupils."

"He said: `This is a crackpot idea based on the misguided notion that primary school children must engage with, and show `respect` for religious fanatics who are seeking to kill them. It is part of the `British Values` agenda that is being forced on schools by Ofsted and the educational establishment`."

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/810115/school-children-told-respect-killers-teaching-aid-talking-about-terrorism

Big Data in action: eleven charities breach data protection rules

"Eleven charities have been fined by England’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) for breaching data protection rules."

"The commission found many of the charities secretly screened millions of donors so they could target them for additional funds."

"It also discovered some traced and targeted new or lapsed donors by tracing information from other sources."

"And some traded personal details with other charities, creating a large pool of donor data for sale..."

"The ICO said that some of the charities had hired companies to profile the wealth of their donors, which was done by investigating their incomes, lifestyles, property values and friendship circles among other means..."

"Major charities including Oxfam, Cancer Research UK, The Royal British Legion and Battersea Dogs and Cats Home, Macmillan Cancer Support and NSPCC were among those fined a total of £138,000 for `serious breaches of data protection laws`..."

"The Charity Commission said: `The generous British public expect charities to safeguard their data and raise funds responsibly, and in return they donate in their millions`."

"`Sadly in these cases charities have not kept their side of the bargain. We are working with the charities concerned, the Information Commissioner and the Fundraising Regulator to ensure that any necessary remedial action is taken`."

Read more at http://thirdforcenews.org.uk/tfn-news/eleven-uk-charities-fined-for-breaching-data-laws#jYYZBZU4WPHY8MFL.99

Communicating online and elsewhere

A number of thanks

 

　
Views for Chief Constable Mike Veale`s video are now climbing thanks to the help of UK Column supporters who have been sharing the video on social media. It is important that many thousands of people see this video because Mike Veale needs all the support he can get with his brave stance to go where the evidence takes him when investigating allegations about former Prime Minister Edward Heath.

Mike Robinson also wanted to highlight his Facebook page starting off with the Mike Veale video. It had 119 shares and 48 likes. He made a comment about the difference between `likes` and shares. "If you share something, the people in your own network get to see it. If you `like` it they don`t. The only people who benefit from a `like` really is Facebook because they get to understand what it is you`re `liking`, what it is you`re angry about and all these kind of things... So please share these posts because that helps us to get some of this information out."

 

"And thanks to everybody who shared my note on Facebook about Brexit being nothing of the kind, drawing similarities between what Theresa May is talking about and what David Cameron was talking about in the run up to the referendum; and of course he was campaigning to stay in the EU.  Theresa May is saying that we`re leaving the EU; but in fact the policies are identical..."

 

"And also thanks to everybody who shared this post highlighting the timeline we now have up on the UK Column on EU military unification and because as we`ve said before you cannot be out of the EU unless you`re separate and have sovereignty over your military. So thanks to the 100 or so people who have shared that so far."

Grooming and the Serious Crime Act

"The government has brought into force Section 67 of the Serious Crime Act 2015. It`s now a criminal offence they say for anyone aged 18 or over to intentionally communicate with a child under 16 where the person acts for a sexual purpose and the communication is sexual or intended to illicit a sexual response. The offence applies to online and off-line communication including social media, email, texts, letters and so on."

"People who are accused of grooming in this way will face up to two years in prison and will be automatically placed on the sex offenders register and this new offence they say will allow authorities, including the police and the Crown Prosecution Service to intervene earlier and stamp out abhorrent grooming before sexual activity can occur. And well the NSPCC says it`s great - the Justice Secretary is doing the right thing. Well what did she have to say?"

"Now Liz Truss says: `This new offence will give courts the powers to jail anyone who sends a sexual communication to a child - and stop the process of grooming before it starts`. She says: `In a world of mobile phones and social media our children are ever more vulnerable to those who prey on their innocence and exploit their trust. The best way of protecting our young people from the evils of child abuse is to stop it happening in the first place`."

Mike Robinson then added: "If I saw any evidence that this government or this parliament or the broader establishment within the United Kingdom wants to stop child abuse... then I might think this is worth the paper it`s written on..."

"I think this is part of a propaganda exercise," said Brian Gerrish, "which -  you`ll see why I think that in a minute."

"OK. Well what did Peter Wanless from the NSPCC have to say?
He said: `The Justice Secretary has done the right thing. This is a victory for the 50,000 people who supported the NSPCC`s Flaw in the Law campaign. It`s a victory for common sense. Children should be safe online as they are off-line, wherever they are in the UK. This law will give police in England and Wales powers they need to protect children from online grooming and to intervene sooner to stop the abuse before it starts`. As I say, this seems to me it`s simply to prevent people freelancing, Brian - if we can use that term. Because the NSPCC is also doing absolutely nothing substantive to prevent the abuse of children."

"Well, I think we`ve got to say there`s something worse than that about the NSPCC and that is that abuse victims and survivors that we speak to simply laugh when the name NSPCC is mentioned because they say `we wouldn`t trust the organisation with a barge pole.`And yet this is the very charity that was sat alongside the Metropolitan Police - indeed taking phone calls from members of the public who thought they were phoning the Met Police to talk about child abuse - and the Independent Inquiry. So this is a very insidious little charity which claims that it`s doing wonderful things but it seems to us the evidence from people who have been abused in the system is very different."

"The other point which I think we should raise here Mike is - if we talk about grooming - of course it`s the British government itself which is pushing in ever more graphic sex education for ever more younger children. So it would seem that whilst clamping down on crimes by people in the wider public arena that the government is very happy that it is grooming children itself through the education process."

"And let`s not mention the children who are groomed through the care system in this country."

"Indeed."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvAmhhldGic

Charities: the eyes and ears of the community

From UK Column News on Monday:

"Let`s move into this little area because if we want to know what the changes are for society, the government is now telling us very clearly. This was released in the last couple of days from the House of Lords: Stronger charities for a stronger society. I wonder what the comment of child abuse survivors would be to that statement in its raw form. Because many of those people say - well they laugh - if you mention the names of the charities NSPCC or Barnardo`s, but here we are, Stronger charities for a stronger society."

"It says: `We are living through a time of profound economic, social and technological change and the environment in which charities are working is altering dramatically. We do not believe that this is a temporary aberration: such disruptive changes are likely to become the norm`."

Brian Gerrish underlines the statement `such disruptive changes are likely to become the norm`.

"Well that`s very interesting. How do they know that Mike? And this is unlikely to be a temporary aberration: such disruptive changes are likely to become the norm."

Mike Robinson: "They can only know that because that is the intention."

"That is the intention and it`s ... only the UK Column that`s pointed out that people are talking about the need to have disruptors in society and we featured some time ago the Ted video ... with a man from Barnet Council - who talks about future government and the fact that we need more disruptors in order to get the necessary changes through."

"So here we`ve got the policy, the policy is of disruption in order to get the government`s change agenda through. What`s the change agenda? Well luckily this Baroness is going to tell us. So here we are: Baroness Pitkeathley and here are some of her comments in respect to the report."

"Charities are the eyes, ears and conscience of society says Lords Select Committee... we need `Stronger charities for a stronger society`..."

"Wouldn`t it be the case that if you have a strong society you wouldn`t need charities because you wouldn`t have people who are poor or suffering or ..."

"That`s absolutely true. Charities are the eyes and ears of society, Brian?"

"Did that remind you of anything?"

"Well are charities replacing GCHQ, is that what`s going on?"

"Well I think that`s part of it. But eyes, ears...certainly made my ears prick up because I remembered this."

"This is Leeds Advisory Group for Common Purpose. This is the meeting going back to 25 July 2006. And just for an indication, here is a charity Common Purpose - we often say this is an oxymoron because of course they`re a political charity. Here are the sorts of people Common Purpose were bringing together. So we`ve got a Regional Director of Common Purpose. We`ve got a Divisional Chief Superintendent from West Yorkshire Police. We`ve got newspapers. We`ve got the university. We`ve got the Council. We`ve got businesses; we`ve got people from the Education sector all meeting behind closed doors under Chatham House rules of secrecy."

"So the two that really stick out are the policeman and the newspaper man because those two organisations should be kept separate from any of this nonsense."

"Indeed. So separation of powers gone out of the window, under the control of a political charity. Why were we so interested? Because in this particular meeting, well it was this statement:"

1. Introduction of new Advisory Group Members

The group and new Advisory Group members were welcomed and introductions were made.

2. Purpose of Advisory Group

Claire went through the advisory briefing pack and reiterated that they are not a board, but the eyes and ears of Common Purpose, Leeds, and will feed key business information to the director. They are there to assist with recruitment, by spreading the word, putting their own staff on programmes and making decisions on accepting participants for matrix. The Advisory Group should also act as a support in localising the content of the curriculum for matrix.

"So think of those orders being given to the very senior policeman there. Because his job is not to be a policeman it`s to work for business information for Common Purpose. And what do we see here? An excellent look into very very dangerous activity by the charity Common Purpose but of course this is mirrored across many other charities as we see."

"Here`s the lady Claire Bennett. You can find her on the Common Purpose website and according to the information she`s very experienced."

"Design and delivery of leadership development courses in West and North Yorkshire."

"Design and delivery of courses for emerging leaders in the north... Youth courses. On it goes. So I don`t know where she got all this experience - she`s been working for Common Purpose for years but this is the lady who was simply pointing at a policeman - a senior policeman - and saying this is what you will do in order to support Common Purpose."

"So let`s come back to the Baroness and see what else she had to say:"

"She said: `Charities are the lifeblood of society. They play a fundamental role in our civil life and do so despite facing a multitude of challenges. Yet for them to continue to flourish, it is clear that they must be supported and promoted`."

"So what`s coming here? Well it`s pretty simple because if you`re a charity you`re not going to be allowed to act as a charity unless the government is supporting and monitoring you`."

"She says: `We found that charities lead the way with innovation, but that this is at risk of being stifled by the `contract culture`. And while advocacy is a sign of a healthy democracy, and is a central part of charities` role, this role has been threatened by Government`."

"Now this is itself an interesting statement. What she`s getting at is the fact that many big charities: Barnardo`s, NSPCC, for example, are now doing the work of government. So they are running contracts. They are no longer effectively charities in the sense that most of us would remember. So big contracts she says are causing charities problems."

"So running on through: `We hope that charities will be encouraged by this report; that the Government will respect their role; and that in addition it will value the connections charities have with all sections of society, and encourage the vital scrutiny they provide`."

"So what we`re interested in here Mike is the fact that the charity sector - that`s about 167,000 charities in UK representing well over £44 billion - those charities affect everyone. They affect local communities, very small communities -  the government now getting the control in through those charities."

"So what Baroness Pitkeathley is expressing here echoes what

Priti Patel was talking about last week where they`re going to fund particularly smaller charities; they`re going to give them grants. But in order to achieve that grant funding they have to agree to special training."

"Correct."

"And of course that is control."

"So Mike`s hit that absolutely on the button. So let`s just put a few things together. This itself was reported by Third Sector magazine, very good article. I encourage people to go and have a look at it. And it says that basically charities are going to be encouraged to report to government on how they perform and they`re going to be encouraged as Mike says to do training for the government. So why should we be interested in all this? Well in that article this is one of the organisations mentioned: the New Philanthropy Capital and they say: `We have seen our approach adopted and adapted as far afield as Brazil, Germany, Sweden and Israel."

"So we now get a clue that this is not UK internal policy - there`s something much deeper here - and why would we be interested with New Philanthropy Capital?  Well if we look at who created it, it`s Goldman Sachs the very same bank that`s helping the British army to train at the moment, alongside Barclays."

"Let`s have a look at another aspect of this article because we`ve got Power to Change mentioned... we`ve got a gentleman called Christopher Stephens. He was chairman of the Judicial Appointments Commission. So we`ve got a nice mix here Mike. One minute we`re talking about charities. We then have a look at the interests of the senior people involved and they`re busy appointing judges and at the same time they`re part of the Salaries Review Board for the top Civil Service Commissioners who are going to give them the money through the government in the first place. But there`s no conflict of interest, luckily."

"None at all."

"So what else can we add to this one? Well in the article it also mentions Lloyds Bank Foundation with community businesses to revive local assets, protect services people rely on and address local needs."

"Is that assets in the sense of intelligence gathering?"

"I think that`s exactly what`s going on. They`re trying to get people to believe they`re going to be helping the local children`s football team that needs some help refurbishing their ground but if you have a look at what`s going on here it`s massive data collection."

"And we shouldn`t be surprised because of course it was this gentleman Eric Pickles who said: `We are going to shake up the balance of power in this country. We are going to change the nature of the constitution. Now he said that alone; no debate... He said he was going to be a revolutionary -  and the revolution starts here.`"

"So what we are really seeing coming in now is this central core of Big Society. This diagram we did years ago but it showed the change agents driving through the third sector to produce this Common Purpose based Big Society and this is going to be - well you talked about this the other day Mike - well this is Theresa May. She`s calling it the shared society but it`s exactly the same thing just using slightly different language."

"Again this is constitutional change, localism. OK the Localism Bill has gone through and become the Localism Act. That`s quite constrained and limited whereas most of this change seems to be pretty much unlimited and no real debate in parliament about what this change is about or where it`s taking us... "

"And this is because there is effectively no Westminster. We simply have the Cabinet Office with its special advisers driving policy."

　https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aS4-S75kXN8

=======================

See also Imagining the future