20 years or so after Scallywag Magazine first published that Lord Alistair McAlpine was invovled in a paedophile ring Lord McAlpine has decided to sue anyone who even hints of it either on TV in print or most perniciously the thousands of people on twitter who tweeted or re-tweeted his name.
For nearly 20 years Lord McAlpine remained silent, accepting the publication in Scallwag plainly detailing his paedophile activities. He did not sue and he did not even write a letter of complaint. When David Ike republished the details in The Biggest Secret in 1999 McAlpine still did not sue or complain. The facts were published widely all over the Internet still he did not sue or complain. read more http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/mcalpine-did-not-sue-scallywag-why.html
So why did Scallywag confidently publish that Lord McAlpine was paedophile? Scallywag had affidavits from three of the abused children naming him specifically, two have since died is mysterious and tragic circumstances. Another 17 affidavits were considered. Scallywag also had confirmation from police sources and M15 naming Lord McAlpine as an abuser. read the Scallywag article http://google-law.blogspot.com.ar/2012/11/scallywag-article-lord-mcalpine-and.html
McAlpine has never been arrested or questioned by the Police about the allegations of child rape. This itself speaks volumes because clearly if you or I were accused of raping children we would defiantly be arrested and questioned.
The pertinent point is that McAlpine is unlikely to win any libel action against any TV Station or Newspaper or Tweeter for the simple reason that he accepted the daily publication that he was involved in a paedophile ring for nearly 20 years.
McAlpine is statute barred from suing Scallywag or its authors and journalists. The fact that he accepted publication in the national magazine Scallywag and subsequent publication in David Icke's Book and further publication on the internet would mean that it was reasonable for anyone to assume he would not contest the facts as published and had, in fact, accepted them as true.
So Tweeters and ITV and BBC were not irresponsible, they did not solely rely on the hints from Bryn Estyn Survivor Steve Messham who actually did not name Lord McAlpine. They quite reasonably assumed that as McAlpine had not contested the repeated publication that he was a paedophile for nearly 20 years, that he had in fact accepted it was true. In fact Lord McAlpine accepted that what Scallywag wrote about him was true simply because he did not challenge it.
McAlpine is settling out of Court for small amounts of damages, because he could loose if he went to Court. The BBC and ITV have thrown in the towel because their lawyers have told them it would cost millions to fight a libel action and if they can settle out of court for a small amount it would be better than a lengthy libel trial with the Government calling the shots in the spin game. As the Tory Government try to put the lid back on a very nasty can of worms they just hope no-one will call McAlpines bluff and defend.
Lord McAlpine and his Lawyers are using fear tactics to silence Investigators, Whistle-blowers, Bloggers, Abuse Surviviors and the concerned public. McAlpine has enough power and money to make his small part in the story so important that the big issue of exposing the Paedophile Ring that Jimmy Savile procured for has very much taken second place.
Yep....He is a Nonce.
ReplyDeleteJust because somebody hasnt responded to an accusation made in an obscure defunct magazine doesnt make them guilty. I dont know whether McAlpine is a paedo or not but I do know the question hasnt been through due process of law so he is entitled to a presumption of innocence.
ReplyDeletehengist everyone is entitled to a defence but the police failed to arrest McAlpine when the allegations were made.Why?
ReplyDeleteIf you were accused by a number of children of raping them I am sure you would be arrested. You would then have an opportunity to defend yourself.
McAlpine was not arrested because he was above the law. The same law he is so glibly hoping to manipulate to jail thousands of innocent Twitterers who had a right to assume he was guilty because he had not challeged the allegations.
The problem is there is one Law for the Rich and Powerful and another Law for the rest of us.
You can be sure McAlpine would not lift a finger to defend you.
McAlpine was Tory party treasurer from 1975 to 1990. From the time the unions nearly brought the country to its knees until Mrs Thatcher resigned. The Tory party was funded by some very unpleasant third parties. McAlpine knows the lot. He is above the law and very well protected. The truth will out but most likely not until long after he is dead and Mrs Thatchers Tory administration is a long forgotten (and harmless) footnote.
ReplyDeleteThe fact is that whether or not Lord McAlpine is innocent, the low level of public trust in the law being applied fairly, means that we will no longer automatically presume the innocence of a man who could easily avoid prosecution by virtue of his high status. Until laws are applied equitably, this will remain a problem for all well connected individuals who are viewed with suspicion.
ReplyDeleteFrom all the information I have read I'd say the cases of abuse in the children's homes all over the country including Islington and Jersey are linked and that the enterprise was most probably run by the intelligence services with a front man/men to bring in much needed revenue to shore up the huge losses to the Treasury under the Tory government. The government/Establishment are now desperate to control the revelations and the BBC Newsnight programme was used to put a lid on things by changing focus and clamping down on the spread of information.
ReplyDeleteFrom
ReplyDeletehttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/sunday_am/4822498.stm
ANDREW MARR: There was a lot of talk back in the Eighties and Nineties about sleaze and how the Labour Party was going to clean up the system of donations to political parties and yet you look at the last few days and some people would say it's dirtier than ever.
LORD McALPINE: The Eighties, the sleaze wasn't just money - it was sexual and every sort of sleaze that anyone could lay their hands on.
ANDREW MARR: It certainly was.
LORD McALPINE: And of course when Tony Blair came in he said I'm having none of that. But, you know, looking back over the last eight years, or whatever it is, it's a mirror image.
On Sunday 19 March 2006 Andrew Marr interviewed Lord McAlpine
ReplyDeleteANDREW MARR: There was a lot of talk back in the Eighties and Nineties about sleaze and how the Labour Party was going to clean up the system of donations to political parties and yet you look at the last few days and some people would say it's dirtier than ever.
LORD McALPINE: The Eighties, the sleaze wasn't just money - it was sexual and every sort of sleaze that anyone could lay their hands on.
ANDREW MARR: It certainly was.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/sunday_am/4822498.stm
Its very easy to believe that an Tory is a paedo, especially when M15 confirms it to be the case.
Delete"Scallywag had affidavits from three of the abused children naming him specifically, two have since died is mysterious and tragic circumstances. Another 17 affidavits were considered. Scallywag also had confirmation from police sources and M15 naming Lord McAlpine as an abuser. "
ReplyDeleteyeah the problem here is
1. Scallywag has a huge reputation problem due to the activities of its main player. You can read about them easily online.
2. David Icke has huge problems too.. he has called a large number of people pedophiles, satan worshipers, necrophiliacs, and lizard people. He also cuddles up to anti-semitic conspiracy theories. If you are going to believe him about one, why not the others? His 'level of evidence' he has, or as you wrote, 'details', is not very greater about any one of these cases than any other.
3. Scallywag's article only mentions one affidavit, not three, and doesn't say anything about seventeen. It also says 'Lord McAlpine' - there are several different high level McAlpines so again we are back to the case of mistaken identity, which other people, including Wales victims, have sworn is what is really happening.
I don't know who "Paul" is, and I don't know who Paul's lover is... I would expect that if he were still alive, he might have something to say on the matter. If he is dead, then his loved ones / associates might have something to say. Also, the police quoted in Scallywag might have something to say, alot of them being retired by now. The problem is that we have nothing. All we have is the Scallywag article printed a long time ago with things that are not very convincing.... especially when one reads all of the other aticles about the problems with the child home investigations.
If there is a 'strathclyde' accusation it should not be rocket science to dig up the source of this accusation and then find some evidence of it. And yet, we have nothing, only the word of people who have proven they are not overly concerned with what would traditionally be called 'skepticism'. Without skepticism you cant call what you are doing research and you cant call it journalism. I dont know what you call it, but not those two things.
4. Even if there are a lot of uncaught high level pedophiles - the problem is that conspiracy people and conspiracy bloggers are not the ones catching them. It's plain old journalism like the Cyril Smith case, the ITV Savile expose, etc.
People have said nothing about Icke's accusations for years not because they were ignoring the evidence, but becaues Icke has no evidence. He belives in lizard people. It's hard to sue someone for libel if it can be argued that nobody would reasonably be expected take the person seriously. He simply sprays huge amounts of unverified gossip about hundreds of different things, and eventually some small percentage of it will be true.
Once again I'd like people to consider the possibility that conspiracy people have severe sociopathic tendencies. Not only do they not care about the effects their actions have on others (like, the fact that they have actually harmed the effort to expose real pedophiles through the gossip distractions), they dont seem to even understand that their actions effect others, nor do they seem to understand that it is morally wrong to accuse somebody of something based on shoddy evidence. There doesnt seem to be any sort of ethical light behind the eyes... they dont understand the concept of unjustly accusing someone of something, there is no inner debate going on, no inner struggle over what to do. It's all justified by the grand crusade they are on, the cause, the screamed recitations of graphic horrors they collect without examining their veracity, and on and on and on. Sociopaths simply do not have those conflicted emotions about these things, which 90% of non-sociopathic people do.
ReplyDeleteIcke could have spent all these years trying to find victims and interview them and corroborate details and fact check and dig up old reports, but it seems that for whatever reason he did not do that. Meanwhile, scores of social workers, journalists, activists, etc, have been working on child abuse cases and reforming the system for decades, and here finally there is some glimmer of hope, with Savile and Cyril being outed,.... but the conspiracy people not only derail this with their wildly erroneous gossip, they take credit for something they had little or nothing to do with, and act like they care about victims of child abuse, who have derived little or no benefit from the actions of conspiracy people, at all.
What tosh? U idiot! Why do u think these named people dont take anyone to court? Cos it would encourage lots of victims to come forward...fool.
DeleteThere was more information in the blog below about the North Wales allegations.
ReplyDeletehttp://pbepring.blogspot.co.uk/
I will continue to share articles like this until the matter is fully and openly investigated.
ReplyDeletejustice be done, he is guilty and he knows it! Dirty bastard!
ReplyDeleteWhat a creep. His horrible book exposes his wicked heart. Margaret Thatcher might think its ok to be devious and evil but most people don't, most people still cling to virtues like kindness and goodness, not selfish ambitious wicked treason. Funny how quick he was to sell off his Graham Overton "art" collection, isn't it? Most people would have shamefully burnt it, but people like him haven't got any honest shame.
ReplyDelete