Thatcher -surely last nail in her coffin

17 Jul 2014

Quote by deancannock
I admired Jimmy Saville and his dedication to help those less well off than himself and help the children in the hospitals he visited, the marathons he ran for charity, I would have felt honoured to have him come to my home.
Of course I did not know then what I know now, I am sure there are many people who felt the same as me before it became public knowledge about his evil habits, I think anyone who did know and it can be proved they knew but protected him should be charged with aiding and abetting but a lot of people who did not know will be as appalled as the rest of us and regret inviting him to political and social events.

100% mids....we can all admire people....Jim'ill fix it and Rolf Harris on a Saturday was part of my upbringing...I used to love it. I used to love Gary Glitter songs....I used to think Cyril Smith was a fuuny guy !!!
However as the truth has emerged we all see them in a different light. No matter how much money Jimmy Saville raised, there will never be any excuse for his actions and abuse of children and handicapped kids. Cyril Smith may well of been a good MP....but nothing will ever excuse his actions and abuse of young boys. History will see these people for what they were.....evil child abusers. And I think anyone that knew about these things deserves to be dragged up and shamed the same. If they would of spoken out at the time, it may well of stopped the abuse of others. I think there will be many at the BBC that actually knew about the activities of Saville and Rolf Harris and others, but because they were famous decided to turn a blind eye to it all. They deserved to be shamed.
And yes....I think there are many in the corridors of power of Westminster that will know of activities that went on. They to deserve to be names and shamed...no matter how low or high ranking they are...and no matter what political colour they wear. there should be no hiding place for abusers or anyone that assisted by turning a blind eye.........and if that means us all having a total different view of someone....then that is the way it should be !!
Dean, I'm sure that the whole forum will agree with you regarding the sexual abuse of children. Where the difference lies, is that you have admitted that because of your hatred for Thatcher, you want the allegations to be true, whereas more fair minded folk are inclined to wait and see if there is any truth in the allegations before condemning.
NO....I have said...I think they will be shown to be true !! I have looked at the evidence that has been presented thus far...as in the Jimmy Saville case...(and yes I was knocked for that as well, but to me you could see it was quite clear)...I think the case will be shown to be correct. I have clearly stated above that I would condemn any person of any political colour. However it seems others are not willing to make that easy statement. Indeed are already trying to put excuses...GNV even saying it shouldn't even be investigated because she is dead and more important things around !!!
Oh dean, you do love to twist things don't you.
I did not say that it should not be investigated. What I did say is that there are surely priorities and dealing with any current or potential abuse cases as a priority to historical ones is paramount where there are limited resources in order to make every effort to protect vulnerable people who may be being abused now. Your mate Tom Watson saw to it that the most able person in the UK - appointed to do just that - was dissed and took her bat home with the inevitable delays now to be experienced as a new candidate is sought and appointed. I'm sure Mr Watson is very proud of his record.
I welcome the action taken by Police forces throughout the Country yesterday in arresting a number of suspects. However, if there is a case to answer (just being arrested isn't a reason per se to 'condemn' them) and it is deemed by the CPS as in the public interest to prosecute them - (that is the law), it is a matter for the Courts to dish out any punishment if they are convicted.
What I will not agree to is people taking of the law in their own hands such as was the case I outlined earlier in the thread. In the context of the Miner's strike, I too am old enough to remember summary justice being carried out by striking miners who hurled a 46 pound lump of concrete off a road bridge and killed a taxi driver doing nothing more than his job. If you can't remember the name of the taxi driver, it was David James Wilkie.
But, I'm sure you'll find some perverse justification for that as well as your hatred for MT.
Simply, it is not for you or anyone else for that matter to 'condemn'. That is the function of the Law in a civilised society. To interfere with the process of justice by making ill-advised claims or worse - taking precipitate action results often in the very justice that is sought being denied and that is an insult to the very core of everything that is right and decent in society.

17 Jul 2014

Quote by deancannock
??
Anyone that is shown to have any connection to abuse, should be shown for the evil people they are.

Dean, are you Egyptian? Cos you seem to be in de'nial' that those you voted for Blair/ Brown etc seem to be just as keen to cover up
the same as what you're hoping that Mrs T maybe has?
Where do you stand on your voting in for supposed 'evil people they are'. will you continue to condone the alleged actions of the party Blair/brown by virtue of voting for them or will you now remove yourself as a supporter of the Labour party?

17 Jul 2014

At least you have to admire dean's staying power...
IF he's as good in bed, his next conquest could be in for a very scary ride and some very sore bits :grin:

17 Jul 2014

Quote by Toots
??
Anyone that is shown to have any connection to abuse, should be shown for the evil people they are.

Dean, are you Egyptian? Cos you seem to be in de'nial' that those you voted for Blair/ Brown etc seem to be just as keen to cover up
the same as what you're hoping that Mrs T maybe has?
Where do you stand on your voting in for supposed 'evil people they are'. will you continue to condone the alleged actions of the party Blair/brown by virtue of voting for them or will you now remove yourself as a supporter of the Labour party?
Toots if you are going to accuse people of being in denial...at least bother to read the thread. Half way down page 3...after your posting..I answer your point....I even start the reply with your name....I have clearly said anyone of any political colour be it Blair or be Thatcher that is found to covered up abuse should be condemned....please take the courtesy to read it !!!!! Even the bit you have copied and pasted....whats the first word there ANYONE !!!
After reading it...you can apologise if you wish...!!!!!
Maybe more importantly......you could always tell us what your view would be if Mrs Thatcher is found guilty.......I answer quite clear with my questions....But it seems others don't want to answer that !!!!

18 Jul 2014

Quote by deancannock
??
Anyone that is shown to have any connection to abuse, should be shown for the evil people they are.

Dean, are you Egyptian? Cos you seem to be in de'nial' that those you voted for Blair/ Brown etc seem to be just as keen to cover up
the same as what you're hoping that Mrs T maybe has?
Where do you stand on your voting in for supposed 'evil people they are'. will you continue to condone the alleged actions of the party Blair/brown by virtue of voting for them or will you now remove yourself as a supporter of the Labour party?
Toots if you are going to accuse people of being in denial...at least bother to read the thread. Half way down page 3...after your posting..I answer your point....I even start the reply with your name....I have clearly said anyone of any political colour be it Blair or be Thatcher that is found to covered up abuse should be condemned....please take the courtesy to read it !!!!! Even the bit you have copied and pasted....whats the first word there ANYONE !!!
After reading it...you can apologise if you wish...!!!!!
Maybe more importantly......you could always tell us what your view would be if Mrs Thatcher is found guilty.......I answer quite clear with my questions....But it seems others don't want to answer that !!!!
No Dean, what you've consistently stated is that 'anyone' found to be connected to child abuse are 'evil' and should be condemned, but where it differs is you have been consistent in baying for Mrs T's blood ( I loved that woman, she was flippin excellent as a PM ) and sullied her good name but have not directly afforded the same courtesy to Blair, instead using a 'catch all' for everyone/anyone else that may be connected not a single mention of his name in the same context? Conspicuous in it's absence (direct mention of his name) Why is that?
You're dismissive regarding Blair's actions over the Iraq war and the needless deaths he sent some of our troops to with your 'yeah I think he has some questions to answer' Is that how little you think of our troops and their lives lost?
So if as the link i posted above re Blair dodging questions on what he knew re the abuse cover up proves that he also knew then where will you stand with your voting for the Labour Party? Will you seek to condone their actions by continuing to support them or will you renounce them for ever and a day as 'evil' ?

18 Jul 2014

Quote by deancannock
Snip.......,
Maybe more importantly......you could always tell us what your view would be if Mrs Thatcher is found guilty.......I answer quite clear with my questions....But it seems others don't want to answer that !!!!

Dean, two things. Thatcher will NEVER be found guilty. She is dead and therefore can never be trialled. Secondly, you are asking people to condemn her on the say so of an article in the Daily Mirror, a rag that hates Thatcher and all she stood for.
You say you have weighed up the evidence and therefore you think it's likely she is guilty of the allegations made in the Red Top. Please enlighten me as to the 'evidence'?

18 Jul 2014

Quote by Max777

Snip.......,
Maybe more importantly......you could always tell us what your view would be if Mrs Thatcher is found guilty.......I answer quite clear with my questions....But it seems others don't want to answer that !!!!

Dean, two things. Thatcher will NEVER be found guilty. She is dead and therefore can never be trialled. Secondly, you are asking people to condemn her on the say so of an article in the Daily Mirror, a rag that hates Thatcher and all she stood for.
You say you have weighed up the evidence and therefore you think it's likely she is guilty of the allegations made in the Red Top. Please enlighten me as to the 'evidence'?
c'mon Max. Dean doesn't need evidence. Tom Watson said it's true, so it must be.
No different to Bliar's lies about WMD and sexed up dossiers and Brown saying that troops were given enough personal kit for desert warfare...
The difference is, as you say, MT is dead but Tom Watson hasn't fingered (no pun intended) Bliar and Brown - yet
Typical communist; screw those who can't defend themselves and let the party elite go free rolleyes

20 Jul 2014

Quote by Max777

Snip.......,
Maybe more importantly......you could always tell us what your view would be if Mrs Thatcher is found guilty.......I answer quite clear with my questions....But it seems others don't want to answer that !!!!

Dean, two things. Thatcher will NEVER be found guilty. She is dead and therefore can never be trialled. Secondly, you are asking people to condemn her on the say so of an article in the Daily Mirror, a rag that hates Thatcher and all she stood for.
You say you have weighed up the evidence and therefore you think it's likely she is guilty of the allegations made in the Red Top. Please enlighten me as to the 'evidence'?
Jimmy Savile was dead and buried before allegations came out into the public eye, yet he's been condemned and vilified, had his honours stripped etc.
Like Thatcher, he cannot be tried and found guilty in a court of law, yet...

20 Jul 2014

Quote by sanssouci
had his honours stripped etc.

Oh? and where did you get that little gem from?
If I'm not mistaken, awards such as a Knighthood die with the recipient. There was nothing to 'strip'.
Remaining assets maybe, but that may ultimately be a matter for the Courts to determine unless the executors distribute the estate unchallenged to 'victims' with the consent of the beneficiaries in Probate.

20 Jul 2014

Quote by SansSouci

Snip.......,
Maybe more importantly......you could always tell us what your view would be if Mrs Thatcher is found guilty.......I answer quite clear with my questions....But it seems others don't want to answer that !!!!

Dean, two things. Thatcher will NEVER be found guilty. She is dead and therefore can never be trialled. Secondly, you are asking people to condemn her on the say so of an article in the Daily Mirror, a rag that hates Thatcher and all she stood for.
You say you have weighed up the evidence and therefore you think it's likely she is guilty of the allegations made in the Red Top. Please enlighten me as to the 'evidence'?
Jimmy Savile was dead and buried before allegations came out into the public eye, yet he's been condemned and vilified, had his honours stripped etc.
Like Thatcher, he cannot be tried and found guilty in a court of law, yet...
Yet?
Just noticed your signature. Weren't there allegations that John Peel had a relationship with an underage girl?

20 Jul 2014

Toots.....take a look and read again...I said anyone of any political colour or party that is found guilty of a cover up should be condemned, and face the full action of the law. Yes that includes Blair...yes I have said Blair has a lot to answer for in the Iraq war. I say that because we wait till the papers are released of cabinet meetings, to see what information he was given. At the time I myself and indeed other parties were in favour of the action based on the information we were given !!! Now IF...notice that word IF again....it is found to be true that Blair had other information that would indicate no weapons of mass destruction were there, then he should face the courts and any action that would result from that. However this is once again trying to create a smoke screen and divert attention. Maybe start a new thread if you wish to discuss the Iraq war. However I would ask you to answer my question as posed 3 times to you. If it is shown that Mrs Thatcher did cover up Abuse, by her cabinet members, then will you condemn her, and change your view that she was this all wonderful leader !! Or maybe its you that in denial.
GNV.....Saville has had his name removed from the honours list that he received. His name will not appear in any official list. Not sure if you consider this stripping him of his title or not...but it does show some action can be taken evn if people are deceased.
Max...Mrs Thatcher can't be taken to court.....but as above neither was Jimmy Saville....but surely you not going to try and defend his innocence !! And the link I gace was from The Mirror....but if you care to google it...every newspaper reported it....as did the BBC and reuters....so not an isolated case....if there wasn't a case to answer, why is Teresa May setting up an enquiry !!
Also you throw up the name of John Peel.....I have no idea about that....but whatever....two wrongs do not make a right.... !!!

20 Jul 2014

Quote by deancannock
Toots.....take a look and read again...I said anyone of any political colour or party that is found guilty of a cover up should be condemned, and face the full action of the law. Yes that includes Blair...yes I have said Blair has a lot to answer for in the Iraq war. I say that because we wait till the papers are released of cabinet meetings, to see what information he was given. At the time I myself and indeed other parties were in favour of the action based on the information we were given !!! Now IF...notice that word IF again....it is found to be true that Blair had other information that would indicate no weapons of mass destruction were there, then he should face the courts and any action that would result from that. However this is once again trying to create a smoke screen and divert attention. Maybe start a new thread if you wish to discuss the Iraq war. However I would ask you to answer my question as posed 3 times to you. If it is shown that Mrs Thatcher did cover up Abuse, by her cabinet members, then will you condemn her, and change your view that she was this all wonderful leader !! Or maybe its you that in denial.
GNV.....Saville has had his name removed from the honours list that he received. His name will not appear in any official list. Not sure if you consider this stripping him of his title or not...but it does show some action can be taken evn if people are deceased.
Max...Mrs Thatcher can't be taken to court.....but as above neither was Jimmy Saville....but surely you not going to try and defend his innocence !! And the link I gace was from The Mirror....but if you care to google it...every newspaper reported it....as did the BBC and reuters....so not an isolated case....if there wasn't a case to answer, why is Teresa May setting up an enquiry !!
Also you throw up the name of John Peel.....I have no idea about that....but whatever....two wrongs do not make a right.... !!!

Oh dear, signs of desperation here dean.
I guess Jimmy Savile is pretty gutted at having his name removed from the list (whatever list) if that has been the case. rolleyes

The reference to John Peelwas not directed at you I think, it was at sansoucis who has it mentioned in his SH Forum signature...
As my old Gran used to say, none as blind as them that don't want to see :lol2:

20 Jul 2014

Quote by GnV
Toots.....take a look and read again...I said anyone of any political colour or party that is found guilty of a cover up should be condemned, and face the full action of the law. Yes that includes Blair...yes I have said Blair has a lot to answer for in the Iraq war. I say that because we wait till the papers are released of cabinet meetings, to see what information he was given. At the time I myself and indeed other parties were in favour of the action based on the information we were given !!! Now IF...notice that word IF again....it is found to be true that Blair had other information that would indicate no weapons of mass destruction were there, then he should face the courts and any action that would result from that. However this is once again trying to create a smoke screen and divert attention. Maybe start a new thread if you wish to discuss the Iraq war. However I would ask you to answer my question as posed 3 times to you. If it is shown that Mrs Thatcher did cover up Abuse, by her cabinet members, then will you condemn her, and change your view that she was this all wonderful leader !! Or maybe its you that in denial.
GNV.....Saville has had his name removed from the honours list that he received. His name will not appear in any official list. Not sure if you consider this stripping him of his title or not...but it does show some action can be taken evn if people are deceased.
Max...Mrs Thatcher can't be taken to court.....but as above neither was Jimmy Saville....but surely you not going to try and defend his innocence !! And the link I gace was from The Mirror....but if you care to google it...every newspaper reported it....as did the BBC and reuters....so not an isolated case....if there wasn't a case to answer, why is Teresa May setting up an enquiry !!
Also you throw up the name of John Peel.....I have no idea about that....but whatever....two wrongs do not make a right.... !!!

Oh dear, signs of desperation here dean.
I guess Jimmy Savile is pretty gutted at having his name removed from the list (whatever list) if that has been the case. rolleyes

The reference to John Peelwas not directed at you I think, it was at sansoucis who has it mentioned in his SH Forum signature...
As my old Gran used to say, none as blind as them that don't want to see :lol2:
simply answering the questions as put GNV.....if only others would do same....And yes I agree with your Nan....you should take heed of her words !!!!

20 Jul 2014

Quote by deancannock
Toots.....take a look and read again...I said anyone of any political colour or party that is found guilty of a cover up should be condemned, and face the full action of the law. Yes that includes Blair...yes I have said Blair has a lot to answer for in the Iraq war. I say that because we wait till the papers are released of cabinet meetings, to see what information he was given. At the time I myself and indeed other parties were in favour of the action based on the information we were given !!! Now IF...notice that word IF again....it is found to be true that Blair had other information that would indicate no weapons of mass destruction were there, then he should face the courts and any action that would result from that. However this is once again trying to create a smoke screen and divert attention. Maybe start a new thread if you wish to discuss the Iraq war. However I would ask you to answer my question as posed 3 times to you. If it is shown that Mrs Thatcher did cover up Abuse, by her cabinet members, then will you condemn her, and change your view that she was this all wonderful leader !! Or maybe its you that in denial.
GNV.....Saville has had his name removed from the honours list that he received. His name will not appear in any official list. Not sure if you consider this stripping him of his title or not...but it does show some action can be taken evn if people are deceased.
Max...Mrs Thatcher can't be taken to court.....but as above neither was Jimmy Saville....but surely you not going to try and defend his innocence !! And the link I gace was from The Mirror....but if you care to google it...every newspaper reported it....as did the BBC and reuters....so not an isolated case....if there wasn't a case to answer, why is Teresa May setting up an enquiry !!
Also you throw up the name of John Peel.....I have no idea about that....but whatever....two wrongs do not make a right.... !!!

Dean, I have have not mentioned Saville, you're the one that keeps referring to him.
I have googled it and can not find the other links you claim there to be. Please provide them. As for the enquiry Teresa May is setting up, it's not into the Thatcher government specifically but why let facts get in the way of your prejudices?
The John Peel reference was aimed at SansSouci, that's why I quoted him!

20 Jul 2014

quick goggle and loads came up.....but choose two from The Daily mail....the Tories own newspaper....and even Norman Tebbitt say...in those days it was just the thing to do...the save the establishment !! As we know.....certain files have mysteriously gone missing.....If they are found, lets see what they have to say.....they haven't gone missing just for fun !!!

20 Jul 2014

Quote by deancannock
Now IF...notice that word IF again....it is found to be true that Blair had other information that would indicate no weapons of mass destruction were there, then he should face the courts and any action that would result from that.

---

Well, this gives more than a clear indication on Blair and how he changed his stance as time
went on, to eventually justifying his actions by adding a different spin.
7 October 2004
'The chief US weapons inspector in Iraq Charles Duelfer concluded that there had been no stockpiles of biological, chemical or nuclear weapons before the invasion.
But Mr Blair still interpreted the report as proof that Saddam had "every intention" to develop WMD.'
Given this was out there and in the public domain by the 2005 election, did you condone his Iraq war actions (taking the UK into it) by voting for Labour/Blair again?

20 Jul 2014

Quote by Toots
Now IF...notice that word IF again....it is found to be true that Blair had other information that would indicate no weapons of mass destruction were there, then he should face the courts and any action that would result from that.

---

Well, this gives more than a clear indication on Blair and how he changed his stance as time
went on, to eventually justifying his actions by adding a different spin.
7 October 2004
'The chief US weapons inspector in Iraq Charles Duelfer concluded that there had been no stockpiles of biological, chemical or nuclear weapons before the invasion.
But Mr Blair still interpreted the report as proof that Saddam had "every intention" to develop WMD.'
Given this was out there and in the public domain by the 2005 election, did you condone his Iraq war actions (taking the UK into it) by voting for Labour/Blair again?
Once again....not answering the question asked 4 times...instead trying top create a smoke screen....I said if you want to debate the Iraq war...go create a thread.....now answer the question..
there again....GNV nan was right..nowt as blind as those that don't want to see.

20 Jul 2014

Quote by deancannock
Now IF...notice that word IF again....it is found to be true that Blair had other information that would indicate no weapons of mass destruction were there, then he should face the courts and any action that would result from that.

---

Well, this gives more than a clear indication on Blair and how he changed his stance as time
went on, to eventually justifying his actions by adding a different spin.
7 October 2004
'The chief US weapons inspector in Iraq Charles Duelfer concluded that there had been no stockpiles of biological, chemical or nuclear weapons before the invasion.
But Mr Blair still interpreted the report as proof that Saddam had "every intention" to develop WMD.'
Given this was out there and in the public domain by the 2005 election, did you condone his Iraq war actions (taking the UK into it) by voting for Labour/Blair again?
Once again....not answering the question asked 4 times...instead trying top create a smoke screen, with posts from 2009 !!! ...I said if you want to debate the Iraq war...go create a thread ....now maybe you would like to answer the question..
there again....GNV nan was right..nowt as blind as those that don't want to see.

20 Jul 2014

Quote by deancannock
Now IF...notice that word IF again....it is found to be true that Blair had other information that would indicate no weapons of mass destruction were there, then he should face the courts and any action that would result from that.

---

Well, this gives more than a clear indication on Blair and how he changed his stance as time
went on, to eventually justifying his actions by adding a different spin.
7 October 2004
'The chief US weapons inspector in Iraq Charles Duelfer concluded that there had been no stockpiles of biological, chemical or nuclear weapons before the invasion.
But Mr Blair still interpreted the report as proof that Saddam had "every intention" to develop WMD.'
Given this was out there and in the public domain by the 2005 election, did you condone his Iraq war actions (taking the UK into it) by voting for Labour/Blair again?
Once again....not answering the question asked 4 times...instead trying top create a smoke screen....I said if you want to debate the Iraq war...go create a thread.....now answer the question..
there again....GNV nan was right..nowt as blind as those that don't want to see.
Toots (aka Paxman) to Dean (aka Michael Howard) (we're not far of the 12 times of asking)
You haven't answered it once, smoke/mirrors/pot/black all you've done is skim over it and avoiding answering it.
Blair (living) conceded/admitted/agreed that there were no WMD and yet he took the decision to take the UK to war...
You would of been aware of no WMD and Blair's inaccuracies when voting in 2005. So the question remains (unanswered) did you vote for Labour/Blair in 2005 even though it was in
the Public domain that no WMD existed?
You're in a barrel, there are no corners for you to hide.

20 Jul 2014

Quote by deancannock

quick goggle and loads came up.....but choose two from The Daily mail....the Tories own newspaper....and even Norman Tebbitt say...in those days it was just the thing to do...the save the establishment !! As we know.....certain files have mysteriously gone missing.....If they are found, lets see what they have to say.....they haven't gone missing just for fun !!!

Dean, read what the articles actually say

20 Jul 2014

Quote by Max777

quick goggle and loads came up.....but choose two from The Daily mail....the Tories own newspaper....and even Norman Tebbitt say...in those days it was just the thing to do...the save the establishment !! As we know.....certain files have mysteriously gone missing.....If they are found, lets see what they have to say.....they haven't gone missing just for fun !!!

Dean, read what the articles actually say
I have...Noman Tebbit says Establishment cover up.....no don't try and tell me you don't understand what that means !!! It was Mrs thatcher own personal secretary we talking about here !!!!!

20 Jul 2014

Quote by deancannock

quick goggle and loads came up.....but choose two from The Daily mail....the Tories own newspaper....and even Norman Tebbitt say...in those days it was just the thing to do...the save the establishment !! As we know.....certain files have mysteriously gone missing.....If they are found, lets see what they have to say.....they haven't gone missing just for fun !!!

Dean, read what the articles actually say
I have...Noman Tebbit says Establishment cover up.....no don't try and tell me you don't understand what that means !!! It was Mrs thatcher own personal secretary we talking about here !!!!!
Te bit says there MAY have been an establishment cover up. He also goes on to say'At that time I think most people would have thought that the establishment, the system, was to be protected and if a few things had gone wrong here and there that it was more important to protect the system'
That's not quite the same as Thatcher personally covering up any alleged abuse. Let's wait and see, shall we?

20 Jul 2014

Quote by Max777

quick goggle and loads came up.....but choose two from The Daily mail....the Tories own newspaper....and even Norman Tebbitt say...in those days it was just the thing to do...the save the establishment !! As we know.....certain files have mysteriously gone missing.....If they are found, lets see what they have to say.....they haven't gone missing just for fun !!!

Dean, read what the articles actually say
I have...Noman Tebbit says Establishment cover up.....no don't try and tell me you don't understand what that means !!! It was Mrs thatcher own personal secretary we talking about here !!!!!
Te bit says there MAY have been an establishment cover up. Let's wait and see, shall we?
I have said that all along MAX.......I have simply asked the question IF...it was found what people views of Mrs T would be then !!.....always stated alleged cover up....But like yourself I await with all due interest.

3 Feb 2015

Here is the first evidence...and proof of the cover up. You wait...this is the tip of one massive iceberg that will be uncovered as documents are released.

4 Feb 2015

deano, you have an unwarrented confidence in the mainstream media and headlies if you believe more than the "tip of the iceberg" will surface.

4 Feb 2015

should have read warranted and mainscream

5 Feb 2015

Quote by deancannock

Here is the first evidence...and proof of the cover up. You wait...this is the tip of one massive iceberg that will be uncovered as documents are released.

Yawn.....

5 Feb 2015

GnV....you get bored of hearing about child abuse, and people who covered it up.
Suppose you think people who commit war crimes should be forgetten about after a few years. Suppose you think terrorists should be forgotten about after a few years.
Well thankfully I don't. Thankfully people like Tom Watson who has worked tirelessly on this issue doesn't either. There has thankfully now been a new head of the judicial enquiry, which people can at last trust, been appointed.
The truth in this matter will out. Just as in the Jimmy Saville case, we will see people for what they really were.
Maybe you prefer to do your three monkeys impression, and put your fingers in your ears; your hands across your eyes and your hands across your mouth. Some of us prefer the truth.

5 Feb 2015

Quote by deancannock
Some of us prefer the truth.

If you think you'll get it then think again, what you will get will be a much watered down affair and one that successive Govts will continue to cover up.
Let's not forget the Blair Govt who you have openly supported and voted for? have much to answer and maybe the delayed Chilcott report will be one such instance of lies/mistruths and cover up.

I wonder if you'll dig through whatever is published and pull out the positive points and skim neatly over the negative ones?
You seem to want the truth Dean but only when it's on your terms.

5 Feb 2015

Quote by Toots
Some of us prefer the truth.

If you think you'll get it then think again, what you will get will be a much watered down affair and one that successive Govts will continue to cover up.
Let's not forget the Blair Govt who you have openly supported and voted for? have much to answer and maybe the delayed Chilcott report will be one such instance of lies/mistruths and cover up.

I wonder if you'll dig through whatever is published and pull out the positive points and skim neatly over the negative ones?
You seem to want the truth Dean but only when it's on your terms.
Not wanting the truth....have I ever stated I didn't want an enquiry into the Iraq war ??? If you bother to look back Toots you will see you posted a similar link and I answered. fact is both Labour and Tory party voted for action in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Lib Dems can maybe hold the moral high ground as they didn't. However as stated again and again...IF wrong doing is found to have occurred, I will without hesitation CONDEMN the actions, and the ask that the people concerned are named and if can be suitably punished !!
However TOOTS....It is now been shown that Mrs Thatcher clearly withheld offenders, names, and sought to cover up the situation. It is obvious to anyone with a shread of an open mind, that the reason for this, is because she knew it would lead back to her cabinet, her allies and her close friends.
So seeing that the documents now clearly show she withheld and covered this up. I ask do you condone her actions or CONDEMN her actions.
As more documents are realised and the full extent to her cover up is exposed, maybe you will once again come back and CONDEMN her and her actions.....