Paedophile coverage & the Sunday People: a brief grovel.

Nick Buckley, deputy editor of The Sunday People, writes to remind me that I failed to point out, earlier today, how excellent their coverage of Elm House and other paedophile scandals has been. He was entirely justified in doing so, not least because I had myself referred to it less than a week ago. My only excuse is that a big boy hit me over the head and ran away, then I forgot about The Sunday People and everything for a bit.

However, forgetting the excuses and sticking to the truth, this is what happens when a misspent youth is followed by several other misspent decades: braindeath.

I did just point out that I would like to see more from them (and Tom Watson) on paedophilia in Labour strongholds like Rotherham. But that was just me being churlish. Exaro, The Sunday People, the Independent titles, and many other august organs are all doing a top job in helping bring gargoyles to book.

Onwards and upwards, one hopes….

17 thoughts on “Paedophile coverage & the Sunday People: a brief grovel.

  1. And this, John, is why you could never be a politician.

    “Hands up. My fault entirely – what can I possibly do to put matters right?”

    Good show.


  2. John I think we are all trying to do our bit on this serious matter and I am not partisan . I don’t care what shade or stance these nonces are bringing them to book is the point.
    What pissed me off is that sites like Twitter (are you listening Twitter?) Despite all weasel words from them are still filled with this vile stuff. It’s persistent and obsessive ..anyone who is serious about stopping this and I mean serious I will find time to.assist as best I can.


  3. Mmmm. Problem is these days that there are so many prepared to go along with the ‘con’ that we don’t know who to believe any longer…I personally don’t believe that there will be any great ‘collapse’ but, there will be a slow, but but sure decline into something maybe much worse, as people will still be disenclined to accept what is happening before their very eyes, only until it is too late of course, then, someone will have to take the blame.


  4. The D-notice on Dunblane/Thomas Hamilton i find worrying indeed.

    The fact that Watson sees fit to pooh-pooh the ‘conspiracy theorists’ (who incidentally furnished him with his information) leads me to believe he’s acting on a party political basis.

    Incidentally, I’m not sure i’ve met a ‘coincidence theorist’… Not that anyone but an imbecile would consider the machinations that surround us coincidental!


  5. It’s hard to read anything too much into reports like these.

    For one thing, no-one has a crystal ball that works 60 days into the future and covers everything. If this is a pure directional bet, there’s no guarantee it will pay off for them – especially within such a short timeframe. Options are difficult to trade, not least because of the extra timing element.

    For another, you have no idea what the rest of their portfolio looks like, that they might be trying to hedge.

    On the flip side, historically low prices by definition implies it is highly likely that a reversion to mean will occur at some point. And that is the thing – no-one knows when for sure.

    But yes, your advice is generally sound, if you think that the market is liable to fall. In these circumstances, you can do a lot worse than holding cash – and then turn the stock charts upside down before you read them :D


  6. I know it is a movie and all that but it is supposed to be based on fact, but ‘The Bank job’ has a scene in it whereby the D notice is supposedly used (or at least suggested – it is been a while) to prevent a bit of embarrassment to high flyers in the government….. which is in direct contradiction to the Letter recieved in reply to the Tom Watson question.

    Can’t help thinking that ‘they would say that wouldn’t they ?’ I mean – ‘Are you using a DA notice to stop evidence being published against the high flyers in government ?’ is hardly going to get an admission of guilt because it would be ‘evidence’ of something being hidden…..?


  7. You’ve mentioned Rotherham. Have you seen that Rotherham NH Trust has lost over £500,000 to ‘a sophisticated e-mail scam’ this week? It’s on the BBC news website. Other trusts lose bigger amounts without the need for ‘a scam’.


  8. Agree totally (don’t think I’ve seen the film,will check it out).

    The response to his question was laughable, Watsons acceptance of it even more so.

    Wherever there’s a headline opportunity you’ll find Tom Watson, and a look at his voting record ( tells you all you need to know about him and his modus operandi in politics.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s