Thatcher Cabinet stifled Kincora child sex abuse inquiry 30 years ago

porsche959

Thatcher Cabinet stifled Kincora child sex abuse inquiry 30 years ago

Jim Prior,now Lord Prior. blocked the opportunity for a full-scale public inquiry into the notorious Kincora child abuse scandal, Cabinet minutes released under the 30 year rule revealed today. The minutes of the Cabinet meeting (see http://bit.ly/19zxFqT ) reveal on 10 November 1983 Jim Prior, then Northern Ireland Secretary, proposed not to have a full Tribunal of Inquiry – the same mechanism, used to investigate the Bloody Sunday atrocities, the North Wales child abuse scandal and the Dunblane massacre.
The minutes reveal the Cabinet – who included the now all ennobled Leon Brittan, then home secretary, Michael Heseltine,defence secretary and Norman Fowler, social services secretary, bought the Royal Ulster Constabulary line that there was nothing in it. He said he was being “pressed to hold an inquiry under the Tribunals of Inquiry”. But he didn’t believe Parliament would buy it.
But he said two police investigations had discovered nothing and no further criminal charges were likely.
Instead he proposed to hold a much lesser inquiry, which he did later, to, as he put it “to halt further spread of rumour and unfounded allegations.”
This particular Cabinet minute now looks sick in view of the decision of the Police Service in Northern Ireland to re-open an investigation into the historic allegations at the children’s home where children were sexually abused in the 1970s and early 1980s. As Fiona O’Cleirigh reported on Exaro News the scandal will now be re-opened.
The question is were Thatcher’s Cabinet in 1983 hopelessly naive or were they covering up something they did not want to be ruthlessly exposed in the public domain.

http://davidhencke.wordpress.com/2013/08/01/thatcher-cabinet-stifled-kincora-child-sex-abuse-inquiry-30-years-ago/

joe swanson

Really? Again? I remember the last thread u started about this where your praise for gerry 'i was never in the ira' adams was immense. No criticism of him though. Wonder why

porsche959

joe swanson wrote: »

Really? Again? I remember the last thread u started about this where your praise for gerry 'i was never in the ira' adams was immense. No criticism of him though. Wonder why

That is false. I made no praise of Gerry Adams. I merely contrasted the obsession of some with the issue of child abuse in republican families with their silence or failure to investigate or research issues implicating members of the British establishment.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Are any of those who activley covered up the abuse of these children now leading a political party or sitting as a TD?

porsche959

Bah Feckin Humbug! wrote: »

Are any of those who activley covered up the abuse of these children now leading a political party or sitting as a TD?

Yes, and some in more powerful positions than that.

porsche959

Detectives have seized video that places a former Conservative cabinet minister at one of several parties where boys were sexually abused by men.
The Metropolitan Police Service’s paedophile unit seized the footage under ‘Operation Fairbank’ which is scoping historical claims against politicians of child sex abuse. It is investigating additional allegations against politicians and other prominent people under ‘Operation Fernbridge’.

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5152/met-s-paedophile-unit-seizes-video-of-ex-minister-at-sex-party

http://theneedleblog.wordpress.com/2013/12/07/op-fairbank-seize-video-of-former-minister-at-sex-party/

Sir Humphrey Appleby

porsche959 wrote: »

Yes, and some in more powerful positions than that.

Name the TD and leader of a political party.
The only paedo protector that we already know about who holds that position is gerry adams, name the other TD and leader of a Political Party.

dxhound2005

The author could not reach any conclusion on the reasons for investigations being "stifled" and "blocked".

The question is were Thatcher’s Cabinet in 1983 hopelessly naive or were they covering up something they did not want to be ruthlessly exposed in the public domain.

Have you done so? Naiveity or cover up?

porsche959

Bah Feckin Humbug! wrote: »

Name the TD and leader of a political party.
The only paedo protector that we already know about who holds that position is gerry adams, name the other TD and leader of a Political Party.

Are you kidding me? You think Savile and Cyril Smith would have got away with it for decades without high level protectors? It goes to the top of the British civil service and political classes.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

porsche959 wrote: »

Are you kidding me? You think Savile and Cyril Smith would have got away with it for decades without high level protectors? It goes to the top of the British civil service and political classes.

So that's a no then, glad you clarified that.

porsche959

Government 'gave money to child sex ring in 70s': Home Office has ordered an investigation into shocking allegations

• Government allegedly gave tens of thousands of pounds to Paedophile Information Exchange, which openly campaigned to legalise child sex
• Extraordinary move triggered by Permanent Secretary Mark Sedwill
• Labour MP Tom Watson says retired Home Office employee told him he had raised concerns in 70s about funding, but was warned to drop matter

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2520083/Probe-claims-government-gave-money-child-sex-ring-70s.html

dxhound2005

porsche959 wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2520083/Probe-claims-government-gave-money-child-sex-ring-70s.html

From the article:

Civil servants are trawling through decades’ worth of files to look for any evidence that the Home Office once funded the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), which openly campaigned to legalise child sex.


Seems very odd that they are trawling through decades of files when the allegations in the article specify that the funding was made in the 1970's.

MadsL

Oh great, just when I thought I couldn't dislike Thatcher more.

porsche959

THe Belfast Telegraph has a good write-up on the release of state papers that relate to Kincora.

By Adrian Rutherford – 27 December 2013
A FORMER religious preacher involved in loyalist circles, who was a suspect in the Kincora abuse scandal, walked free because of perjured evidence, the UK's most senior legal figure was told.

Three senior staff – William McGrath, Raymond Semple and Joseph Mains – were jailed in 1981 for the abuse, but there have been suggestions of a mass cover-up by the Secret Service, which was rumoured to be protecting high-ranking paedophiles in the military, Civil Service and politics.

Today's revelations will fuel those suspicions. The scandal is referred to in several files released by the Public Record Office under the 30-year rule. However, the files have been redacted with key papers removed – while one file couldn't be found.
One file contains a note of the private meeting in February 1982 attended by senior members of the political and legal establishment, including the Attorney General, Secretary of State Jim Prior, the Lord Chancellor Quintin Hogg and Sir William Bourne, a barrister and senior civil servant.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/state-papers-the-perjury-that-allowed-kincora-suspect-preacher-to-walk-29868826.html

Sir Humphrey Appleby

porsche959 wrote: »

THe Belfast Telegraph has a good write-up on the release of state papers that relate to Kincora.











http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/state-papers-the-perjury-that-allowed-kincora-suspect-preacher-to-walk-29868826.html

"Suspected", "rumoured", "suggestions".;)
Powerful stuff altogether, all it is missing is "evidence and proof"
Actually,all it is missing is the classic "an anonymous source claimed"!

porsche959

Bah Feckin Humbug! wrote: »

"Suspected", "rumoured", "suggestions".;)
Powerful stuff altogether, all it is missing is "evidence and proof"
Actually,all it is missing is the classic "an anonymous source claimed"!

You seem to have a remarkable interest in this thread. Is it generally the case that you believe those alleging abuse are liars, or just when those implicated are Unionist establishment figures?

If it is the case that well connected abusers got off scot-free, then language such as "alleged", "suspected", etc is appropriate. What other sort of language do you think they would use?