The Friday Night Song
Filed under Uncategorized
Hi .Thats rite ,Goddard is depending on all victims to feed information to truth pilot project as i have been .THEN DROP YOU LIKE A FLY.
there seems to be a link to the newsnight piece at the bottom of the written one ,at least at the mo( 1 30 am).we can wait and see if it is there in the morning.
newsnight was rather interesting to watch.( bbc wed feb 1 2016) but the jist of it is in words here.
i will be waiting to see if justice goddard will watch this as it seems of direct relevance to matters in lambeth and perhaps to broader issues.
i will also be waiting to see if she follows the numerous links from lambeth to other persons ,places and events of relevance.
if lambeth is to be among the first parts of her inquiry it does seem to have enough issues to provide a decent guide as to whether or not the intention of this inquiry is to establish and expose or to avoid and conceal truth.
to use the analogy of examining the events in lambeth with a microscope and those surrounding it with a telescope it seems that lambeth could be as informative to truth as applying that approach to the events at and surrounding kincora and other nodes .
csa and directly related matters (such as conspiracy and collusion by csa offenders,blackmail and reward,whitewash and damage limitation by others etc etc) form one theme but where those elements connect to other themes in the contextual lattice may be outside justice goddard’s inquiry parameters but it seems necessary to identify and address them in order to deal with and remedy the the core issues of her inquiry.
however we will have to wait and watch to establish whether this inquiry is intended to “keep a lid on it” by exposing some relatively harmless partial truths and suggesting some partial remedies or if it will not only expose as many whole truths as can be established and join the dots between those truths but also put them into context thereby providing a basis for comprehensive permanent remedies.
based on what has so far come to light in years of many good folk establishing detail and context i suspect the former is inevitable but still hope for the latter.
Bulic Forsythe’s family have waited a long time for truth and justice, let’s hope it’s not another whitewash!
Goddard Panel Inquiry preliminary hearing on Lambeth begins 24 March Janner March 9th Anglican Church and Rochdale 16th March Remember the hearing will be due process based on the available evidence followed by a report. Only after the hearings 25 proposed and all the material reviewed will the final overview report be issues. However the hearings , the reports the recommendations wont actually change anything for the better. That is not what this process is about note the separate Truth project.
Hmm…. Watching and waiting for what? Has anyone been arrested that we aren’t allowed to know about, yet? Related to the Dame Janet Smith report perhaps?
Sounds like something’s a foot….
I see Paul Boateng is in the news … again. And Tony Blair has been getting the Daily Mail treatment recently Oh, what secrets that government could tell…
The truth? You can’t handle the truth.
What’s the betting he get’s early onset dementia?
T S Elliot wrote that human beings cannot accept too much reality perhaps in his play the Cocktail party, too busy to look it up, it was the Cocktail Party where a kind of psychiatrist figure aid I c an get you to where you are not but it will be different from what you anticipate when you get there,,, but I cannot remember who said when you look into the abyss the abyss will look back into you.
The problem that truth and its dissemination never changes anything for the better unless those who need to change how they act have the willingness to do so.
New Governments when formed quickly learn this through the experience of governing and can draw on the knowledge of the head of state who has become like an all seeing eye having been told all the truth of previous governments.
2016 follows on from 2015 as the year when fundamental changes are made to the appearance of things through government edict and legislative action while making every effort to preserve the status quo.
In quick succession we have had the latest reports on Savile and Hall and soon there will be Macur and the formal process of the Goddard Inquiry becomes more public with an attempt at the reality process first through the publication of the work of the UK Peoples Tribunal and then controlled commentaries of the reality of Goddard events by an already informed national media and increasingly controlled social media
at one level the waiting is over,
Lambeth…. ( of course, not forgetting Islington, Richmond, North Wales, etc etc etc).
You think hearings and reports make a difference then? can you advise one on the subject of child care and protection when reports ever have made things better in general overall except for those directly involved in their creation? name one and provide the evidence that this is so
Artman, it is clear from your posts that you are perhaps a Labour Party member, so it’s interesting that you use a quote from Nietzsche. Fighting his own monsters and staring into the abyss may have driven Nietzsche mad, with his own particular set of ideologies about good and evil, but none of us should be afraid to find out the truth about what has happened to Children in the UK and give them back the justice they deserve, as you are more than aware, it is far too late for many of them. If that doesn’t happen, then nothing has changed and the reports and inquiries are just lip service.
The simple answer is that the Goddard Inquiry is in the two parts I recommended to Michael Gove in January 2014. The Truth project which coupled with the police investigations and those of IPCC is intended to bring a more meaningful sense of justice to victim survivors than achieved to date, in terms of what happened to them individually.
Then there are the Investigations already announced and 25 intended in total, the hearings, the reports,, the recommendations and the final big report and recommendations covering the comprehensiveness and thoroughness and perhaps provided some evidence of the depth and scale as well as the cover ups, the why and what happened which is intended to satisfy the campaigners, the politicians and the insatiable media.
Justice Goddard in the role of Citizen Robspierre or leading the Star Chamber, the Court of Inquisition etc with the first potential politician victim for the public scaffold Grenville Janner, although once there is the taste of blood the appetite for more is self generated.
And then I am tempted to a self indulgent ramble
My gut feeling is that the Friday night song will be recognised as a work of contemporary art and although academics and art historians may one day consider the intended meaning of each selection in the context of the week, I prefer to leave interpretation and meaningfulness to each individual. I only became Artman Joseph Grech in 2003 after the class action for damages was settled out of court in relation to 15 Sunderland Test cases and a total of 60 victim survivors and was advised there was no more I could do in relation my knowledge and records at that time. I commenced an ongoing contemporary artwork adopting my middle name and the surname Grech (of the Greeks) of my father whose church St Josephs he had priested as a domestic prelate to the Pope and as Vicar General of Gibraltar. I continued in my art work installation until in the autumn of 2013 I discovered that a third party, Cathy Fox had used whatdotheyknow.com to persuade Sunderland council to commence to publish documentation which in 1993 had been protected by the High Court.
Yes. I have been a Member of the Labour Party since 1992 and also some time before then having first joined and served on a local party executive committee in 1959, prevented in between, because of positions held in local government. Since reading the official reports of the war crimes tribunals aged 14/15 on Bergen-Belsen and on Auschwitz I would describe myself as a fundamental Christian socialist who wishes I could damn some institutional leaders to ever lasting hell but recognises that the religious texts, however inspirational, are from the hands of gender physical males of their time and fixed by their limited knowledge of the human brain and body, and of the expanding physical universe. I now spend remaining time trying to help others create the second age of enlightenment against the forces of the dark and which out head of state warned the confidant of Princess Diana, according to his memoir.
In 1960 I was given the choice of going to prison for six months, leaving any time of choosing by agreeing to say that weapons of mass human extermination were OK or making the what many still regard as a futile gesture statement of “not in my name you do it”, with twelve others, 6 physical males, 6 physical women and one under 21 year old physical male and which taught that what we do and say lives with us and those with whom we share experience for eternity.
With one of the five other males involved we persuaded the Direct Action Committee, and helped organise, the first what was to have been Satyagraha demonstration against submarine based rocket missiles at the Holy Loch base (Polaris missiles) see Sean Scalmar Gandhi and the West and on line archives of the D.A.C J B Priestley Library University Bradford if you seek confirmation and Christopher Driver’s book the Disarmers and Gate Fever Margaret Turner/Jane Buxton together with Inside Story Prison Reform Council. My earliest visual memory is of a VI heading in our direction as we moved from house to air raid shelter in an area where more V1 and V2 fell than anywhere else in the UK. The engine cut and the rocket fell short of us.
I now watch and I now wait with those others with the knowledge who have previously tried to explain what has come to pass.
It depends on who are the We! If we were part of the institutions where children were regarded as expendable (and it is important to understand we are all subjects within any state are expendable as determined by that head of state and its government) then in the UK we knew and if we pretend we did not know what happened in relation to the institution we were involved with, then we are lying as permitted by law, were not up to the job/task or did know and lied in the part to avoid reputation damage to the institution, to ourselves or to those we cared about.
The only thing I for one, and most of the others so involved, did not know, is the full extent of what happened and the detailed nature of the cover up in particular instances. In one sense you ought to be more worried about government and institutional leaders if we did not know or if we did know and allowed the break up of the state into chaos and barbaric anarchy… which is the crime, I level at Tony Blair and the Cameron coalition, Bush and Obama, and latterly Cameron and their advisers, in relation to the UK and US interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria. It is a not that the USA Russia, the UK and France have no understanding of how to and how to not recreate a state after conquest given out detailed knowledge of what we did and did not do in relation to Germany 1918 onwards and post 1945 together with USA in relation to Japan.
The whole point about being head of an institution is that you know what there is to know about what is going on via your form of government/control. In the UK there is a heredity head of state that runs the country through the Privy Council and its sub committees such as the cabinet, the justice system and security. I am continually surprised by the number of people who either do not understand this or pretend it has nothing to do with how they are governed.
Our head of state is also head of the House of Lords and the Church of England, which are certainly not democratic institutions and similarly head of the armed services which is again not a democratic institution.
It is important to also appreciate that with the exception of the head of state who cannot be prosecuted everyone else involved in an institution can be prosecuted in the UK if they have broken the law at the time the action or behaviour was undertaken. You cannot prosecute someone for breaking a law which did not exist at the time, or was differently stated, unless a new law is made retrospective and even then that law is open to judicial challenge in terms of its subsequent interpretation. I for one have always believed that the rule of law, despite its fault lines, and corruptions, is always more important than the form of government and the level of prosecution immunities use of prerogatives which in the USA for example means the president can forgive, set aside or free anyone for anything he is so minded to do for whatever reason when leaving office.
In the UK as a student of the constitution I am not sure if a constitutional lawyer knows whether the head of state has any say on the use of the Royal Prerogative and if there is any requirement for its use to be recorded in some form of register or to be made known to anyone other than those directly involved. Tony Blair’s defence for the use of prerogative given to those potential terrorists in Northern Ireland was that it had been essential to progress the peace process and he assumed that those carrying out the decision once made would know what they were doing and that he believed they would also get it right demonstrates what a clever man he was/is for buck passing denial of accountability and responsibility for individual decisions subsequently.
It would be interesting go know which head of the civil service or government or party political adviser/ academic/expert, persuaded which Prime Minister that instead of the state through Parliament having direct control and therefore accountability, this should be passed to others via what we now call privatization or arm’s length agencies, while at the same time also getting the chancellor of the exchequer of the day to understand that the Treasury department could effectively control all domestic government expenditure, nationally and locally and thus run the UK leaving the Prime Minister to have Foreign affairs leadership, national defence, law, order and security depending on who those individuals were, and that ideally one should create a balance of power leaving the PM control through appointments, or at least threat of sacking, and keeping the head of state content
It is also important to understand that the institutions of the state such as the government and the Ministry of Defence cannot be prosecuted for negligence or for anything else. Frank Dobson Labour first Secretary of State Health in 1997 said both at a European conference and also at a conference in the UK that had it been possible to prosecute UK government for child neglect because of what became known to government past then it should.
The health and safety executive has repeatedly censured the MOD over the past 10 years over its negligent failure to care because the Crown Immunity prevents prosecution over failure of duty, although I for one appreciate that this duty should be regarded as secondary to the first duty of the MOD to protect the state by training its young men and women to win in combat if necessary to their deaths to protect the state. During the 1981 Gates Inquiry one barrister appeared to argue that the duty to prevent children entering the public care system, remaining in it or appearing before the courts (1963 Children’s and Young Persons Act superseded the 1933 Act and subsequent amendments on Child Life Protection and when challenged admitted it had been a try on or words to same effect.
Norman Tebbit tried to justify what happened prior to 1997 on the Andrew Marr Show the day before the Home Sec in 2014 announced that under the all party political pressure the then coalition government would hold a Hillsborough style panel of inquiry which I was recommending with others although we had a wide range of motives and objectives, and in my instance it was as a means of a holding position until after the Scottish referendum and the General Election although I, and obviously the government appreciated that as with Hillsborough that it was inevitable that in the known circumstances it would lead to some form of statutory Inquiry and the Home Sec repeatedly made this clear.
In the event the Hillsborough review style of documentation never got off the ground and we now have the two aspect statutory panel of Inquiry where all the evidence to-date is that panel is growing into the task and where I was always confident that the appointed lead Counsel was up to the task, given his background on the side of the victim and survivors, especially given the way he dealt with Keith Vaz at the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee.
The first task is the Truth project to enable those victims who wish to have their say, have it recorded and help inform the detailed extent of what has happened in the past until now in England and Wales and which in turn will statistically provide an overview of what happened in the UK and world wide as you will appreciate the problem is universal has existed through human kind. The one already known is that within the Catholic Church it has existed throughout the existence of the church and with only a small variation in terms of situations within and between countries. We have no idea and I suspect will have no idea in relation to Muslin faith countries and nothing will ever surprise about the Church of England set up after all by a murdering and fornicating monarch determined to get his way.
Noteworthy is the obvious that the Truth Project covers individual victim survivors and not the second Inquiry function?
The second function is to manage and control, “the who knew what when and covered up and why,” although I suspect the Panel were not told this when appointed. When in 1980 I was asked to become a member of the Gates Panel inquiry I was not told in advance what I would be asked to cover up but which I did even when drafting what became the majority report because it was in the public interest to do so and still remains position. I had asked why me and was told I was recommended by the Department of Health and in the response to why was there an Inquiry (judicial but non statutory with core legal representation with questioning and documentation rights by those granted the position) I was told the Palace or words to that effect. The Cathy Fox site has published the ten page briefing for the Palace prepared by then Secretary of State for passing to the PM for onward transmission. The important aspect of that inquiry is that the police investigation and judicial process had been completed.
The problem with the Leveson Inquiry, and that now led by Justice Goddard is that Police inquiries and subsequent judicial processes had/have not been completed… and re Hillsborough the all important new Inquest continues and where clearly the coroner may have things to say about new prosecutions as well as past failure to prosecute, depending on the immunities already granted.
We shall wait and see.
The big issue is did people cover up because they were told to do so from on high or for their own protection or that of other parties that was not from high. My understanding is that the Goddard led Panel will also pose these questions and seek formal answer through the due process conducted hearings, and where the transcripts of evidence will be available unless conducted in sessions in private. Although some evidence in these session may be published in a way which protects anonymity for example of member of the security services, those who worked undercover or are survivor victims.
In the case Leveson the novel approach was to hold the what went wrong, who knew/ did not know and what we should do now before some police investigations had got going let alone the judicial processes completed and because of this the Leveson part two may never happen… and I for one agree because what would be the point?
I also agree with the majority of newspaper owners about the danger of making the press an institution under the heredity head of state because the lifetime of our head of state is time limited and we cannot trust a future government to keep the heredity aspect and therefore bring the press the judiciary and the military security system under direct control of a Tony Blair or David Cameron who would both be contenders for the job if the situation occurred in the three or four decades. Again I do not fault the Home Sec or whoever took the decision not to have abandoned the approach of a judicial statutory inquiry for a Royal Commission which would have made even more difficult to formally and in a public way look at the role of institutions headed by our all seeing and knowing head of state given length off office holding in this instance.
I say all knowing because the PM and Ministers are duty bound as obedient and loyal servants to inform on everything they do an can be dismissed if they fail to do this and the head of state can advise warn from their knowledge irrespective of party political considerations which is something the civil service should not officially do but where one suspects that membership of the same clubs and societies and participating in the same official functions etc through the life of a parliament enables opportunities for information cross overs, something which the Yes Prime Minister Yes Minister series chose to present as divide between the civil service and its relationships and the politicians and theirs.
From the outset the Home Sec on behalf of the coalition warned that it was difficult to impossible to hold an investigation into what happened and why until all the new police investigations had been completed and those of the IPCC where the complaints were made against the police and this as it should remains the corner stone of government policy
One key to understanding the relationship between the Crowned head, the Prime Minister as first among equals in Cabinet and the role of the civil service is to look at what happened when Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair first came to power and more recently the Cameron Coalition.
When Margaret Thatcher came to power she learned that Harold Wilson had arranged for the keeper of the Royal Art, a distant relative of the Queen mother to be granted prosecution immunity despite being traitor as a Russian spy. She arranged, presumably by the Whips office, for a Labour Party backbencher to ask a PMQ and then and subsequently after first having warned him by phone she proposed to out him which she then did. This did not alter his legal position but he was no longer Keeper of the art for the head of state and lived quietly out of the public eye until his death during which time he wrote a 30000 memoir about his early life especially as a Cambridge student naming the names. This was seized on his death and locked away at the British Library for 30 years and shortly before it became available a well known former press secretary to Thatcher stated that she had done this because she did not believe in cover up.
Just as interesting is the PMQ which Tom Watson asked of David Cameron in the Autumn of 2012 which is said to have kicked off the fresh round of police inquiries although there is no suggestion that there was prior agreement between the two arranged via the Whips office or who so ever. It is however significant that no media attention has been given to their joint membership of the 2002 Chris Mullin Committee the then MP for Sunderland South who then chaired the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee and whose report on the investigation of historical crimes against children in public care recommended an ending of police investigations unless authorised by a judge, the opposite of the Leveson Inquiry did and of Justice Goddard is now doing, although this does affect the way due process cab be undertaken, and where the other key Mullin Committee on ending civil actions for damages arising from historical inquiries without a successful criminal proceeding taking place should be covered in the Investigation on the role of liability insurance in the cover up. It is possible not just to read the Mullin Committee report and its recommendations together with the government response, but to study all the 70 plus written submissions including those from the interests who persuaded the committee on its recommendations.
Where I find the parallels even more interesting is that before this in 1998, the then Secretary of State for Health, Frank Dobson not only made his position clear on Government knowledge and its failure but in response to those of us who had told him what had been going on especially Sir William Utting (who I had personally briefed at his request on the Gates case back in 1982) wrote in his forward to government response to the Utting report People Like Us, “There can be no more excuses”. The government had then go on to devise a prevent plan costing £450 million over three years of new money after setting up the Cabinet sub committee under the Minister. David Cameron then attempted to replicate this putting his Home Secretary in charge of the Cabinet sub committee, and getting various minister especially Ministers of Education to announce new expenditure plans in the latest prevent and treat strategy. There would be no more excuses or cover up. Obviously the government knew that Rochdale, Rotherham, Oxford etc was in the pipeline to explode, the Northern Ireland, the Australian, the Jersey inquiries in the making, the pressure on the Catholic Church via Spotlight etc.
Michael Gove reported the close friend of the Cameron’s is now the Justice Minister with his Permanent head of departmental civil service Richard Heaton, previously at the Cabinet office and who I saw when I visit the offices of the Solicitor and Attorney Generals in 1998. So there is a lot to wait and see about.
But then the question should be asked is who are those waiting and watching and why?
I have stated my belief in the past that the State would tidy this unfortunate and inconvenient episode away.
We now have Exaro suspected of setting a scene prearranged to fragment and crumble, at the same time we have everyone else on Exaro’s case reinforcing the fact that the story is blown. The end result is that the unfortunate and inconvenient episode has if not been tidied away at least mitigated to an optimal degree.
Take heart but be prepared for the long wait over the next five years at least with the first public hearing followed by the report of the Statutory Inquiry into the Janner cover up and then 12 other investigations likely to lead to hearings and reports and remember the this is the only 13 with 25 originally promised and where the Inquiry is orientated towards victim survivors. It was inevitable that the police and CPS would not find the grounds to bring Prosecutions in the majority of instances related to historical cases but they are now trying where it can be said they did not in the past hence the criticism from those under investigation, their families and friends .
In some respects we have down the present road before when in 2003 Chris Mullin the Sunderland South MP chaired the Home Affairs committee of the House of Commons and recommended a stop to police investigations unless ordered by a judge under pressured from an organised and well funded lobby as revealed in the written evidence submitted and which is online together with the report. Interestingly David Cameron Prime Minister and Tom Watson Deputy Labour Leader members and signing up to the report and remember it was Tom asking Dave the PMQ in the Autumn of 2012 that kicked everything off.
Pingback: We’re Watching & We’re Waiting | Alternative News Network
I believe it was the Quaker George Fox who counselled wear thy sword until thou canst which remains could advice for all those contemplating a major change in their lives about which they remain unsure. However in general my experience is that once decided act..