Filed under Uncategorized
Pingback: Harvey Proctor Press Conference TranscriptAlternative News Network | Alternative News Network
I heard Proctor on LBC yesterday and he talked about Leicestershire social services and police, presumably in concert with the Met, trying to remove a baby of a relative. Proctor said that it is covered in his book. The point he makes is that he has never been accused of offences against babies and therefore suggests that the attempt was malicious. The media were also banned from reporting on the case.
Did Exaro want money for access to Nick!? As if they were pimps?
The attack on Google is odd, but I guess it’s a generational thing. I’m sympathetic to him overall, but it’s not that there weren’t any paedophiles near the top of the Tory party or in surprising numbers in ‘establishment’ positions. Indeed there do seem to have been rather a lot of them, so the notion of a ‘ring’ is not entirely unreasonable. He doesn’t seem to reflect on this. Saville’s access to Thatcher is particularly egregious and there is some overlap before Proctor’s political career was ended in 1983. Then there are ongoing investigations into establishment rings, with Operation Fairbank and Cayacos as far as I can see. Perhaps others. He doesn’t reflect on these either.
Correction. ‘Fairbank’ is now ‘Fernbridge’. I don’t think that have been closed down has it? ‘Fernbridge’ seemed at one point to have clear evidence connecting Leon Brittan with child pornography via the custom’s officer who seized it from him.
Yes Fairbank was the scopeing exercise which was subsequently split into several investigations – Fernbridge (EGH, though I’m minded to think that it was actually focused on Grafton Close).
What is more interesting are Operations Cayacos and Brancaster. I am not certain of the exact remit of these investigations
a very comprehensive assessment of the situation from his point of view and carefully worded(perhaps his lawyers helped with that)as he has a variety of options if he chooses to seek redress for the situation he was placed in.
his opinion of the henriques and goddard inquiries is worth noting ,time will tell but i suspect he is correct on the intentions of both .
his comments about the involvement and nature of exaro are very carefully worded ,if his legal team show due diligence and use forensic analysis on the data they will find regarding this aspect of the situation it seems likely they could present a very convincing multi thread case against that organisation should he decide to follow such a course .
his comments regarding the other folk involved in this investigation may be better informed than mine but as regards to heath and oldfield i think it highly likely that the specific allegations (and the more general implications of those allegations) under scrutiny by midland were unfounded and could easily have been shown to be “red herrings”.
ps i still dont like proctor or his contributions to politics but liking him is not necessary to broadly agree with his statements regarding the situation he has been (used) in over the last couple of years especially his comments about how this situation has distracted from many other lines of inquiry that might well result in truth,justice and prevention of further harm.
it is important to remember that although midland appears to have been based on incorrect allegations that does not prove that all allegations are incorrect.
there is a history of vip/establishment/useful figures offending, blackmail, whitewash and assorted short term and long game conspiracies both domestic and international that is real going back at least as far back as 1900 which can and should be further exposed.