Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Mikhail Liebenstein

Do We Need A New Witchfinder General?

Recommended Posts

It is amazing the stream of allegations that seem to be now coming out against the UK's elite organizations and arms of Government.

One wonders if we don't need to set up some body of inquiry with highly overzealous powers of arrest and interrogation. Or is this just a reaction to a media centric compensation culture age?

School boy was abused by female MP during drug fueled romps

http://www.dailymail...ex-parties.html

The corruption of Britain: UK's key institutions infiltrated by criminals

http://www.independe...ls-9052617.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was illegal at the time but to those with connections it was there if they wanted it, at frequent parties.

The equivalent these days (which presupposes that the underage sex parties are no longer common) is drug-taking. The latest is Nigella Lawson. To say that all politicians and celebs are "at it" is clearly wrong but a hell of a lot of them are.

If in 20 years time there is the same kind of moral outrage about drug taking as there is about undergae sex then you can see all the same stories coming out:

"I took drugs with cabinet minister"

"Drugs were freely available on our BBC set"

And there will be all the recriminations again about why nothing was done at the time and despite everybody knowing. So why are the police doing sweet fanny adams about celebrity drug taking today (bar the odd sting done for reasons unknown such as Tulisa recently), and why were they doing the same about underage sex twenty years ago?

The answer: because there is no political will to do anything about it, whatever Joe Public thinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is amazing the stream of allegations that seem to be now coming out against the UK's elite organizations and arms of Government.

One wonders if we don't need to set up some body of inquiry with highly overzealous powers of arrest and interrogation. Or is this just a reaction to a media centric compensation culture age?

School boy was abused by female MP during drug fueled romps

http://www.dailymail...ex-parties.html

The corruption of Britain: UK's key institutions infiltrated by criminals

http://www.independe...ls-9052617.html

An ethical Police force would be doing this job already. Introducing ethics tests at the recruitment stage would go a long way to weeding out all the power craving corrupitble sociopaths and keeping all the officers who genuinely want to do the right thing.

Of course, you might end up with a recruitment crisis ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was illegal at the time but to those with connections it was there if they wanted it, at frequent parties.

The equivalent these days (which presupposes that the underage sex parties are no longer common) is drug-taking. The latest is Nigella Lawson. To say that all politicians and celebs are "at it" is clearly wrong but a hell of a lot of them are.

If in 20 years time there is the same kind of moral outrage about drug taking as there is about undergae sex then you can see all the same stories coming out:

"I took drugs with cabinet minister"

"Drugs were freely available on our BBC set"

And there will be all the recriminations again about why nothing was done at the time and despite everybody knowing. So why are the police doing sweet fanny adams about celebrity drug taking today (bar the odd sting done for reasons unknown such as Tulisa recently), and why were they doing the same about underage sex twenty years ago?

The answer: because there is no political will to do anything about it, whatever Joe Public thinks.

I don't think these things are equivalent.

Underage sex has a victim and involves hurting somebody else. The moral outrage stems from the long term emotional damage done to the child and betrayal of the fundamental responsibilities of any adult to a child.

Drug taking predominantly hurts the person taking the drugs (of course family and friends can be affected by addiction, but no more so than with serious alcoholism). The moral outrage historically stems from a feeling that such experiences infringe on the spiritual domain of the religious establishment, so it would be very surprised if drug taking wasn't increasingly considered to be less and less of a moral outrage given our increasingly secular society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An ethical Police force would be doing this job already. Introducing ethics tests at the recruitment stage would go a long way to weeding out all the power craving corrupitble sociopaths and keeping all the officers who genuinely want to do the right thing.

Of course, you might end up with a recruitment crisis ;)

I don't think police officers start out as corrupt or that the profession necessarily attracts unethical people

The problem is they end up spending too much time in the company of criminals both within and outside the force

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think these things are equivalent.

Underage sex has a victim and involves hurting somebody else. The moral outrage stems from the long term emotional damage done to the child and betrayal of the fundamental responsibilities of any adult to a child.

Drug taking predominantly hurts the person taking the drugs (of course family and friends can be affected by addiction, but no more so than with serious alcoholism). The moral outrage historically stems from a feeling that such experiences infringe on the spiritual domain of the religious establishment, so it would be very surprised if drug taking wasn't increasingly considered to be less and less of a moral outrage given our increasingly secular society.

I am equating them in the sense that both occurred in showbiz / political / society circles and were both illegal but clearly tolerated. The reason being that if enough powerful people are doing them then there will be no huge swoop.

The Boothby / Driberg era cover-ups happened because of the damage that they would have caused to the establishment. Find a few ex-ministers of the main political parties guilty of such crimes in the 80s that their parties knew about and the LibLabCons are all losers. Hence the lack of enthusiasm and the arresting of everybody who was in showbiz in the 70s; but no politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am equating them in the sense that both occurred in showbiz / political / society circles and were both illegal but clearly tolerated. The reason being that if enough powerful people are doing them then there will be no huge swoop.

The Boothby / Driberg era cover-ups happened because of the damage that they would have caused to the establishment. Find a few ex-ministers of the main political parties guilty of such crimes in the 80s that their parties knew about and the LibLabCons are all losers. Hence the lack of enthusiasm and the arresting of everybody who was in showbiz in the 70s; but no politicians.

Totally agree, but I consider this to be far more serious in relation to underage sex. I'm not that bothered by drug taking in general as long as it doesn't involve endangering anyone else's life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think police officers start out as corrupt or that the profession necessarily attracts unethical people

The problem is they end up spending too much time in the company of criminals both within and outside the force

I doubt it.

the rank and file plod has frankly a horrible job to do, and I think most of them are just as frustrated by the brainless tw@ts above them

we just need to educate them that the brainless tw@ts directly above them really are brainless( standard "university grad" education types who have an "ology" from some polytechnic, been on a couple of "council awareness" courses and think they know everything.)

much like the politicians really, not many actually been through the school of hard knocks and done it the hard way.

however, the superiors of the brainless tw@ts are actually extremely evil,devious people (taking a shilling from even more evil devious people above them with an agenda), who really DO mean harm to the country, hence why rank and file plod's life is so feckin difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PS.

careful what you wish for with witchfinder generals. etc.

we are currently being subjected to a very serious bout of "council of trent" propaganda....however I should point out that this is just the sneaky phase with soothing voices and smiley faces to lull you into confidence......DO NOT TAKE THE BAIT.

they are still not as nice and fluffy as the mainstream news would like to paint them.

Giving these guys the benefit of the doubt is one mistake you'll regret.

I would say live to regret, but that's not their intention at all(so you won't live...but you will be "purified" if you catch my drift), it's convert or die.

...and it's NOT an option.

every bit as fanatical as the mad mullahs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   212 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.