Leon Brittain: Watson simply joined the conspiracists
Westminster VIP Peadophiles: a round-up of news. The spotlight is on Tom Watson MP, who during Prime Minister’s Questions in October 2012, called on police to investigate the “clear intelligence” that “a powerful paedophile network linked to parliament and Number 10”.
The Guardian: “Tom Watson faces rising pressure over Leon Brittan claims”
Not from Leon, though. He’s dead.
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, is facing mounting political pressure over his pursuit of allegations of child sexual abuse against the former Conservative home secretary Leon Brittan. Bob Neill, the Conservative chairman of the justice committee, has demanded the publication of a letter Watson wrote to the director of public prosecutions, Alison Saunders, in which the Labour MP called for the accusations to be reinvestigated.
What would that prove or disprove?
Neill has also called for Saunders’ subsequent correspondence with the police to be made public to gauge how much influence Watson’s interventions had in Scotland Yard’s decision to reopen the historical rape allegation. Watson claims Lord Brittan would have been interviewed by police even without his intervention.
What about the influence from other sources, like Teresa May who called what we know of abuse “the tip of the iceberg”? The conspiracists are all around us. They are in power.
Telegraph: “David Cameron: Tom Watson needs to ‘examine his conscience’ over Leon Brittan ‘lies'”
Tom Watson should examine his conscience over the way he forced police to reopen an investigation into former Tory home secretary Lord Brittan, David Cameron has said. The remarks by the Prime Minister come as a number of Conservative MPs are set to demand on the floor of the Commons that Mr Watson makes a personal apology for his actions.
The tip of the iceberg. The inference is clear: we of the now are not corrupt and stinking like the them of the past. This is about Tom Watson, the MP who helped turn the News of the World and phone hacking into a morality tale. He spoke of the Murdoch-created “shadow state”. And that from the MP of party that when in power snooped on us all.
On Sunday Sir Nicholas Soames, told The Telegraph that he and other Tory MPs will ask a series of points of order in the Commons’ Chamber to put pressure on Mr Watson to apologise. He said Mr Watson “must now come and make his amends on the floor of the House of Commons by way of a personal statement apologising for what he has done and apologising most importantly to Lady Brittan and to Leon’s family for the monstrous lies and abuse that have been peddled about Lord Brittan. One has to question what were Tom Watson’s motives in all this. Why did he do it?”
Why did the police so wilfully cling to it? Why did the Press, too? Simply put: they hope it makes them look good.
“He must have had some inkling that it was not quite right, otherwise he would have said it outside the House of Commons.”
Express and Star: “Tom Watson: I barely know sex abuse uncle”
It has emerged that Mr Watson, who is leading a campaign to expose high-profile paedophiles, has an uncle who is a convicted child sex abuser.
The MP has never spoken publicly about his relation to Peter Halliwell, who was jailed for 27 months in March last year for indecent assault on a nine-year-old boy. Mr Watson has now admitted he was aware of his uncle’s conviction but said he ‘barely knew’ Halliwell whose brother is married to his mother Linda.
He said: “I barely know Peter Halliwell. His victim deserved justice and I’m glad he got it.”
Daily Mail: “DOMINIC LAWSON: Abuse slurs are like acid thrown in your face. Those to blame mustn’t evade justice”
…these guardians of the law — in their concern to be seen to be ‘on the side of victims’ — completely over-reacted. This was evident in their own report on Savile, published in January 2013: the report’s author, Commander Peter Spindler, declared that Savile ‘groomed the nation’. What, all of us?
The Times: “Brittan’s accuser ‘was unbelievable and a fantasist’”
A Labour MP who has campaigned on behalf of victims of child abuse was “wholly unconvinced” by the man who led paedophile claims against Leon Brittan just before he died.
Simon Danczuk, who exposed Cyril Smith’s abuse, said that Chris Fay, a former social worker, was “wholly unbelievable and some sort of fantasist”.
Is he got at spotting that type?
Mr Watson is expected to be asked to give evidence to MPs about his decision to write to Alison Saunders, the director of public prosecutions, urging a “full review” into claims of rape and sexual abuse… He acted after Mr Fay, a former Labour councillor who was jailed for involvement in a fraud in 2011, passed on allegations to him. Last week Mr Fay said that he was “right up for witch-hunts against right-wing Tories”.
Mr Danczuk says:
“I don’t suffer fools gladly and he was someone who I was wholly unconvinced by, to the point where I just cut the conversation quite short. I didn’t believe anything he had to say really. A lot of it was second or third hand. There was a meeting, a rally, in relation to child sex abuse, in parliament more recently. We persuaded the organisers not to put Chris Fay on the panel, because he was going to be speaking and I made the point that I would be very uncomfortable if he was on the panel, and that I wouldn’t share a panel with him.”
Such are the facts…