Friday, 23 January 2015

Fiona Woolf, Leon Brittan and institutionalised conflicts of interest

On 14 September 2014, The Daily Mail told us this:
“Historic sex abuse inquiry chief Fiona Woolf has connections going back at least a decade with Leon Brittan, who is accused of involvement in a cover-up when he was Home Secretary… The top commercial lawyer sat in the same magistrates’ court as Lord Brittan’s wife Diana for three years. Mrs Woolf was also a senior figure at the Law Society when it hosted a conference addressed by Lord Brittan…

Last night campaigners accused Mrs Woolf of treating the investigation with contempt, and called on both her and the Home Office to explain how well she knows Lord Brittan. She has refused to say if she declared her potential conflicts of interest in advance, despite calls in Parliament…

Mrs Woolf, 66, has lived in the same upmarket street as the Brittans since 2005; sits on the board of a City conference with the former Minister; gave a £50 donation to his wife for a fun run last year; and judges a business award with her.
Lord Brittan is a key figure in the inquiry because of his involvement in the scandal of hundreds of files on child abuse that the Home Office admitted had been lost or shredded.
Lord Brittan was handed a now-lost dossier in 1983, which he insists he passed on to officials.

Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP who exposed Cyril Smith as a child abuser, said:
‘Both the Home Office and Fiona Woolf need to explain exactly what her relationship is with the Brittans. The more they stonewall, the more suspicious people, particularly victims, will be.’

Mr Danczuk told the Commons he was ‘disturbed’ by the links but his call for a debate was slapped down by William Hague. Now Leader of the House, Mr Hague succeeded Lord Brittan as MP for Richmond in North Yorkshire in 1989 and previously wrote speeches for him. Last night Mr Danczuk said ‘people will draw their own conclusions’ about Mr Hague’s decision.
Peter Saunders, of the National Association for People Abused in Childhood, added: ‘The links between Mrs Woolf and the Brittans will totally undermine the credibility of the inquiry.’
The Judicial Office confirmed Mrs Woolf had sat on cases at City of London Magistrates’ Court when the chairman of the bench was Lady Brittan. Mrs Woolf became a Justice of the Peace in 2007, while Lady Brittan was chair of the bench until 2010. Officials said it would take too long to check if they ever sat on the same cases.

Meanwhile, records show that in October 2005, Leon Brittan gave the opening speech at a conference at the Law Society where Mrs Woolf was vice-president.

Mrs Woolf was questioned about her links to the Brittans last week, but refused to answer…

A spokesman refused to say if Mrs Woolf had declared her links to the Brittans or not, but said: ‘She is an exceptional and highly qualified candidate for this demanding role'."
Despite which the lady is now long gone. From the point of view of the system, of course, Woolf was indeed, just like the insider that preceded her, the perfect choice for such a 'demanding role.' An establishment figure almost guaranteed to obstruct the emergence of the most embarrassing anti-establishment information.

In Elizabeth Butler-Schloss' case, her own brother Michael Havers, a former Attorney-General no less, has been implicated. And Fiona Woolf was an intimate of the Brittans.

Do we think the powers-that-be chose these people by accident? Do we think they were unaware of their embarrassing associations? One presumes they, stupidly, imagined that the press wouldn't find out, or that they could be persuaded to keep these matters dark.

That is often the case. But not here. The media, it seems, was out for blood.

Fair play.

Unfortunately for all concerned Brittan is now dead. And thus, awareness of the crimes he may have committed are likely to remain forever confined to the alternative informational sources of the internet. If his fondest associates in Westminster have anything to do with it, that is.

'... his call for a debate was slapped down by William Hague... Hague succeeded Lord Brittan as MP for Richmond... and previously wrote speeches for him. 

Mr Danczuk said ‘people will draw their own conclusions’ about Mr Hague’s decision.'

They sure will, Simon. William Hague, like the aforementioned Michael Havers, has been mentioned in paedophilic dispatches. As for his Richmond predecessor, check this out:

It is down to the dogged, obsessive and dauntless determination of good-hearted men (and women) like like Bill Maloney that the bestial nature of many those who have exercised power over us in recent times is now, slowly, being exposed. Without such indomitable truth-seekers/tellers, the routinely practiced evils discussed in the above interview would never be revealed.

Chris Fay is the epitome of a credible witness. He has, without success, been trying to get the police to investigate the claims he makes for many decades now. They didn't ignore him because the tales he had to tell weren't believable. They did so because, in an age where the lie and the liar rules, he was all too 'credible.'
"Carol Kasir... showed me, I think it was eight photographs of people. There was two of Leon Brittan, there was once of Harvey Proctor (MP) and she had hundreds more in this shoebox...

The Leon Brittan photograph, he was... naked apart from like a little apron and one of those waitresses caps... with a boy aged about twelve sitting on his lap... The boy was naked... I mean, it was an obscene photograph by anybody's description...
Carol Kasir, as I keep trying to tell people, was not some sort of innocent victim in all this, she was a conniving, cunning bitch of a woman, she really was. She knew exactly what she was doing so she would only give us enough to keep us involved, if you know what I mean. To keep on our good side...

And I said to her ‘It’s not good enough Carol I can’t just y’know’, unless you give me the stuff. She wouldn’t do it. What she did eventually agree to do I think about six, eight weeks later she said I could come round and photograph them myself, but unfortunately, of course, shortly after that she was murdered...

(Special Branch was) sitting in a car outside... I mean this shows you how contemptuous the security services and Special Branch were of people... they could do whatever they liked."
It takes a certain kind of man to seek out children to exploit and abuse.

If you ever wondered how we got from what we were and what we had to where we are now and what we have become, it occurs to me that those who would bugger a defenceless child would be just the kind you might wish to recruit if you wanted to bugger up a country.

The controlling evil at the heart of the governance of this country is as ancient as it is profound. Only now, largely because of the ever-increasing, hopefully unstoppable, power of the social media, are the facts emerging.

Thank God and Tim Berners-Lee for the internet.

Just in case you weren't paying attention, here's how you might 'bugger up a country' if you were thus inclined:

It goes without saying that those who aren't 'paying attention' are the second favourite folk of the elite perverts who abuse our children.


  1. That Private Eye cover is a fake. It's funny, but it's not the original cover.

  2. Yep. Private Eye would not have got away with it back then. It's a bit of a photoshop meme on the internet, like the one with Tony Blair taking a photo of himself in Iraq with the world exploding behind him. Which is sort of the point.

    Sometimes the poetic accuracy is worth the factual mischief.

  3. Thanks for commenting and pointing it out by the way. If you see any similar "mischief," tell me about it. I may not be aware that things aren't quite as they should be.