David Aaronovitch Accuses “VIP Westminster Abuse” Conspiracy Journalist of Link to “Anti-Semitic Creep”

From Mark Watts, formerly of Exaro News:

Several years ago, Watts was promising that very soon the police would confirm allegations of “Westminster VIP child sex abuse and murder” that would rock the country to its foundations; then, as police and journalistic investigations undercut the sensational narratives he had been instrumental in promoting, he lowered his expectations and instead offered the more modest promise that various sceptics would soon be put on trial for harassment offences and, like “green bottles“, would “fall”.

That didn’t come to pass either, so he now settles on the important information that the Bar Standards Board has asked the barrister Barbara Hewson not to be rude to people on Twitter, even though she has been on receiving end of a great deal of it herself  – particularly, although not exclusively, from self-styled “child sex abuse activists” who promote lurid conspiracy theories about figures in public life, and who regard Barbara’s scathing scepticism with self-righteous anger.

Watts’s Tweet drew a hostile reaction from David Aaronovitch:

The “anti-Semitic creep” here is @ciabaudo, who is known variously as Alun Roberts and Alan Goodwin – the latter is his legal name. Goodwin, who lives in Germany, makes wide-ranging allegations of organised and secret “elite” paedophile rings in British society, often seeing tenuous links between people in public life as damning evidence of secret collusion in the foulest of crimes. The supposed involvement of Jews in this activity seems to be of particular interest to him, and he approving promotes anti-Semitic sources.

In reply to David’s Tweet, Watts asked to see “evidence” of @ciabaudo’s anti-Semitism – I then put forward one instance, and others provided further examples. (1) Here is an outline:

23 April 2013: Goodwin posts a link that he says “didn’t attract the attention it deserves”. The link clicks through to a far-right website called Cigpapers; the specific page has since been deleted, but the url indicates that it used to carry an essay called “Tony Blair’s Islington People”. This remains available elsewhere on social media, and it refers to various politicians as “multiculturalist Jews”. In reply to someone who says “it truly makes the blood run cold”, Goodwin explains that “I live in Germany and my dad freed Bergen-Belsen, but there sure seems to be a lot of nepotist Jews here.”

3 August 2014: Goodwin replies to Tweet by one Ian Millard that stated “Jewess on BBC Radio 4 Sunday saying “”British” Jews feel a real sense of patriotism”..TO ISRAEL! […] #HitlerWasRight”. Goodwin’s reaction is to ask “I wonder where the allegiances of the Jews on the Privy Council lie?”, although he then covers himself by adding that “I strongly disagree with Hitler being right though”.

25 September 2014: Goodwin replies to Tweet by the journalist Meirion Jones asking whether The Times might run “similar stories about senior politicians” after the publication of an article about Greville Janner; Goodwin’s suggestion is that “They could run a series about leading Jews … Janner, Brittan and Mandelson”.

9 December 2014: Returning to his Privy Council theme, Goodwin asks Hugo Rifkind, son of the politician Malcolm Rifkind, “How can someone who serves a foreign power sit on the Queen’s privy council?” Goodwin then tells him that “I’m sure your whole family would be pulled in all directions as far as their allegiances go.”

18 April 2015: Goodwin gives a “Like” to a Tweet by someone asserting that “Leon Brittan / Greville Janner Both JEWS[…] Both PEDOPHILES”.

21 April 2015: Goodwin refers to an article about Greville Janner published by the Occidental Observer (tagline:”White Identity, Interests, and Culture”) which refers to “the moneyspinning Holocaust Educational Trust”. He says he’s “looking forward to Part 2”, adding that “Even if @Dannythefink comes down on me like a tonne of bricks, I really do think the Jewish cabal aspect should be investigated”.

7 July 2015: Goodwin posts a screencapture, with the added commentary “Part of the problem 1”. The screencapture appears to be derived from the “Tony Blair’s Islington People” essay, and it focuses on Peter Mandelson as “a Bilderberger homosexual multiculturalist Jew”, who has been “Denounced by Tam Dalyell MP as being part of Blair’s ‘Jewish Cabal'”.

Watts’s reaction to this kind of thing – after being pressed for comment – was as follows:

Goodwin’s own explanation is that there is no difference between the way he comments about Jews and how one might comment about Methodists;  that he is more interested in what a source is “saying” than whether or not it is anti-Semitic; and that it is a “problem” to refer to things he has merely quoted approvingly rather than said in his own words.

Perhaps that is sufficient for Watts, but most of us can see the obvious bad faith from a mile off.


1. The evidence Watts asked for was provided mostly by Hugo Rifkind, Zetetic Elench, and Frankie.

75 Responses

  1. Regarding Meirion Jones, he didn’t cover himself in glory with this:
    (Jimmy Savile famously being the “most Jewish Catholic you will ever meet” with quite a large nose – rumoured to be serving cocktails to the undead Leon Brittan by a pool in Tel Aviv or summat.)

  2. I miss Watts. We used to see each other every few months. I was usually in the dock of a court and was in the public gallery. The few chats we had outside the court room evidenced to me that Watts has serious hearing problem. He never mentioned his sight problems. His claims are beyond comprehension.
    His attachment to those behind my arrest and further endurences should be enough for a blind man on a galloping horse to see he is a planted seed that failed to take root.
    Aaronovitch is playing catch up. I admire his late entry but he really should have been on Exaro, Watts, Fat Al and the rest of them much much sooner.

    Lets hope that now his he the bit in his mouth he does what needs doing. Finishing off the fucking lot of them. Pendry needs attention.

  3. Darren Laverty is quite wrong to accuse David Aaronovitch of being behind the curve on this. DA has been speaking out against conspiracy theories for ages and has written several Times columns tackling paedophilia hysteria and preposterous allegations against famous people. Unfortunately the articles are behind the Times paywall so perhaps their impact is limited.

    • Dear Paul,
      There is no conspiracy. It’s a proven fact that Watts et al have been running an orchestrated campaign via Exaro and a number of twitter bots, to destabilise the child sexual abuse platforms by introducing stories that serve as distractions. These fantasist’s that appear as VIP victims and or their supporters are merely hand tools in an industrial effort to undermine the 1000’s of genuine survivors of decades of abusive institutions that have found their voices. I know this to be true, probably more than most. DA’s contribution only adds more to your conspiracy theory rather than disabling the hand tools and their operators. Unlike most of the media, us foot soldiers on the front line are here permenently. We don’t particially contribute, when we have a spare window. It’s our lives, our reputations. Our overriding aims are not to throw toys on Twitter. We want arrests and charges. Crimes have and continue be made with regard false allegations. Where’s the investigative journalists investigations? Who, but the foot soldiers are “at it”?

      Finally, and this no secret, I think of Barbara Hewson as I would think of any champion for the underdogs. I admire everything she does. I support her publicly.
      Cue the trolls………..

      • Darren, are you aware who Paul Temperton is? Temperton was involved with CHE and SMG from the very beginning pre-PIE and throughout the formation of PIE.

      • John, It is true that I was part of CHE’s leadership from 1968 to 1976. I never had anything to do with PIE. I don’t see what connection any of that has with my comment about David Aaronovitch’s admirable campaign against ludicrous conspiracy theories. What point are you trying to make?

      • Not sure whether you were a member of the Paedophile Information Exchange or not Paul – the full list was never published. However, you were an active member of the Scottish Minorities Group when Michael Hanson and Ian Dunn founded the Paedophile Information Exchange. This is a quote from you from you in the SGM Newsletter around that time “ex GenSec of CHE and SMG member at time of writing article. “His plea for ‘selective toleration’ sounds ominously to me like the idea, much heard during the early days of gay organisations and still too prevalent today, that ‘we are nice ordinary people really and nothing at all to do with these nasty freaky people who dress up in women’s clothes / interfere with innocent young boys / march around waving banners etc etc’ – seeking respectability for one’s own narrow group by putting other groups of people down. We should realise that the gay movement is part of the wider libertarian movement.” – Now Ian Dunn and Hanson and many members of SMG were quite clear that the libertarian movement included child emancipation – the right for children to have sex with adults.

      • You are mistaken. I have never been a member of either PIE or SMG.

      • I have not claimed that you were a member of PIE. The article you wrote presents you as being a member of SMG – you would need to take that up with them. Are you not contesting the words provided above that were published in your name?

      • I have no recollection of any such article. Is it online, or can you scan it? And by the way, who are you?

      • Just to be clear Paul – are you distancing yourself from the words above that are ascribed to you in the SMG newsletter. If so why? If you disagree with the words then please be clear on that now.

  4. Aaronovitch is currently being slammed on Twitter for this article, which as it was written when he was with the Guardian, is free to view.


    I think he makes reasonable points. The use of the ‘child p***’ terminology is out-dated, but bear in mind the article is from 2003.

  5. The SAFF warned David Aaronovitch several years ago ( when he tested the waters with a two-part Radio 4 Analysis programme on the false Hampstead SRA allegations ) that he would afterwards be singled out for ‘the treatment’ by both the leading edge social work and therapist activists and their baying wolves in the conspiracyloon arena.

    Aaronovitch was so pilloried and no less than THREE official complaints were made by prominent SRA believers to the BBC to tie him up for months and punish him for getting it right.

    Weaving him into the conspiracyloon world-view soon occurred and Darren’s tripe above is typical disinformation to muddy the waters.

    The result was that Aaronovitch withdrew from the fray and washed his hands of the issue with a final shot across the bows of the Satan Hunters in Matthew Scott’s blog here:


    We warned him that disengagement was impossible now that he was involved but he knew best, considering us just another facet of the loonies who were at him.

    In every other instance David has been absolutely on the money in his research, he just didn’t see how all-consuming this SRA myth really is because successive governments have continued to kick the matter into the long-grass, given the Child-Scare-Industry the funding it wanted to continue the lies and avoided grasping the nettle due to the emotional blackmail which conspiracyloons like ‘Darren’ excel in and Media editors have wet dreams about.

    David Aaronovitch is absolutely right. An undercurrent of left-wing anti-israeli anti-semitic jew-hating is intimately bound up with tales of Satanic Abuse and Abuse by people in high places. We exposed the source of this years ago here:


    and explained how the blood-libel is still percolating away beneath a veneer of multiculturalism.

    Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

    Expect a tidal wave of loony allegations, fantasised double-think, false-flag stories and cross allegations to confuse the issue.

    Who knows, maybe Aaronovitch might actually descend from his ivory tower and get down dirty with others who’ve been successfully fighting this evil myth for 30 years or so.

    John Freedom

    • “Aaronovitch withdrew from the fray and washed his hands of the issue with a final shot across the bows of the Satan Hunters in Matthew Scott’s blog”

      An interesting read. This jumps out as a glaring example of DA’s trademark style:

      “By the way, I have yet to hear of a concentration camp survivor who forgot that they’d been in a concentration camp.”

      How dare he? How dare he simultaneously trivialise two serious topics by making such a blatantly false equivalence?

      • It seems like a perfectly valid point to me: the idea of ‘recovered memories’ is based upon the notion that an experience can be so traumatic that the human brain buries it to protect the person involved, but that this buried memory can be miraculously excavated at a (much) later date – almost always with the assistance of a ‘counsellor’ (who coincidentally believes in the unproven notion in the first place); that these traumatic memories always seem to involve SEX rather than, say, watching your own family being slaughtered in front of your own eyes (or perhaps being forced to carry out the slaughter yourself) is beyond odd.

        Are there thousands upon thousands of former ‘child soldiers’ walking around with buried memories of the atrocities they were obliged to carry out? Were there millions of former concentration camp prisoners who needed a few sessions with a poorly trained & completely unregulated ‘counsellor’ before they remembered what they’de gone through? Apparently not.

        I share your outrage at a “blatantly false equivalence”, but for me it’s that of a ‘survivor’ (of a concentration camp) being on a level with a ‘victim’ (of sort sort of sexual abuse or misdemeanour). The word ‘survivor’ used to signify something – someone who had lived through a uniquely horrible event (or at least unique to modern-times in the west) but has since seen its power eroded by co-option & overuse; ‘survivor’ of domestic abuse, ‘survivor’ of coercive control, ‘survivor’ of a Hollywood casting-couch, ‘survivor’ of the patriarchy… pathetic.

      • Bandini,

        “I share your outrage at a “blatantly false equivalence”, but for me it’s that of a ‘survivor’ (of a concentration camp) being on a level with a ‘victim’ (of sort sort of sexual abuse or misdemeanour). The word ‘survivor’ used to signify something – someone who had lived through a uniquely horrible event (or at least unique to modern-times in the west) but has since seen its power eroded by co-option & overuse; ‘survivor’ of domestic abuse, ‘survivor’ of coercive control, ‘survivor’ of a Hollywood casting-couch, ‘survivor’ of the patriarchy… pathetic.”

        Are you seriously suggesting that a rape survivor cannot use those words to describe him or herself?

      • No I’m not suggesting they CAN’T use the word, TDF, but merely expressing a personal dislike for the way it has come to be applied to anything from ‘victim of summat that wouldn’t even make it over the threshold of criminality’ all the way up to genuinely dreadful acts.

        Although you mention ‘rape survivor’ we’d have to clarify what ‘type’ of rape is being talked about; some of the recent Hollywood guff includes, for example, a ‘rape survivor’ who “reluctantly agreed to give Weinstein a massage” and as he supposedly forcibly “performed oral sex on her” “she stopped saying no and feigned enjoyment” – perhaps convincingly as she was an actress. That was the rape. Despite this she then later went on to have a consensual sexual relationship with the slug, even taking him to meet her mother. A rape survivor?

        What really bothers me about the word is that there is no way back once the label is applied – you’ll never hear about a former or ex- survivor, and in this respect its use echoes in a way the indelible stamp of the tattoo mentioned by Tom below. Marked for life…

        None of the ‘campaigning’ groups are interested in people who had an unpleasant experience but then got over it and got on with their lives – they want lifetime members, ‘survivors’. Its use creates perpetual victimhood – see SunnyCrackpot’s inane Twitter spam for an example: “I’m a child sex abuse survivor” repeated all the way to infinity and back. Deranged.

      • “None of the ‘campaigning’ groups are interested in people who had an unpleasant experience but then got over it and got on with their lives – they want lifetime members, ‘survivors’. Its use creates perpetual victimhood – see SunnyCrackpot’s inane Twitter spam for an example: “I’m a child sex abuse survivor” repeated all the way to infinity and back. Deranged.”

        Well, ok, would grant you that. It’s why this satirical spoof on Pat ‘the Plank’ Kenny (a notoriously misery porn-prone Oirish Tee Vee Presenter) came to mind when I read Sunny Delight’s Twitter spam outpourings.

      • TDF, you might be interested in the article ‘Why Chris Morris had to make Brass Eye’ (as tweeted by the peerless Moor Larkin):
        I hadn’t been aware of his motivations until now. Hard to imagine the article even being published nowadays, let alone the programme being made.

        “This is something else Morris despises; the idea that you are, once a victim, a victim forever, and can never define yourself in any other way – at least not if our moral healers have anything to do with it.”


      • Bandini, yes, thanks hadn’t seen that article before.

      • On the subject of inane Twitter spam, the lying fraudster behind the ‘James Reeves’ account has now announced that he has:

        “just applied to be heard at the westminister csa enquiery”

        Oddly, when he is challenged on his claims, he is capable of tweeting in proper English….bit odd, that.

      • “….a smile on a pig’s face and a kick up de hole in the winter…”

      • Still there, TDF?

        The ‘brave rape survivor’ mentioned above has now “reportedly been accused of sexual assault herself” and according to the New York Times paid out a whopping $380,000 to ‘silence’ her accuser & to buy up the copyright on the photographic evidence.

        As the alleged victim was, according to the United Nations / under English, Northern Irish and Welsh law (though perhaps not under that of the Scots), a ‘child’ & below the arbitrary age of consent in the territory where the assault is said to have taken place, and as Argento was over twice the little fella’s age I suppose we may as well label the supposed culprit a ‘paedo’ (or ‘nonce’ if you prefer!), something I don’t think even Weinstein has been accused of…

        “A lawyer for Mr Weinstein said the development revealed “a stunning level of hypocrisy by Asia Argento”.
        Another high-profile accuser of Harvey Weinstein, Rose McGowan, has also reacted to the reports.”

        Aye, indeed she has – ‘let’s be gentle and not rush to judgement’! What a bloody nerve.

        We were discussing the use/meaning of the word ‘nonce’ the other day beneath another article… this is why.

      • ‘Nonce’ is not a good word, I already apologised to King for using it.

        But that aside, I’m not sure what you expect me to say. The whole ‘me too’ movement has always been a bit suspect to me, I don’t believe I ever advocated in favour of it. Apparently there is a lot of research indicating that abuse BY females is under-reported. One has to wonder about the reasons for Anthony Bourdain’s suicide.

      • ^ latest is she is saying it was consensual and that he initiated it.

      • Hard for him to consent when he was below the age of consent, TDF! At least if we are to believe that this incredible ability to ‘consent’ is only bestowed upon us on reaching the age of 14/15/16/18/etc. (depending on where we happen to be on the globe) yet totally absent prior to the candles being blown out.

        And sorry, I didn’t explain myself well the other day & wasn’t having a gripe at you, just trying to highlight the fuzziness around the (mis)use of the word paedophile – which has a fairly solid definition – and ‘under-age sex’ whose meaning varies wildly. The latter may still be illegal and therefore punishable, but I get so tired of this kind of rubbish which has sod all to do with yer genuine “sweet-bag rattling” kiddie-fiddler:

        I’m not following this Argento thing anymore but couldn’t help thinking of those women who claimed that a pinch on the bum from Savile had ruined their lives, caused them to get divorced (twice), destroyed their future-careers, etc. when reading of her ‘victim’s’ fall from grace on account of a bit of a fumble: his earnings as a successful child-actor plummeted as he entered adulthood & struggled to make the transition into genuine Hollywood star (like practically every other child-star!) and it WAS ALL HER FAULT! Nothing to do with him growing up & losing his cuteness, it WAS ALL HER FAULT!!!

        People blaming others for their own failings and for their own bad choices & seeking cash payouts on the back of it… the 21st Century in a nutshell.

      • In other news it seems that some are complaining that the Pope’s visit to Ireland risks ‘retraumatising’ victims. I’m not seeing the logic here. Can’t they just do what I do and completely ignore the media coverage of the visit? Or mount a peaceful protest if they wish? The current Pope is in any case very much viewed as a reformer. Traditionalist Catholics largely despise him. (Take a look at the unintentionally hilarious mundabor blog for an example – https://mundabor.wordpress.com/ )

  6. Concentration camp survivors often have tattoos. Child soldiers often have limbs missing. Isn’t that a fairly obvious hole in the logic?

    • So the one-armed man would have forgotten about executing his own family if he hadn’t had a limb lopped off? Hmmm…

      • You don’t do debate really, do you? Can you see the difference between events which manifestly affect entire societies and have external physical manifestations, and traumas of the internal orifices and the soul?

      • Well I replied at least, Tom, but I didn’t really think the point you’d made was a very good one – sorry.
        Does your apparent belief in the validity of ‘recovered memories’ stretch all the way to those who remember taking part in Satanic rituals or boarding interstellar spacecraft in the company of alien beings, or is it limited to ‘ordinary’ sex abuse only?

      • Whoa there, cowboy. Let’s take this one step at a time and try not to become excitable, eh?

        If you don’t want to answer my question, you can just say so without the facetious nonsense.

        I have no experience with those who allege occult rituals, only those who have experienced “ordinary” abuse. I do suggest that if you spoke directly to them the way you treat them when commenting here, you would get a justly-deserved slap.

        And I find that the trauma has severe effects on their everyday lives, often to the extent of trying to block out the memories through drug addiction, and avoiding activities that most of us take for granted because they associate them with the sexual abuse.

        So while I can’t give an informed opinion on “recovered memories”, I am not completely ignorant of the general subject.

      • Tom, I thought I’d made it fairly obvious that my answer to your question “isn’t that a fairly obvious hole in the logic?” is ‘no’. If you meant the follow up – “You don’t do debate really, do you?” – the answer would be ‘yes’.

        Although you now talk about people trying to block out memories with booze ‘n’ pills that really isn’t what I was on about, and it certainly isn’t what Aaronovitch was talking about. Here is the paragraph in full (including the lines you took exception to):

        “If there were, as Nelson asserts, “a large and reputable literature demonstrating that these things [buried memories] are indeed possible, supported by the frequent experience of practitioners and abuse survivors themselves”, this would have to be supported by sufficient corroboration that the repressed events had taken place. In the case of Satanic abuse, at any rate, there never has been. If Nelson knows differently then she will be able to cite the circumstances. By the way, I have yet to hear of a concentration camp survivor who forgot that they’d been in a concentration camp.”

        So perhaps we’ve been talking at cross purposes.
        As to the prospect of receiving a “justly-deserved slap” I’m already making plans for a new survivors group – Survivors of Survivorism, S.O.S. for short.

      • Surely the issue of “sufficient corroboration” is the nub of the difference: fairly easy to find when it comes to issues of war crimes and less so in isolated cases of abuse. But if you don’t accept that I cant force you to.

      • It might surprise you to learn that I’m rather skeptical of psychoanalysis and hypnosis too. I just prefer closely-argued articles not to have jarring non-sequiturs randomly chucked in to undermine what was otherwise a decent case.

      • Tom, if you’re skeptical of psychoanalysis and hypnosis then you’ll probably share my disbelief at the notion of “highly organised evil” perpetrated by “international political and criminal groups” who got into bed with mad Nazi scientists after the second world war in order to “create dissociative disorders” in children so that they could be abused with impunity. Er, and to keep Satan happy. (See link below)

        On the question of corrobaration in “isolated cases of abuse” I think the point is being missed: they aren’t, it is claimed, ‘isolated cases’ at all, but part of sprawling and highly organised networks of abuse… and therefore the absence of evidence is startling. Those behind the claims don’t publicise their more ‘unconventional’ beliefs – in fact they hide them as I’m sure SAFF is sick to death of reminding people. But those beliefs are there, lingering, firmly held by some who’ll be training the next generation of ‘counsellors’, giving seminars or maybe picking up an OBE along the way (Broomstix Cambell).

        Also see for example the way ‘Nick’ had his outlandish claims sanitised by his media handlers so that they could sneak him in under the radar of credibility; who were HIS counsellors? What did they believe in? A small effort was made to dig into the background of those who MAY have had something to do with things here:


        See how ‘Matt V’ was helped…

  7. Don’t waste your time with fools Bandini.

    It is a hallmark of 30 years of the lies surrounding the Satanic Ritual Abuse Myth that believers will reduce any debate on the issue to a matter of nit-picking semanticisim until their proponents either get bored out of their skin and leave, or get so confused they forget the original point being made.

    Ask yourself this:

    When did you last suddenly remember something which you had forgotten for years? It doesn’t have to be something traumatic, just some slight thing, but say, two decades ago. It is a rarity to remember such things, but when it does happen it is ALWAYS caused by some association (image, or emotion, or thought or happening). It is the association which causes the recall. This is within everyones’ experience but the ridiculous idea of ‘Recovered Memories’ is that a whole life experience, often spanning years, in childhood, can be suppressed by the conscious mind and will never rise to the surface unless it is winkled out by a Therapist.

    The whole idea is so patently ludicrous as to be laughable. Belief in this nonsense is the fault of the psychiatric profession which has allowed these unproven syndromes to gain sway and be used to treat patently ill people who need real help.

    The first person to suggest that suppressed memories were possible was Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis and upon whose teachings the whole of modern psychiatry rests.

    What psychiatry rarely mentions is that after spending years pushing this idea Freud himself found a case which had sucked him in where the woman ‘hysteric’ had been feeding him patently false memories. For a time he wanted to abandon the idea of psychoanalysis but soon formulated a swerve in his methodology to avoid addressing false memories brought out during psychoanalysis. That was that psychoanalists should look not at what the patient says BUT WHY THE PATIENT IS SAYING IT.

    That dictum has since been junked entirely by modern psychiatry and its parasitic therapists who have been selling the idea of Recovered Memories wholesale because it fits their Feminazi world-views (all fathers are rapists but daughters can’t remember it – read Courage to Heal ).

    Their wicked view is utterly predicated on one thing and one thing only. The patient always tells the truth and must be believed however fanciful their story and whether or not there is forensic evidence to back it up. It’s bollocks.

    This ideology inverts natural justice causes patients to remain in a therapeutic limbo for the rest of their lives and illustrates in particular how stupid modern ‘therapists’ are when they themselves become controlled, as they often do (see case of ‘Nick’) by cunning and manipulative patients who play the game for their own benefit.

    Pure Behaviourism!

    Don’t waste your time arguing with fools.

    Tony Rhodes

    • Tony, I thought that perhaps Tom had genuinely confused ‘recovered memories’ with those ‘fuzzy memories’ we all have (and which can be exacerbated by drink and drugs and, unfortunately, the ageing process)…

      A quick peek at Twitter today and I see that Valerie Sinason spent the weekend presenting a conference dealing pretty much with what Tom has mentioned: ‘Trauma and sexuality’:


      Unable to resist I googled her latest book to see what the “well respected” nutjob was putting her name to this time, and almost at random saw the following:


      Tom might enjoy it and the Nazis even get a look-in; perhaps he’ll see why there are those whom others feel are well deserving of criticism.

      • Bandini, it looks like you’ve got mixed up and gone into the Dennis Wheatley folder on your e-reader there. Recommended if you like your satanism with a liberal dash of WWII.

    • Tony, I love your rhetoric about “believers” and suchlike, but it’s truly a dark age when even the agnostics are now being persecuted *tongueycheekface*

  8. Coming from a family where some did survive a Concentration Camp and as a person who survived a brutal male rape and attempted murder when very young I reckon David Aaronovich’s comment is spot on.

    Personally I abhor the terms “victim” and “survivor” to describe any of my experiences as they indicate a sort of permanent condition that I am supposed to be lumbered with for my entire life. Certainly my own vicious attack (over 40 years ago) screwed me up mentally for a couple of years but it’s now a rather distant memory and like most memories of childhood or even teenage years, it’s quite difficult to comprehend your own past if you live in the present.

    I do not believe in “recovered memories”, certainly of major physical attacks upon the person.
    Many years ago I participated as a researcher with a writer producing a book on a married couple who were in Belsen and sat in on several of his interviews. This couple had never spoken to each other of the terrible events, understandably, but by the end of the series of interviews the couple actually split up. The process of dredging up terrible memories which they certainly didn’t have to “recover” as they sat in the depths of their minds, apparently proved to be so painful they simply couldn’t tolerate being together any more.

    Perhaps there may be the occasional person who does suppress memories but the fact is pseudo “psychologists” are now churning out “survivors” with their “recovered memories” by the dozen and it’s just not credible.

    I also abhor the current mania used by these quacks and indeed by many professionals & the media for telling those who have had a terrible event like rape happen, that their lives have been “ruined” (a form of abuse in my mind).
    The only current medical situation I agree with is the concept of “victim guilt” which is definitely something I suffered from for a couple of years (until I got sick of it and got on with life)- it’s a very real thing but I believed it’s encouraged in the current atmosphere of survivor and victimhood.

  9. Thanks Ruth! It is so cozy!xo,Kellyann

  10. https://twitter.com/ciabaudo/status/1031032599391686657

    We all see where you’re headed, Alun. You’ve slipped your moorings and come adrift. Ship Alun is headed to the Rocks of Conspiraloon Island.

    In other words, you’re about as mad as a box of frogs.

    Beware the sleep of reason, Alun, it produces monsters.


  11. The eagle-eyed Alun has now decided that a reference in Margaret Thatcher’s handwritten notes to newspapers is actually about paedophiles:


    • Meanwhile, if you can be bothered, Mark Watts on developments at the IICSA. Caveat emptor, ‘cos, you know, it’s Mark Watts.


      • And Tim Tate has written a new blog.

        Bandini, save us from the madness you’re our only hope.

      • I’ve only dipped my toe in, TDF, as a bit busy but:

        1) Watched Richard ‘S&G’ Scorer being less than impressed with Don Hale’s credentials. Wouldn’t be surprised if Hale pulls a sickie when it’s his turn on Friday but if not I’ll be tuning in!

        2) Tate wrote:

        “The opening statement today by Brian Altman QC incudes the following notable statement in its section on Elm Guest House:

        ‘It appeared that one boy, aged 10, had been sexually abused on the premises. The boy made a statement to the police that he had been raped by adult males at the house. A social worker claimed that the boy made an allegation in relation to ‘Uncle Leon’.’

        There is no follow-up to this remarkable passage in any of Mr. Altman’s published remarks. It is simply left there to dangle in the wind. And yet it seems to establish as a finding of fact at least one section of the story the Fernbridge detective told me.”

        Er, but it WAS followed up on page 57:

        “Third, we will hear some specific evidence about the allegations concerning Elm Guest House and the investigation by the Met into those allegations in its Operations Fairbank and Fernbridge. Those allegations include possible misconduct on the part of the Metropolitan Police in the way in which investigations into alleged goings-on at Elm Guest House were conducted, and also allegations that the results of those investigations were covered up. Commander Neil Jerome of the Metropolitan Police will attend to explain what allegations were made about Elm Guest House, what investigations were carried out and what the outcome was, as well as the follow-up reviews of those investigations. The allegations include the suggestion that evidence relating to Leon Brittan’s presence at or involvement with Elm Guest House was suppressed.”


        So not really sure where he’s coming from & find his whole second-hand Customs Officer/unnamed copper tale a bit far fetched but wouldn’t disagree with them both being called to give evidence, for the little it will serve.

        3) The laughable rubbish that The Telegraph published about Peter Morrison raping someone at Elm turned out to be a ‘mistake’:

        “Finally with regard to Morrison, it is right that I mention one further IOPC investigation relating to allegations made about him. In January 2015, the Sunday Telegraph reported that in 1982 a boy from Sussex has been lured to London and then raped by Peter Morrison. They reported it on 3 January 2015, bearing the headline “Westminster paedophile ring: ‘I allowed my son to go with him. You trusted people more in those days’.”

        The IOPC has investigated this allegation and, as we shall see, it seems that it was a case of mistaken identity. The boy in question was indeed the victim of a sexual assault and his attacker was caught and convicted. But it was not Peter Morrison. It appears the victim was never told the identity of the man who had attacked him and years later he saw pictures of Peter Morrison and wrongly concluded that it had been him. As I say, we will hear further evidence about this from the IOPC witness tomorrow.”

        Not sure if they will also scupper the supposed Elm connection (which was pathetically flimsy anyway) but I’d rather hear from the ‘Assistant News Editor at the Daily Telegraph’ who put his name to something I sincerely doubt he ever slightly believed in himself.

        4) McKelvie backpeddling:

        “Mr McKelvie has previously claimed to have been the source of Tom Watson’s 2012 parliamentary question… …In a witness statement that he has very recently provided to the inquiry, Mr McKelvie has suggested that Mr Watson’s question was primarily based on information provided by two others…”

        Also: “The IOPC investigated nine separate areas of concern raised by Mr McKelvie in an operation named Redrail 2, to which we will return during the IOPC evidence. The conclusion drawn by the IOPC, having investigated all of the areas of concern, was that there was no evidence or corroboration to support any of them…”


      • Thanks Bandini.



        You f****g hypocrite, Watts.

      • “Geoffrey Robertson blurted out the identity of a victim of child sexual abuse, albeit not by name…”

        Must admit I’m struggling to understand this. Charades?

      • He probably means ‘jigsaw’ identification (put enough info in the public domain and an onlooker can make an educated guess re an ID) but Exaro were guilty of the same, re accused people and arguably alleged victims.

      • Worth a gander for Ops Aspen & Bayberry:

        Both relating to Vishal Mehotra, the first re Elm (“… as a result of media reports…”) and a mystery ‘phone call it was claimed the police ignored. No evidence found, they didn’t ignore it and the caller was “identified as having mental health problems”.
        (I’d love to see the transcript to compare with The Telegraph’s ‘exclusive’, incidentally from the same ace reporter as the Morrison at Elm crap mentioned above.)

        The second regarding a supposed sighting in the company of Leslie Bailey. The sighting took place before Vishal went missing, it wasn’t ignored & the Bailey-lookalike had actually been described “as resembling the comedian, Mel Smith”.

        LBC made much of this at the time, podcasts and whatnot. More media-led madness…


      • Yes thanks for the link, I remember the LBC program.

      • Re “I’d love to see the transcript to compare with The Telegraph’s ‘exclusive’…”, there was NO mention of Elm as is currently being confirmed by Commander Jerome. Nor VIP paedophile rings.

        Exploiting the father of a murdered child for easy copy. Nice one, The Telegraph. Sleep well, eh?

      • ^ Arseholes. Reminiscent of the NOTW and Samantha Claire Ufland McAlpine.

      • Commander Jerome – Fay “not credible” and [Elm Guest House] list “zero evidential value”.

  12. TDF, regarding the Peter Morrison/Elm/Telegraph tale mentioned above, here is the result of the ensuing Operation Spruce:


    A couple of standout points:

    1) the age of the victim was 15 (confirmed in the minutes from the live hearing); the Telegraph piece claimed he had been 14.

    2) the attack took place in 1983, not 1982 as claimed by the Telegraph.

    3) Elm Guest House closed in 1982. There was quite literally no way the victim could have been abused there in 1983, either by Peter Morrison or by anyone else.

    This rubbish was printed in what was once a newspaper…

    (I’m only dipping in and out of all this – and it’s not always easy as many of the PDF files are unsearchable – as I’m trying to get somewhere on something Savile-related which also involves the press deliberately lying about a person’s age, etcetera.)

    [Extracted from here: https://www.iicsa.org.uk/key-documents/9651/view/IPC000830.pdf ]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.