Well, Universal Shami was never going to see anything POSITIVE about the policing of the “Trade Unionists against Reality” demonstration in London a few weeks ago and so it is natural the BBC afford her a soapbox to spout her predictable bile against the Met. Since when did Shami represent anything beyond a little liberal clique and why does she be given such massive prominence? Why was there no other group holding different views represented? And why did the Met allow her access to be able to watch the policing of our Capital?
JUST ANOTHER BIASED MONDAY….
Bookmark the permalink.
I posted this on the open thread lower down before this thread was opened,so I’ll post it again for you all
Liberty has a very grubby history-which some may not be aware of……
http://www.no2abuse.com/index.php/news/comments/labour-figures-bizarre-link-to-paedophile-groups/
Harriet Harman was the legal officer in the late 1970s for the National Council for Civil Liberties. When Miss Harman joined NCCL in 1978, PIE, the Paedophile Information Exchange, had already been affiliated for three years
Immediate 22.00hrs Wednesday 20th June 2007
Their involvement with an organisation to which two groups campaigning for the legalisation of paedophilia were affiliated has come back to challenge three leading Labour Party figures.
Before she became an MP, Harriet Harman was the legal officer in the late 1970s for the National Council for Civil Liberties. When Miss Harman joined NCCL in 1978, PIE, the Paedophile Information Exchange, had already been affiliated for three years. Another group, Paedophile Action for Liberation, a Gay Liberation Front offshoot, had also been affiliated to NCCL until it was absorbed by PIE. PIE, which campaigned for adults to have sex legally with children, only broke off its relationship with NCCL when it went undercover in 1982, the same year that Harriet Harman left her NCCL post to become Member of Parliament for Peckham.
NCCL people were earlier involved in keeping the name of an NCCL council-member, Jonathan Walters, out of the People newspaper when it ran an exposé of Paedophile Action for Liberation, of which he was secretary, in 1975. The People still ran the story, but Walters was not named.
Even more extraordinary is the fact that a current Cabinet Minister was running the National Council of Civil Liberties at the time all this was going on.
The Rt Hon Patricia Hewitt MP, Secretary of State for Health, became General Secretary of NCCL in 1974. The very next year, 1975, NCCL invited the Paedophile Information Exchange and Paedophile Action for Liberation to affiliate. In the year after, 1976, the now-notorious paedophile Tom O’Carroll was invited to address the NCCL conference, which promptly voted to ‘deplore’ the use of chemical castration treatments for paedophiles.
ctd
Also in 1975, Patricia Hewitt joined the Campaign for Homosexual Equality, as a ‘straight’, in the same year that Keith Hose of the Paedophile Information Exchange addressed its second annual conference. Hose moved a motion of censure on the conference organising committee for ‘relegating paedophilia to ancillary status in conference.’ The motion was seconded by Trevor Locke, who just happened to be a member of the Executive Council of the NCCL. ‘An awareness and acceptance of the sexuality of children is an essential part of the liberation of the young homosexual,’ the motion went on. It was duly passed.
Jack Dromey, whom Harriet Harman married in 1982, and who is now Treasurer of the Labour Party, was also involved with the NCCL. He served on its Executive Committee from 1970 to 1979, so he was there when the decision to invite the two paedophile groups to affiliate was made. NCCL also set up a gay rights sub-committee at the same time, members of which included prominent paedophiles Peter Bremner (alias Roger Nash), Michael Burbidge, Keith Hose and Tom O’Carroll. And of course Walters and Locke were on the Executive.
Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice, commented: ‘It is timely that the ghosts of the 1970’s past should come back to haunt these three leading Labour Party politicians. Harriet Harman, Jack Dromey and Patricia Hewitt were in their mid- or late-twenties at the time, but that cannot really excuse the way NCCL came to regard paedophiles as an oppressed minority whose civil liberties needed to be fought for.
‘All three of them really need to explain why they were so friendly toward so many out campaigning homosexual paedophiles in their youth. Why did they allow the NCCL gay rights sub-committee to be stuffed with them? Why were they happy to work with paedophilia supporters on the NCCL Executive? It cannot have been sympathy with child-molestation, so was it a complete lack of judgment or was it moral cowardice?
‘NCCL has now been rebranded as ‘Liberty’
also-and allegedly as i read this on another forum and have no reference for it-
she wanted the Police to have to prove the child was injured during the taking of the photo’s for it to be illegal. So kiddie porn was to be OK as long as the kid wasn’t injured.
How very, very revealing. And lo, these people were part of a Labour Government that allowed homosexuals, proportionately far more likely to be child abusers than heterosexuals, to adopt children .. and to frame legislation that de facto bans Christians from fostering and adopting because they regard homosexuality as a perversion.
Oh Brave New World.
CHAKRABARTI likes her job as a governor of the Gaddafi and Islamic London School of Economics.
BBC-NUJ is unperturbed by this, and continues to give her unexplained, unjustified preferential political privileges in broadcasting
On related matters, BBC-NUJ will not be prominent in criticism of Trevor Phillips and ‘Equalities and Human Rights Commission’
“Why the race may be run for clever Trevor”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1377915/ANDREW-PIERCE-Why-race-run-clever-Trevor.html#ixzz1JrV4kIV2
I think she’s cute. Especially when she is wound up. She can spout on my soapbox every Monday morning.
If you like two faced rich hypocrites then whatever floats your boat I suppose, to the rest of she represents the worst aspects of public life today, never elected to anything she is pimped around the BBC with more reverence than Ghandi or Mandela. She represents a tiny tiny minority, a grubbing arrogant hypocritical gang who know how to use the system and have gotten very rich doing it.
Dude, if ‘it’ looks like a soapbox, you need a doctor, not Shami.
Who is, anyway, not as cute as La Belle Diane. FACT.
The BBC was also headlining Shami’s claptrap about “kettling reduces the confidence of the demonstrators in the police”.
How about “The vast majority of people are fed up with violence during “protests” and welcome the recent police tactic of using kettling to try to reduce violent disorder”
Shami was on 5Live Breakfast with someone putting the opposing view (on election of Chief Constables as well as ‘kettling’). Strewth she doesn’t like people disagreeing with her. Just the sort of sanctimony one would expect from someone so abjectly hypocritical over the LSE taking money from Gaddafi.
She really does strike me as a crime against humanity waiting to happen.
Can I sue the BBC if I hurt my back reaching for the off button too quickly every time this idiot comes on (Shami – not always Evan).?
A key problem with BBC-NUJ, Chakrabarti and the police:
their dogmatic ‘political correctness’ in general, and their ‘multiculturalism’ in particular.
1.) on BBC-NUJ –
“Anti-white policies at the National Union of Journalists”
( 7 mins video)
2.) On the police:
“Multiculturalism Has Destroyed the British Police “
Could Anyone Recommend a Good Mathematician to Shami Chakrabarti?
I suspected at the time that Liberty’s presence in the police control room was direclty responsible for allowing too much violence to happen. This seems to be direct evidence. How many times did the police agree to stand back that day under pressure from this woman’s group and the media? And the BBC still views the seizing of private property as the legitimate right of a “protester”, so it’s no wonder which side they’re on.
I feel sorry for the police. Most of them agree with the TUC and hate the Tories, so more unfair pressure on them is only going to end in tears.
The one, unelected, NGO person who BBC-NUJ politically capitulates to the most, is Ms CHAKRABARTI.
She only has to let BBC-NUJ (and Sky) know which day she is available to broadcast on her own political behalf, and the broadcasting media fawns for her.
It’s really unbelievable.
Which organisation/ group is the biggest funder of her tiny, politically unrepresentative ‘Liberty’ outfit? Is it stll the National Lottery?
Given her close involvement as London School of Economics governor still, why is she not thown a few questions abour her role in Gaddafi finance and degree award at the LSE? Why hasn’t she resigned? Does ‘Liberty’s Chakrabarti ban interviewers the liberty of speech in such matters?
Now BBC-NUJ defers to her ‘expertise’ on how the Met police must and must not behave at demontrations! Who does this woman think she is? And, of course, as she is unchallenged by like-minded BBC-NUJ, she gets away with it.
Here’s a whole page of BBC-NUJ political adulation of Chakrabarti.
(For ‘Liberty; read ‘Chakrabarti’):
“‘Cuts march police too focused on kettling’ – Liberty” (i.e. ‘Chakrabarti’.)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13109259
(Imagine BBC-NUJ giving the same politically fawning treatment to the English Defence League on immigration. Only kidding.)
Just another part of the credentialed but unelected nomenklatura who will be running your lives very soon.
Yep, it’s a triple whammy of bias:
i/ The Beeb slips in that there were over 200 arrests but it wasn’t at the official rally so that was OK. Huh?
Yep, the rioters were *at* the Official Rally but not *with* them. The BBC lumps in UKIP and BNP, but they can tell exactly which protest rioters are part of.
ii/ If you need the point rammed home further, they illustrate the story with a picture of a guy dressed as a clown…. cause that’s exactly who turned up for the march that ended in rioting through central London: angry clowns.
iii/ And finally… the old favourite: why exactly does an organisation with less members than turn out to see Yeovil play Walsall get slobbering coverage from the BBC? Any chance we’ll get a feature about UKIP’s opinions on the EU budget?