ChatterBank7 mins ago
How Did Liberty And The Guardian End Up In League With Pie?
23 Answers
http:// www.bbc .co.uk/ news/ma gazine- 2635237 8
OK, Liberty and the Guardian are the top line in lentil crunching but surely a paedophile group would repell even them. How did this repugnant organisation ever attain even this crumb of repectibility?
OK, Liberty and the Guardian are the top line in lentil crunching but surely a paedophile group would repell even them. How did this repugnant organisation ever attain even this crumb of repectibility?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.not everyone agreed with it, but it did exist for years, why wasn't it stopped in it's tracks, that will take some explaining, by those who were involved, and around at the time, i doubt they will, because this was supposedly a time of sexual liberation, and all that nonsense,
from the link
It's wrong to say that PIE was tolerated during the 1970s, says Times columnist Matthew Parris. "I remember a lot of indignation about it [PIE]. It was considered outrageous."
from the link
It's wrong to say that PIE was tolerated during the 1970s, says Times columnist Matthew Parris. "I remember a lot of indignation about it [PIE]. It was considered outrageous."
Not sure how the Guardian was "in league" with the PIE ?
"A Guardian article in 1977 noted with dismay how the group was growing"
So, reporting on the PIE was the same as being in league was ? Extraordinary ! By the same token then, the DM is in league with the PIE, because it has decided to rake all this up again, in its clumsy smear campaign against Harman and others.
Liberty must speak for itself, and has done so by condemning its predecessor, formally the NCCL. Harman has done herself no favours in her cack handed way in which she defended herself against the DM's smear campaign, but to try and implicate the Guardian is trying to play the same game as the DM.
"A Guardian article in 1977 noted with dismay how the group was growing"
So, reporting on the PIE was the same as being in league was ? Extraordinary ! By the same token then, the DM is in league with the PIE, because it has decided to rake all this up again, in its clumsy smear campaign against Harman and others.
Liberty must speak for itself, and has done so by condemning its predecessor, formally the NCCL. Harman has done herself no favours in her cack handed way in which she defended herself against the DM's smear campaign, but to try and implicate the Guardian is trying to play the same game as the DM.
The poster alleges the Guardian were in League with PIE. They were not. They reported on a vote at a conference. They did not take part in the vote, arrange it, endorse it or campaign for it. They merely reported the news at the time.
The Daily Mail reports are different. It is a politically motivated campaign to smear leading members of the Labour Party. It is not reporting the news, it is creating it from archived material from 40 years ago.
I am surprised that writs haven't been issued. Perhaps the central allegation that Harman supported PIE are untrue, but some of the facts of the case are unpalatable 40 years later.
The Daily Mail reports are different. It is a politically motivated campaign to smear leading members of the Labour Party. It is not reporting the news, it is creating it from archived material from 40 years ago.
I am surprised that writs haven't been issued. Perhaps the central allegation that Harman supported PIE are untrue, but some of the facts of the case are unpalatable 40 years later.
Just watched the John Tusa Newsnight interview on the link that TTT has thoughtfully provided.
Its seems incredible that paedophiles would agree to be interviewed openly on the BBC's major investigative program, and its impossible to imagine it happening today. Attitudes to paedophilia have changed enormously in the last 34 years. Tusa was somewhat of an old-fashioned gentleman but it would interesting to see how Paxo would conduct the same interview if it were conducted today !
Its seems incredible that paedophiles would agree to be interviewed openly on the BBC's major investigative program, and its impossible to imagine it happening today. Attitudes to paedophilia have changed enormously in the last 34 years. Tusa was somewhat of an old-fashioned gentleman but it would interesting to see how Paxo would conduct the same interview if it were conducted today !
Back in the day, NCCL had hundreds of dodgy organisations sign up.
The NCCL view was that it was better to have an opportunity to air, learn about and face up to opinions (even those one might find repellent) rather than suppress and pretend they weren't there.
It's worth remembering that in the 1970s a large proportion of people wouldn't have known what paedophilia was.
It was a core principle of 'Civil Liberties' that even 'the repellent' should be heard if only so others could make their own decisions about them.
The NCCL view was that it was better to have an opportunity to air, learn about and face up to opinions (even those one might find repellent) rather than suppress and pretend they weren't there.
It's worth remembering that in the 1970s a large proportion of people wouldn't have known what paedophilia was.
It was a core principle of 'Civil Liberties' that even 'the repellent' should be heard if only so others could make their own decisions about them.
which is what i said. But this was a time of massive changes, in law, in regards to sexuality, and some got away with some truly appalling behaviour in the guise of the swinging sixties, seventies, sexual revolution, including not condemning outright those caught sexually abusing young children. some were caught and prosecuted, and served time in prison, but some didn't, and stayed in their jobs, or moved to another school, care home, institution.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.