Thursday, October 9, 2014

Labour Politicians And Child Sex - Its Not A Scandal Its Progressive

The media attention given to the three senior Labour party politicians involved in a child sex scandal has a whiff of opportunism about it that may detract from the genuine shock and horror that should accompany the subject of child sex abuse.
(See the story here)

The scandal involves three of the Labour Party's most rabid socialist/progressives - Patricia Hewitt, Harriet Harman and Jack Dromey who, incidentally, happens to be Harman's husband.

All three worked for the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL) and they all attained positions of power within the upper echelons of the Labour Party.
The NCCL at the time espoused all the trendy left wing causes of the day and, as a consequence attracted that section of British society that consisted of middle and upper class self loathers together with the post pubescent, pimpled revolutionaries that eventually grew up and joined the Liberal Democrats.

It must be borne in mind that legalizing sex between adults and children has long been a core belief of the same 'progressive' elite that are the guardians of the Labour Party soul today. According to them it was perfectly acceptable for the Paedophile Information Exchange (P.I.E) to be an affiliate of the NCCL.

Hewitt, Harman and her husband Dromey represented, and therefore endorsed the views of P.I.E, such as: "Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in with an adult, result in no identifiable damage".

They didn't divulge how they came to the conclusion of 'no identifiable damage', perhaps it was personal experience, however it remains unexplained.

They also claim that "The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage".

Again the basis for this claim is not shared, the reason being that its an ideological belief therefore no empirical evidence is necessary. If they believe it, then it must be right and everyone else is wrong.... or stuck with Victorian attitudes to sex.

Despite being senior members of the Labour Party, they campaigned for:

a) The abolition of the age of consent for sex between adults and children. ( 'Sixteen is just a start' was a campaign slogan endorsed by the Labour Party's high profile homosexual campaigner Peter Tatchell)

b) Incest to be de-criminalized.

c) Sexually explicit photographs of children to be made legal.

It is worth remembering that the Labour Party grew from the original trade union movement and consisted mainly of working men - that would be men such as coal miners, steel workers, railway men, factory workers, farm workers etc. together with their wives and other women's groups. They were also, in the main, Christians or at least lived by the Judeo-Christian moral code.

The influence and eventual takeover of the party by the aforementioned upper and middle class self loathers began with groups like the Bloomsbury Set and the Fabians.

These people referred to themselves as 'progressives' who disagreed with Victorian values and worked to abolish the Judeo- Christian moral code. They believed that this moral code was a an impediment to 'progress'. They were hedonists who not only espoused lunatic ideas such as eugenics and euthanasia but they also indulged in group sex and wanted homosexuality and paedophilia legalized, then brought into the mainstream of British life.

These so called 'progressives' have replaced the working man as the biggest influence in the Labour Party and subsequently changed it from the party of "a fair days work for a fair days pay", into a revolutionary movement of well-to-do hedonists. The hierarchy of the modern Labour Party and most of its MP's are non-working class who espouse Fabian and the Bloomsbury Set causes.

People referring to themselves as 'progressives' now dominate politics and public life and unless the people wake up it is only a matter of time before sex between adults and children, incest and child pornography are legalized. They cynically used gay marriage as a precedent and with that now socially acceptable more of the Fabian/Bloomsbury progressive agenda will follow as sure night follows day.

(Please note that their linking homosexuality and paedophilia is a tactic they have used to achieve their aims. This is a slur and an affront to homosexuals and taints the issue of same sex marriage further)

It is worth looking at these three Labour Party stalwarts in a little more detail:

Patricia Hewitt actually hails from Down Under being the daughter of a knighted professional Australian bureaucrat and an aristocrat Lady of the Realm. Originally a conservative, she adopted radical 'progressive' causes somewhere along the way. She was actually classified as a communist by the British Intelligence Service, MI5.

Hewitt was 'spotted' as a potential candidate for high political office in the Labour Party and groomed accordingly. When her time came she was selected as the Parliamentary candidate for Leicester West by virtue of her gender over a more suitable male candidate.

Referred to these days as a carpetbagger, she was parachuted into the 'safe' Labour seat of Leicester West which is about as far removed socially and politically from Australia as it is possible to be. Predictably, the undiscerning tribal voters of Leicester West elected her as their representative as they would have done had she been a horse, a donkey or a chimpanzee.

One of Hewitt's pet theories is that  "fathers may not be a useful influence in the upbringing of children".

It would be interesting to find out if the fathers of Leicester West agree with their elected representative about their families and the raising of their children.

The political duo of Harriet Harman and husband Jack Dromey epitomize everything that stinks about the Labour Party and British politics in general.

Harman is typical of the wealthy elite that lead the working mans party but wouldn't be seen dead with a dock worker or a market porter. A typical socialist/progressive hypocrite she campaigns against elite private schools but uses them for her own children. She scoffs at marriage and the traditional family but is married and has a traditional family of her own.

Harman has been the MP for Camberwell and Peckham for over three decades and despite her undivided attention it remains one Great Britain's most notorious toilet constituencies. It's a sad fact that according to the Index of Multiple Deprivation, her constituency has the highest number of poor people than any constituency in the country.

Her constituency is such a crime ridden cesspit that she has to wear  a stab proof vest to walk her own streets even when accompanied by the police.

Three decades of Harman's rule is proof enough that socialist/progressive politicians will deliberately foster poverty and welfare dependency in order to guarantee votes and political power.

Her husband Jack Dromey is a Londoner who mysteriously got himself nominated to the Birmingham Erdington constituency from an all woman shortlist after he failed to become leader of the trade union Unite.

In addition to being a member of the party's National Executive Committee he was also the party's treasurer while still employed by the party's paymaster, Unite.

During his tenure as treasurer there were the cash for peerages and illegal campaign donation scandals which also involved his wife. Despite being the treasurer of party, Dromey claimed he wasn't informed about financial anomalies amounting to millions of pounds. He also broke Parliamentary rules by failing to declare his Unite salary but got away with all this unpunished. One law for them etc. springs to mind.

Jack Dromey's own sexuality has been brought into question when he was caught favouring explicit gay porn on his Twitter account. This involved photographs of the wedding tackle of black men in all their glory. What Harriet thinks about this was not known at time of writing.
(Dromey's gay porn story here)

The history of paedophilia and child pornography by 'progressives' inside the Labour Party is well documented and can be confirmed by following the shocking revelations on the labour25 website.

If there is any remaining doubt about the left and some Labour Party member's attitude to paedophilia then a quote from the late Sir Henry Hodge should dispel it once and for all.

Sir Henry is the late husband of Margaret Hodge the Labour MP for Barking. She was the Leader of Islington Council in London when a paedophile ring gained access to children's homes under her control and sexually abused scores of children. Sir Henry began his legal career as a left wing solicitor and unsurprisingly went on to become a high court judge.

"Homosexuals are now widely regarded as ordinary, healthy people - a minority but no more 'ill' than the minority who are left handed. There is no reason  why paedophilia should not win similar acceptance". 

This is a classic example of an agenda driven paedophile supporter using the legalising of homosexuality to promote his cause.

It is worth pointing out that when constituents cast their vote for a Labour Party candidate without regard for that candidates' personal agenda, they should be aware that this is not the working man's party of their fathers and grandfathers, that party has long gone. Their party has been hijacked by a cabal of wealthy elitists, part of who's agenda is to remove the moral compass that directed the founding fathers and replace it with a moral free evil that would legalise sex between adults and children.
(Harman and Dromey show no remorse. Story here)


  1. Dear Daniel,

    I was served an unpleasant reminder of Ms. Harman's existence yesterday night on Question time.

    I was surprised by two things on this show.

    The first was the NHS. Every panel member stood up for the NHS and all of them except Pickles were against any degree of privatisation. While I appreciate this as the current consensus, I can't understand this. It seems clear to me that the NHS is the world's greatest con ever. The huge majority of NHS visits every day are to local GP surgeries, which are in essence private businesses, paid a negotiated rate by the central authorities. Accordingly, the majority of hours of patient exposure is to private enterprises, albethey under the Aesclepian oath. Regarding the rest of the NHS at least Harriet Harman had the decency to admit that the main advantage of the NHS is that it is cheap. It is made so by imposing rationing: a shortage of supply at an unbeatable price. It was nausiating to hear the panel discussing the funding of the NHS using tractor statistic figures. Other comparable economies do things very differently and have much better healthcare provision at all levels.

    Secondly, Harriet Harman moved on to corporate taxation of international entities. She plucked the figure of 35 Billion pounds out of the air regarding a tax gap. If she had bothered to take the time to read the accounts of some of the companies, she would see that these companies are in an ex-growth turnover position still and are spending more money expanding than they are currently receving in profit. If you are burning capital not making profit, then there is no profit to be taxed and thus no tax owed.

    I was amazed last night that she got away with this. This is the whole problem of the pathetic British left, of which this woman is a perfect representative. She is from a comfortable upper-middle class background and filled with self-loathing she went to study a degree in socialism. This was followed by a "career" in left-wing think tanks, including the NCCL with the infamous PIE connections you mention. All of her positive affirmations have been from fellow leftists that live in their own bubble, the company of which she has actively sought. This was her training for being a minister of state. She accordingly spent her time as a minister in utter bewilderment at everything passing over her desk, having obtained no analytical skills in her life other than guiding herself along the prejudice of the abstract nouns she learned in her youth.

    Someone with a major budget and with previous ministerial experience can't even read company accounts or organise a summary of them. And yet they are claiming that if only they could find the magic 35 billion, they would spend it wisely, rounded to the nearest billion, in a disciplined way on the NHS. Just another blatent attempt to buy votes using other people's non-existent money. This is and always has been the Labour party.



    1. Thanks for taking the time to share your views. The NHS is more of a political football than a health service. I won't go into it too much as I am preparing an article on this very subject. We have to admit that it is no longer fit for purpose and needs a complete re-think.

      As far as Harman is concerned I could go in for hours and not find a single redeeming feature. She is a truly vile specimen.

      She doesn't have a clue about business or wealth creation. She doesn't know how money is generated but her answer to everything is to tax and spend.

      She's a political dinosaur but her constituents can't see it.

    2. I am having a problem replying to comments so please bear with me.

  2. (1) It's about time someone had the balls to talk about the inadequacy of the NHS for the needs of the new demography and face up to the impending implosion of the whole creaking mess it has become. I've used the NHS in anger about 4 times in my life and maybe gone to the GP about 10 times, and to be honest I think it's pretty crap really. In any other walk of life you'd get a choice and if one service was rubbish then you can go somewhere else. Why not in healthcare?

    (2) Quelle surprise, economic illiteracy from the leftards.

    What really pissed me off about QT was the fact that the audience appeared to be full of commies & UKIP haters despite 60% of last night's vote going to UKIP and 25% to the Tories. Do the Beeb actually ship people in from Islington for these programmes?

    Shame about the vote up north too. Just goes to show that there are STILL enough morons left up there prepared again to vote for a party led by a dweeb which would lead us into an irreversible death spiral if voted in next year. Even if Hairy Harperson had 'I'm a paedo lover' tatooed on her forehead the dromes would still vote for her.

    1. Thanks for commenting Humph. As I said to P above I have an article or two planned on the NHS warts and all. It's a disaster and needs a constructive debate.

      There's nothing I can add about the economic illiteracy of libtards and I've given up on QT. Its so obviously biased it doesn't add anything constructive to the debate.

      You've got to wonder what people are thinking when they vote for the likes of Harperson, Milliband Balls and the rest. It boggles the mind.