-:Undertaker:-
14-12-2013, 02:55 AM
Apologists for paedophiles: How Labour Deputy Harriet Harman, her shadow minister husband and former Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt were all linked to a group lobbying for the right to have sex with children
- Magpie magazine distributed in the late Seventies to members of PIE
- PIE is Paedophile Information Exchange - the name of a far-Left lobby group
- Called for legalisation of child sex and age of consent to be lowered to four
- Emerged this week Labour government of the time may helped finance the organisation and The Magpie
- Home Office now ordered a 'thorough, independent investigation' into claims
- Hewitt, Harman and husband Dromey encountered the PIE as young officials in the National Council for Civil Liberties
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/12/14/article-2523526-1A10629F00000578-229_634x365.jpg
Political: Harriet Harman (centre) and Patricia Hewitt (to her right), at a press conference held by the National Council for Civil Liberties in 1990
At first sight, it might be a harmless parish magazine or the newsletter of a respectable society of bird-watching enthusiasts.
Called The Magpie, the now-yellowing A5-size pamphlet was distributed in the late Seventies to members of an organisation called the PIE. The inside cover carries a workmanlike ‘editor’s letter’ highlighting ‘our third annual AGM, which is to be held in London in the summer’, and inviting readers to seek election to ‘our Executive Committee’.
Page three advertises a memorial service for recently deceased PIE member Alan Doggett, who worked as the conductor of the London Boys’ Choir, and was apparently to be remembered for his ‘friendliness, integrity and loyalty’. There follows a selection of short news stories, a letters page and several long feature articles, which are scholarly in tone and peppered with academic jargon.
But it doesn’t take long for any right-minded person who flicks through The Magpie — dispatched quarterly in plain brown envelopes to up to 1,000 members — to realise that behind its matter-of-fact tone and appearance, something is terribly, terribly, amiss.
For the initials PIE stand for Paedophile Information Exchange. This turns out to be the name of a far-Left lobby group which spent much of the Seventies and early Eighties publicly calling for the legalisation of child sex — and the age of consent to be lowered to four.
Today, PIE has been widely forgotten. But at the time, it achieved prominence for circulating articles by tame psychologists and cod scientists promoting the ‘rights’ of paedophiles.
Take, for example, a long article by Dr Edward Brongersma, a Dutch politician and academic who was renowned for his ultra-liberal views on sexual morality.
‘A sexual relationship between a child and an adult does not harm the child and may be even beneficial,’ he argues, ‘providing that the adult partner is considerate, loving and affectionate.’
Take also an article in which a PIE member called Keith Spence, who had recently moved to Stockholm, writes of his (unsuccessful) efforts to abuse ‘heart-shatteringly beautiful’ children at the local swimming pool.
‘If you think England is frustrating for paedophiles, you should try living in Sweden for a bit,’ he complains.
Towards the back of the journal are adverts for a book called Towards A Better Perspective For Boy-Lovers, and admiring reviews of magazines with names such as Male International, Kim, and Boys Express.
Today, almost 35 years later, the contents of The Magpie seem so vile and amoral, and the activities of a lobby group dedicated to advancing the human rights of predatory paedophiles so disgusting, that it’s incredible either was allowed legally to exist at all.
However, it now seems that the Paedophile Information Exchange wasn’t just tolerated by the liberal authorities of the time. There is growing evidence that the era’s Left-wing establishment saw it as a socially acceptable pressure group and actively encouraged its ugly campaigns and sinister public meetings.
Indeed, it emerged this week that the Labour government of the Seventies may even have helped finance the organisation and its morally bankrupt publication The Magpie.
On Sunday, the Home Office announced that it had ordered a ‘thorough, independent investigation’ into shocking allegations that the Paedophile Information Exchange received public funds while James Callaghan was in Downing Street.
It will examine whether tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money was funnelled to it via the Voluntary Services Unit [VSU], a department of the Home Office that gave annual grants to charities and non-profit-making lobby groups.
The probe comes after a whistle-blower had claimed the payments were signed off, over several years, by a senior civil servant who worked under Labour’s then Home Secretary, Merlyn Rees.
Dig beneath the surface of this ugly scandal, however, and you will soon discover that Lord Rees — who died in 2006 — is a long way from being the only prominent Labourite whose good name may be tarnished by it.
For it also raises tricky questions for three of the most senior Labour figures of recent times: deputy leader Harriet Harman, former Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt, and shadow housing minister Jack Dromey, a former party treasurer and Harman’s husband.
Turn the clock back to the Seventies and this trio had strangely close links to the Paedophile Information Exchange. And the long-defunct organisation’s sudden return to the news pages may very well bring those links back to haunt them.
Harman, Hewitt and Dromey first encountered the PIE when they were cutting their political teeth as young officials in the National Council for Civil Liberties [NCCL].
This tub-thumping human rights organisation — these days known as Liberty — was far more radical than its modern equivalent, and was actively forging alliances with a host of ultra-liberal pressure groups.
One such group was the PIE. In 1975, it somehow succeeded in convincing the NCCL to grant it official ‘affiliate’ status.
The move was a signal victory for radical Left-wing activists, who had for years lobbied for more ‘enlightened’ attitudes towards sex between adults and children.
It was also, of course, a PR coup for those who sought to promote paedophilia.
‘The PIE somehow managed to convince feminists and the gay rights lobby that they had shared values and that we all belonged in the same club,’ recalls one feminist writer whose magazine was lobbied for support by the PIE after the Exchange won NCCL affiliation.
‘Anyone who spoke out against them feared being called a “homophobe”, which in Left-wing circles at the time was about the biggest insult anyone could throw at you. So they were invited into the liberal establishment.’
A PIE ‘information’ leaflet published at the time, called Paedophilia: Some Questions And Answers, shows how the organisation had managed to ally its cause to the gay rights movement.
‘Homosexuals are now widely regarded as ordinary, healthy people — a minority, but no more “ill” than the minority who are left-handed,’ it read. ‘There is no reason why paedophilia should not win similar acceptance.’
The NCCL — then under the chairmanship of Henry Hodge, the Left-wing solicitor who would go on to marry Labour MP Margaret Hodge — appears to have bought this argument hook, line and sinker.
‘The PIE was also being picketed by the National Front, so a lot of people also supported them on the basis that our enemy’s enemy had to be our friend,’ says the writer. ‘It seems terrifyingly simplistic now, obviously, but that was the political context.’
Over the ensuing years, the NCCL — which had Hewitt as its General Secretary from 1974-83 — provided valuable support to the paedophile lobby as it pursued a string of legal and political campaigns designed to advance its twisted agenda.
In 1975, for example, the NCCL conference was addressed by the PIE chairman, Keith Hose. Delegates passed a motion declaring that ‘awareness and acceptance of the sexuality of children is an essential part of the liberation of the young homosexual’.
In 1976, with Jack Dromey on its executive (he served from 1970-79), the NCCL filed a submission to a parliamentary committee claiming that a proposed Bill to protect children from sex abusers would lead to ‘damaging and absurd prosecutions’.
‘Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage,’ it read. ‘The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage.’
The statement might have been cut-and-pasted from the propaganda book of the Paedophile Information Exchange.
Two years later, in 1978, Harriet Harman, then a newly qualified solicitor, became the NCCL’s legal officer. She promptly wrote its official response to Parliament’s Protection of Children Bill, which sought to ban child pornography.
Her letter claimed that such a law would ‘increase censorship’, and argued that a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered.
‘Our amendment [to the proposed law] places the onus of proof on the prosecution to show that the child was actually harmed,’ she wrote.
Such statements, from officials in what was (and is) a respected human rights organisation, may go some way towards explaining how the Labour-run Home Office of the era might have allowed public grants to be directed towards the PIE.
The NCCL presided over by Harman, Hewitt, Hodge and Dromey had, after all, helped foster an environment where woolly liberalism trumped child protection.
To many on the Left, promoting the ‘rights’ of paedophiles came to be regarded as a legitimate act of political subversion.
Sources close to the Home Office investigation, which was announced this week, say the whistle-blower who sparked it first came forward in the late Seventies. However, his concerns were ignored by officials working for Labour Home Secretary Merlyn Rees.
Article continues via link....
I have heard rumours for years now of former Labour minister Harperson and her links to these sort of sick and twisted cultural marxist points of view and it looks like it's all coming out now.
Anyone who knows anything about the radical left and cultural marxism knows that it's a goal - and always has been - for them to completely twist the morality of society and destroy institutions such as the married family, the Church, the traditional family and norms such as the idea that you don't have sex with children. This will be laughed off of course, but this was common practice in the communist USSR - and just think how much our sexual morality has changed since the 1960s. They're winning.
The gay rights campaigner, Peter Tatchell, has long been arguing for the age of consent to be lowered to 14. So don't think that this is an issue that died off in the 1970s, indeed he's been arguing for the age of consent to be lowered via repeats calls in the Guardian newspaper since 1997 - http://www.theguardian.com/comment/story/0,3604,530504,00.html
It's time these people were exposed for the sick ideologically twisted weirdos they really are. If anything to my mind, the age of consent should be raised to 18.
Thoughts?
- Magpie magazine distributed in the late Seventies to members of PIE
- PIE is Paedophile Information Exchange - the name of a far-Left lobby group
- Called for legalisation of child sex and age of consent to be lowered to four
- Emerged this week Labour government of the time may helped finance the organisation and The Magpie
- Home Office now ordered a 'thorough, independent investigation' into claims
- Hewitt, Harman and husband Dromey encountered the PIE as young officials in the National Council for Civil Liberties
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/12/14/article-2523526-1A10629F00000578-229_634x365.jpg
Political: Harriet Harman (centre) and Patricia Hewitt (to her right), at a press conference held by the National Council for Civil Liberties in 1990
At first sight, it might be a harmless parish magazine or the newsletter of a respectable society of bird-watching enthusiasts.
Called The Magpie, the now-yellowing A5-size pamphlet was distributed in the late Seventies to members of an organisation called the PIE. The inside cover carries a workmanlike ‘editor’s letter’ highlighting ‘our third annual AGM, which is to be held in London in the summer’, and inviting readers to seek election to ‘our Executive Committee’.
Page three advertises a memorial service for recently deceased PIE member Alan Doggett, who worked as the conductor of the London Boys’ Choir, and was apparently to be remembered for his ‘friendliness, integrity and loyalty’. There follows a selection of short news stories, a letters page and several long feature articles, which are scholarly in tone and peppered with academic jargon.
But it doesn’t take long for any right-minded person who flicks through The Magpie — dispatched quarterly in plain brown envelopes to up to 1,000 members — to realise that behind its matter-of-fact tone and appearance, something is terribly, terribly, amiss.
For the initials PIE stand for Paedophile Information Exchange. This turns out to be the name of a far-Left lobby group which spent much of the Seventies and early Eighties publicly calling for the legalisation of child sex — and the age of consent to be lowered to four.
Today, PIE has been widely forgotten. But at the time, it achieved prominence for circulating articles by tame psychologists and cod scientists promoting the ‘rights’ of paedophiles.
Take, for example, a long article by Dr Edward Brongersma, a Dutch politician and academic who was renowned for his ultra-liberal views on sexual morality.
‘A sexual relationship between a child and an adult does not harm the child and may be even beneficial,’ he argues, ‘providing that the adult partner is considerate, loving and affectionate.’
Take also an article in which a PIE member called Keith Spence, who had recently moved to Stockholm, writes of his (unsuccessful) efforts to abuse ‘heart-shatteringly beautiful’ children at the local swimming pool.
‘If you think England is frustrating for paedophiles, you should try living in Sweden for a bit,’ he complains.
Towards the back of the journal are adverts for a book called Towards A Better Perspective For Boy-Lovers, and admiring reviews of magazines with names such as Male International, Kim, and Boys Express.
Today, almost 35 years later, the contents of The Magpie seem so vile and amoral, and the activities of a lobby group dedicated to advancing the human rights of predatory paedophiles so disgusting, that it’s incredible either was allowed legally to exist at all.
However, it now seems that the Paedophile Information Exchange wasn’t just tolerated by the liberal authorities of the time. There is growing evidence that the era’s Left-wing establishment saw it as a socially acceptable pressure group and actively encouraged its ugly campaigns and sinister public meetings.
Indeed, it emerged this week that the Labour government of the Seventies may even have helped finance the organisation and its morally bankrupt publication The Magpie.
On Sunday, the Home Office announced that it had ordered a ‘thorough, independent investigation’ into shocking allegations that the Paedophile Information Exchange received public funds while James Callaghan was in Downing Street.
It will examine whether tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money was funnelled to it via the Voluntary Services Unit [VSU], a department of the Home Office that gave annual grants to charities and non-profit-making lobby groups.
The probe comes after a whistle-blower had claimed the payments were signed off, over several years, by a senior civil servant who worked under Labour’s then Home Secretary, Merlyn Rees.
Dig beneath the surface of this ugly scandal, however, and you will soon discover that Lord Rees — who died in 2006 — is a long way from being the only prominent Labourite whose good name may be tarnished by it.
For it also raises tricky questions for three of the most senior Labour figures of recent times: deputy leader Harriet Harman, former Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt, and shadow housing minister Jack Dromey, a former party treasurer and Harman’s husband.
Turn the clock back to the Seventies and this trio had strangely close links to the Paedophile Information Exchange. And the long-defunct organisation’s sudden return to the news pages may very well bring those links back to haunt them.
Harman, Hewitt and Dromey first encountered the PIE when they were cutting their political teeth as young officials in the National Council for Civil Liberties [NCCL].
This tub-thumping human rights organisation — these days known as Liberty — was far more radical than its modern equivalent, and was actively forging alliances with a host of ultra-liberal pressure groups.
One such group was the PIE. In 1975, it somehow succeeded in convincing the NCCL to grant it official ‘affiliate’ status.
The move was a signal victory for radical Left-wing activists, who had for years lobbied for more ‘enlightened’ attitudes towards sex between adults and children.
It was also, of course, a PR coup for those who sought to promote paedophilia.
‘The PIE somehow managed to convince feminists and the gay rights lobby that they had shared values and that we all belonged in the same club,’ recalls one feminist writer whose magazine was lobbied for support by the PIE after the Exchange won NCCL affiliation.
‘Anyone who spoke out against them feared being called a “homophobe”, which in Left-wing circles at the time was about the biggest insult anyone could throw at you. So they were invited into the liberal establishment.’
A PIE ‘information’ leaflet published at the time, called Paedophilia: Some Questions And Answers, shows how the organisation had managed to ally its cause to the gay rights movement.
‘Homosexuals are now widely regarded as ordinary, healthy people — a minority, but no more “ill” than the minority who are left-handed,’ it read. ‘There is no reason why paedophilia should not win similar acceptance.’
The NCCL — then under the chairmanship of Henry Hodge, the Left-wing solicitor who would go on to marry Labour MP Margaret Hodge — appears to have bought this argument hook, line and sinker.
‘The PIE was also being picketed by the National Front, so a lot of people also supported them on the basis that our enemy’s enemy had to be our friend,’ says the writer. ‘It seems terrifyingly simplistic now, obviously, but that was the political context.’
Over the ensuing years, the NCCL — which had Hewitt as its General Secretary from 1974-83 — provided valuable support to the paedophile lobby as it pursued a string of legal and political campaigns designed to advance its twisted agenda.
In 1975, for example, the NCCL conference was addressed by the PIE chairman, Keith Hose. Delegates passed a motion declaring that ‘awareness and acceptance of the sexuality of children is an essential part of the liberation of the young homosexual’.
In 1976, with Jack Dromey on its executive (he served from 1970-79), the NCCL filed a submission to a parliamentary committee claiming that a proposed Bill to protect children from sex abusers would lead to ‘damaging and absurd prosecutions’.
‘Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage,’ it read. ‘The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage.’
The statement might have been cut-and-pasted from the propaganda book of the Paedophile Information Exchange.
Two years later, in 1978, Harriet Harman, then a newly qualified solicitor, became the NCCL’s legal officer. She promptly wrote its official response to Parliament’s Protection of Children Bill, which sought to ban child pornography.
Her letter claimed that such a law would ‘increase censorship’, and argued that a pornographic picture of a naked child should not be considered indecent unless it could be proven that the subject had suffered.
‘Our amendment [to the proposed law] places the onus of proof on the prosecution to show that the child was actually harmed,’ she wrote.
Such statements, from officials in what was (and is) a respected human rights organisation, may go some way towards explaining how the Labour-run Home Office of the era might have allowed public grants to be directed towards the PIE.
The NCCL presided over by Harman, Hewitt, Hodge and Dromey had, after all, helped foster an environment where woolly liberalism trumped child protection.
To many on the Left, promoting the ‘rights’ of paedophiles came to be regarded as a legitimate act of political subversion.
Sources close to the Home Office investigation, which was announced this week, say the whistle-blower who sparked it first came forward in the late Seventies. However, his concerns were ignored by officials working for Labour Home Secretary Merlyn Rees.
Article continues via link....
I have heard rumours for years now of former Labour minister Harperson and her links to these sort of sick and twisted cultural marxist points of view and it looks like it's all coming out now.
Anyone who knows anything about the radical left and cultural marxism knows that it's a goal - and always has been - for them to completely twist the morality of society and destroy institutions such as the married family, the Church, the traditional family and norms such as the idea that you don't have sex with children. This will be laughed off of course, but this was common practice in the communist USSR - and just think how much our sexual morality has changed since the 1960s. They're winning.
The gay rights campaigner, Peter Tatchell, has long been arguing for the age of consent to be lowered to 14. So don't think that this is an issue that died off in the 1970s, indeed he's been arguing for the age of consent to be lowered via repeats calls in the Guardian newspaper since 1997 - http://www.theguardian.com/comment/story/0,3604,530504,00.html
It's time these people were exposed for the sick ideologically twisted weirdos they really are. If anything to my mind, the age of consent should be raised to 18.
Thoughts?