Thursday, 9 October 2014

Labour Politicians And Child Sex - Its Not A Scandal Its Progressive..............From Daniel Thomas

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)

No comments: