You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.

Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Attitudes & Opinions arrow The Enablers - Part Two
The Enablers - Part Two PDF Print E-mail
Monday, 29 July 2019
Allow me to expand.

Times change. Organisations need to change with them but often lag behind and sometimes become supportive of crimes - with the best intentions, based on times gone by.

Example - give women the vote. Of course. Obvious. But it took fighting to get there. However, now it has become that there should be more women MPs and Prime Ministers. Not necessarily. Only if they deserve it, as individuals. But gender preference has taken over. Insane though understandable.

Back in the Sixties, being gay was illegal; a crime. Underage sex was also illegal but, wrongly, because of the ludicrous anti-gay laws, it was generally ignored. That was why so many groupies existed; 12 year old fans who wanted to have sex with handsome rock stars. And it went on, smiled at and nodded through by society, the general attitude being "that's life".

The main reason that stopped (as gay sex slowly became legal) was because girls, getting pregnant by their spotty teenage boyfriends, started working out that paternity would be better if a star was named Dad. More money. Child support. Groupies capitalised.

As society clamped down on that crime (often linked to blackmail) and things like DNA came in, other crimes emerged to take its place (always does).

Police and charities and the CPS had to grow to cope with the adapted new areas of crime and, like all organisations, the bigger they were, the slower they were to adapt.

And corruption was allowed to creep in.

So you get police, lagging behind, failing to protect the vulnerable (Milly Dowler, Breck Bednar, the kid who jumped in front of a train in Surrey, being bullied) and not only concentrating on easier crimes (historical sex claims - which require no evidence or work) but even, disastrously, assisting and encouraging such crimes ("credible and true").

And charities either slipped into similar activity or, sometimes, actually concealed crimes.

Let me provide an example. Suppose someone is an abuser. They set up a charity pretending to support victims of abuse. Which also, of course, provides a stream of potential victims from the sympathetic staff. "Oh how terrible. Let's pop upstairs for a cup of tea and some gentle cuddles and support".

And if or when such behaviour is brought to the attention of police, instead of spotting the signs of corruption, hearing excuses which, often, reflect those made by real abusers (learned through the years) "not my fault; she pushed me into it; she was far bigger and stronger than me; I was drunk and taken advantage of" - are convinced that charity bosses, accused of the very crimes they pretend to be fighting, must be honest and decent and proceed no further (thus allowing more abuse to continue).

Which is why, when I hear that a charity like the NSPCC - busily NOT protecting children who need protection, like those being bullied - gets infiltrated by a clear abuser like Carl Beech, I'm not surprised.

It just confirms everything I've suspected for twenty years.

The time has come for police, CPS, charities to be properly investigated.

< Prev   Next >