|
|
Post by craig67 on May 21, 2015 12:30:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on May 21, 2015 13:12:51 GMT
The security service is likely to be MI5 but the top security service individual in the paedophile ring was in MI6(SIS)[allegedly]. I think it's pretty clear now that everything is not going to get pretty clear!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2015 13:22:35 GMT
The security service is unlikely to MI5 , unless he was being investigated for matters relating to national security , not something that seems to have occurred .
|
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on May 21, 2015 13:29:41 GMT
The security service is unlikely to MI5 , unless he was being investigated for matters relating to national security , not something that seems to have occurred . 'bisphampotter', an M.P. involved in such activity alone IS a 'national security issue'! My God, when an MI6(SIS) top officer is concerned IT DEFINATELY IS 'a national security issue'. Even General Bramall, who I think was Chief of the Defence Staff, has been interviewed? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2015 13:48:03 GMT
The security service is unlikely to MI5 , unless he was being investigated for matters relating to national security , not something that seems to have occurred . 'bisphampotter', an M.P. involved in such activity alone IS a 'national security issue'! My God, when an MI6(SIS) top officer is concerned IT DEFINATELY IS 'a national security issue'. Even General Bramall, who I think was Chief of the Defence Staff, has been interviewed? Not what I meant at all and you know it ....I was referring to national security in the sense of him being connected to " foreign " scources ....in some cases the depraved activities he was taking part in could have lead to blackmail and the like ....then it would most definitely be a security risk.....if not it does not fall within the sphere of operations that MI 5 are employed in ( or didn't ) . I'm not disputing anything else just that it may not have been MI 5 . |
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on May 21, 2015 14:01:38 GMT
'bisphampotter', an M.P. involved in such activity alone IS a 'national security issue'! My God, when an MI6(SIS) top officer is concerned IT DEFINATELY IS 'a national security issue'. Even General Bramall, who I think was Chief of the Defence Staff, has been interviewed? Not what I meant at all and you know it ....I was referring to national security in the sense of him being connected to " foreign " scources ....in some cases the depraved activities he was taking part in could have lead to blackmail and the like ....then it would most definitely be a security risk.....if not it does not fall within the sphere of operations that MI 5 are employed in ( or didn't ) . I'm not disputing anything else just that it may not have been MI 5 . As someone who was security cleared for ca.17 years to read MI6 and GCHQ material,I can categorically say you are definitely 100% wrong! Yes, the blackmail concern would be a massive concern. Another massive concern would be that the KGB and its WP foreign security services would infiltrate the paedophile network. There is evidence that the KGB used the freemasonry network to get agents promoted within the MoD. I will remind you of the 1963 Keeler, Mandy Rice-Davies scandal when call girls were sexually involved with a government minister and Communist Russia's London Defence Attache. The paedophile ring Smith was in(we believe) was as great, if not greater threat, to this country's national security than in 1963. MI5 will have been shitting bricks and I will guess they had an excellent idea of exactly what was going on. After all, it's what they exist for! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2015 14:41:21 GMT
Not what I meant at all and you know it ....I was referring to national security in the sense of him being connected to " foreign " scources ....in some cases the depraved activities he was taking part in could have lead to blackmail and the like ....then it would most definitely be a security risk.....if not it does not fall within the sphere of operations that MI 5 are employed in ( or didn't ) . I'm not disputing anything else just that it may not have been MI 5 . As someone who was security cleared for ca.17 years to read MI6 and GCHQ material,I can categorically say you are definitely 100% wrong! Yes, the blackmail concern would be a massive concern. Another massive concern would be that the KGB and its WP foreign security services would infiltrate the paedophile network. There is evidence that the KGB used the freemasonry network to get agents promoted within the MoD. I will remind you of the 1963 Keeler, Mandy Rice-Davies scandal when call girls were sexually involved with a government minister and Communist Russia's London Defence Attache. The paedophile ring Smith was in(we believe) was as great, if not greater threat, to this country's national security than in 1963. MI5 will have been shitting bricks and I will guess they had an excellent idea of exactly what was going on. After all, it's what they exist for! Fair enough.....I can't be bothered arguing the point . |
|
|
|
Post by davel on May 21, 2015 20:27:45 GMT
Cyril was also involved in the playing down of the dangers of asbestos!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2015 23:11:12 GMT
Cyril was also involved in the playing down of the dangers of asbestos! This could be because he was jealous of roofers nimbly trapeezing across crumbling tiled roofs ! Yet another despicable example of a big fat warped predatory bully who used his position to fulfill his warped sexual fantasies along with other filth. |
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on May 22, 2015 6:26:07 GMT
Cyril was also involved in the playing down of the dangers of asbestos! And legalising McDonalds! |
|
|
|
Post by davel on May 23, 2015 16:10:46 GMT
Cyril and asbestos
|
|
|
|
Post by mermaidsal on May 23, 2015 21:50:07 GMT
Could understand (if not remotely condone!) the Security Services doing a coverup for Greville Janner because he was somewhere near the centre of power in his day - but someone as marginal as Cyril Smith, who was only ever famous for being fat? He'd surely only get protection if someone a whole lot more powerful was implicated too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2015 22:26:52 GMT
Could understand (if not remotely condone!) the Security Services doing a coverup for Greville Janner because he was somewhere near the centre of power in his day - but someone as marginal as Cyril Smith, who was only ever famous for being fat? He'd surely only get protection if someone a whole lot more powerful was implicated too. Famous for being fat ? .....was he really that famous ? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2015 22:59:59 GMT
Could understand (if not remotely condone!) the Security Services doing a coverup for Greville Janner because he was somewhere near the centre of power in his day - but someone as marginal as Cyril Smith, who was only ever famous for being fat? He'd surely only get protection if someone a whole lot more powerful was implicated too. Famous for being fat ? .....was he really that famous ? Well no , he was despised in many quarters . He represented a party that was littered with security risks from Jeremy Thorpe down ( not a pun , but accurate none the less ). They were , and still are a party that chooses yellow to represent their true colours . Yellow. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2015 23:07:38 GMT
Famous for being fat ? .....was he really that famous ? Well no , he was despised in many quarters . He represented a party that was littered with security risks from Jeremy Thorpe down ( not a pun , but accurate none the less ). They were , and still are a party that chooses yellow to represent their true colours . Yellow. Yellow has never been a favourite colour of mine |
|
