Now we know that all it took for my brother Lord (Alistair) McAlpine to be exonerated as a paedophile was for the victim Steven Messham to be shown a photograph of his alleged abuser. (These are the words of Sir William McAlpine, the brother of the cousin of the man, whom it is now being suggested, was the real paedophile, whose photograph was shown to Steve Messham by the police during an investigation of child abuse.)
A friend of mine once told me how all it took to avoid being charged with a speeding offence, was a neatly folded ten pound note inside his driving licence.
Sir William made no reference whatsoever to the sexual orientation of his nephew, Jimmie McAlpine, or offered any better reason for the alleged mistake by Meesham, whom may well have forgotten the first name of his abuser, but he did in fact get the right family name, which in itself is odd, than that it was no more than a case of mistaken identity.
Jimmie McAlpine, is now dead, so it matters little should the family choose to besmirch his memory, by suggesting that he was the guilty abuser. Or is it being suggested by Sir William, that he could have told the police, had they bothered to ask, that no member of his family, would take part in such loathsome behaviour. McAlpine Inc. was at the time busily desecrating North Wales, quarrying for Slate. So apparently we no longer need Court Trials, the word of a rich Toff should suffice.
Once again the BBC is in the dock. My mind goes back to the disgraceful sacking of Greg Dyke and Andrew Gilligan, for in effect, telling the truth about the Blair Government, which is of course taboo on the BBC. After the furore had calmed down, they were both vindicated by subsequent events.
I listened to John Humphrys driving into Entwistle, the recently resigned DG, demanding whether he ever read the papers or listened to the News? I found this quite amusing coming from Humphrys, whom has never asked such a question of any politician in Government in all of his years at the Beeb. I have memories of his interview of Jonathan Sacks, the Chief Rabbi, when he was quite obviously warned to leave off Gaza. The Rabbi himself was unctuous to the point of embarrassment.
However the same question could well be asked of Sir William McAlpine, concerning his nephew, whom he employed in the Wrexham locale, is he saying he had not seen or heard any reference to the exploits of Jimmie, which were well-known to the local police? Which would account for the photo which it is now being claimed, was the actual photo, which was shown to Messham at the time and later destroyed. Did he have no curiosity whatsoever about how this mistake could have occurred? Or indeed if it was not Jimmie, who the hell was it?
When the original disclosure, concerning the behaviour of Jimmy Savile started to surface, everything was fine, the airwaves were full of it, Savile was, after all, nothing more than an awkward, inarticulate buffoon, whom had been given plum jobs which he did not merit, to the bafflement of most intelligent viewers.
The BBC, maybe unknowingly, did the right thing for the “Establishment,” when they chose to ignore it or stifle it, take your pick. However one of the commercial TV channels got a hold of it, which led on to the Blogosphere, where the real journalists lurk and hey presto! the seething filth of the Establishment was laid bare.
Thanks to little snitches like Humphrys, the people are never told the truth. For example, where was Humphrys during the Kincora Scandal, did he attempt to dig out the British paedophiles involved in that one? Where are the disclosures of the antics of Lord Mountbatten. Where is the truth of Churchill, whom was adored by the BBC and of course, the “Grocer,” Ted Heath.
Entwistle is, like Greg Dyke before him, the sacrificial lamb, being slaughtered to calm down the whole affair and put it back in the box and not on the box. The object of all this Cinema, is to make sure that nothing else concerning High Society paedophilia will be broached on the BBC. Why else would the BBC become the story, as they say, while the victims are once again being sacrificed to save the criminals.
Will the likes of Humphrys be pushing for an enquiry into the destruction of relevant evidence, which was part of the Messham accusation in the first pace. How can a satisfactory decision be made about the McAlpine role in the affair without the necessary evidence? Should not the BBC be setting up an investigative team to look into the destruction of relevant evidence, particularly as it comes hot on the heels of the Hillsborough Scandal?
We are dealing with extremely rich and powerful people, whom are well used to double-dealing in their business affairs and “Lobbying,” which is code for bribing is all part of the game. Many victims have been paid off down through the years, allowing the guilty to avoid the law. Unfortunately many of the guilty are members of the Law and Judiciary themselves.
It would appear on the surface that Entwistle was ambushed. Perhaps there is something else behind this whole load of rubbish. The BBC did not name Lord McAlpine, it is true that there are many references to him online but it is unfair to suggest that the “Newsnight” suggestion that those interested could find references there, was in some way responsible for those references being there. I would suggest that those references would have surfaced anyway.
After the sacking of Dyke, a Jew Michael Grade was put in charge, during his first Press Conference, The Jerusalem Post asked Grade whether he would be removing Orla Guerin from her post in Gaza. He said he would not, Guerin however was soon sent to Rhodesia.
The next choice, Mark Thompson, was married to a Jew, which gives him Jewish children, Thompson was a frequent visitor to Israel, he is now in line for a job with the Jewish controlled media in the US. It will be interesting to see whom will replace Entwistle.