The Second Death Of Leon Brittan

VennerRoad By VennerRoad, 27th Jan 2015 | Follow this author | RSS Feed | Short URL http://nut.bz/9brbajdx/
Posted in Wikinut>News>Crime

Leon Brittan did not win fame in life as a politician, but he is set to win notoriety in death.

The Second Death Of Leon Brittan

Former Home Secretary Leon Brittan died January 21, now it is open season on him.

In England, the dead cannot be libelled, and rightly so. Nevertheless, there is something crass and indecent about those lining up to trash his reputation, including people who should know better. One of these is the Labour MP and former Cabinet Minister Tom Watson, who claims there is credible evidence that Brittan was not only a rapist but a murderer. Ironically, a century ago, another politician named Tom Watson was at the centre of a similar controversy, this was in the American Deep South. The big difference though is that in that case a murder had indeed been committed, and a prominent local businessman convicted of it, convicted on evidence that was a lot more compelling than those who today insist that Leo M. Frank was the victim of a miscarriage of justice.

Much of the reporting of the Leon Brittan affair has been misleading, while reports in the alternative media have been frenzied, and frankly at times ludicrous. According to Sky News, the police are continuing to investigate a claim that Leon Brittan raped a woman at his home in 1967. This claim was made in 2012, and would be laughable if both once beloved family entertainer Rolf Harris and former media manipulator Max Clifford were not currently serving gaol sentences based on similar evidence, ie the confabulations and false memories of demented women, or simply evil witches in the case of some accusers.

As with the Bill Cosby allegations in the US - a detailed analysis of which can be found here - the volume of allegations is impressive; we are told not only that Brittan raped this then young woman but that he sodomised young boys, appeared in a video at a “child abuse” party, and that he was involved in at least one murder of a boy. As well as Tom Watson, these allegations have been made by inter alia David Icke. If you were to accuse Icke of beating his dog, he’d be outraged, yet on no evidence worthy of the name he trashes the reputations of the living as well as the dead.

Even more incredible, the police are said to have found one informant, someone called Nick, to be credible, when he makes allegations of sexual abuse and murder against the high and mighty of the Establishment. Can such a cover-up really exist?

Let’s look at a few genuine conspiracies that failed:

Senior Coalition Government politician Chris Huhne who conspired with his wife to hide a trivial driving offence. The result was that after she dragged her friend (and potential future High Court judge) Constance Briscoe into this ludicrous affair, they all three ended up behind bars. Okay, Mr Huhne is a wealthy man, and his fiery Greek ex-wife has bounced back, but did they get away with it?

Jeffrey Archer who sued a newspaper for libel - to defend a reputation he did not deserve - and was sent to gaol for four years more than a decade on.

Watergate! That one word should be sufficient.

And others have fallen from grace just as spectacularly as then President of the United States Richard Nixon. In Australia, senior judge Marcus Einfeld ended up behind bars as the result of a trivial driving offence, and the web of lies he spun trying to extricate himself from it, while back in the UK no less a person than the Director of Public Prosecutions was forced to resign after being caught kerb-crawling in a London red light district. Whether or not it is true that three people can keep a secret only if two of them are dead, the allegations against Leon Brittan, if true, would require a conspiracy of colossal proportions. Where is the evidence for any of this? All we have is words. Talk. Rumour. Innuendo. Nonsense. And not least, madness.

There is too the little matter of the dossier presented to Brittan (then Home Secretary) in 1983 by the MP Geoffrey Dickens. This has gone missing, and the conspiracy crowd cry...conspiracy! If it has been deliberately misplaced or destroyed there is probably a good reason for that, namely it contained only insane ravings that no one in his right mind would take seriously, and which were better buried rather than taint innocent lives. Geoffrey Dickens was, to put it mildly, a true believer. On YouTube you will find videos in which he endorses claims of Satanic abuse on a colossal scale. Although he died in 1995, he would surely have endorsed all this nonsense about Leon Brittan, including the claim that he may have been murdered to shut him up. Just in case he decided to break the silence after a thirty year hiatus.

There are currently no fewer than three police investigations into the allegations made by Tom Watson and others relating to this mythical Westminster paedophile ring, and to date there has been one conviction, of a former teacher, Charles Napier (pictured); Napier is the half-brother of a Conservative MP, which is as close as this grand conspiracy is likely to get to the Establishment.

While there are indeed such things as paedophile rings, and while on occasion there have been individuals and small groups of people who have engaged in bizarre practices that involved murdering people in the name of Satan, the idea that such people have managed to infiltrate the corridors of power, abusing and murdering children with impunity, which would require the active connivance of the police and the security services, is beyond fantasy, it is insane.

Unless the police are able shortly to unearth some tangible evidence - like a child’s body - or the (obviously non-existent) film of Leon Brittan doing unspeakable things to underage boys at Elm Guest House, Dolphin Square or wherever, this whole insane investigation should be wound down and binned. Any convictions for historical offences obtained now are likely not only to be relatively minor but to be secured at the cost of solving current crimes and taking dangerous predators off the street. The police have only limited resources, and it does not make sense to pursue possible offences, especially when the perpetrators may be long dead, while there are real rapes and murders that need to be solved. Not only that, the lives of too many innocent celebrities have already been trashed by the scandalous Operation Yewtree, the same way the lives of ordinary people, including teachers and care workers, were trashed by trawling operations like Operation Goldfinch, and best not to mention the Cleveland or Orkney Satanic abuse scares.

Now that the chickens of this mad feeding frenzy have come home to roost at the heart of the Establishment, perhaps our leaders will recognise the necessity of a statute of limitations for all cases of an historical nature, ie those in which allegations are first made years or decades down the line. In the meantime, Leon Brittan is set to suffer the same fate as both Jimmy Savile and Cyril Smith, albeit on a smaller scale, and without a certain odious ambulance-chasing law firm making a killing from processing the claims of self-styled survivors.

Tags

Charles Napier, Elm Guest House, Geoffrey Dickens, Historical Sexual Abuse, Leon Brittan, Rape, Satanic Abuse, Tom Watson

Meet the author

author avatar VennerRoad
Independent researcher based in South East London.

Share this page

moderator Mark Gordon Brown moderated this page.
If you have any complaints about this content, please let us know

Comments

author avatar Fern Mc Costigan
27th Jan 2015 (#)

Interesting post!

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
29th Jan 2015 (#)

I don't believe in covering up crimes that have actually taken place, and it it surely important that all relevant evidence is brought to light and properly examined.

We simply don't know if Leon Brittan had something to hide, and it is far too soon to "wind down" something that has hardly started.

There are simply too many unanswered questions as things stand. We do know that Cyril Smith did horrible things and got away with them, so why not other MPs?

Incidentally, Chris Huhne is a Liberal Democrat, not a Conservative - he was the MP for the constituency where my sister lives.

Reply to this comment

author avatar VennerRoad
29th Jan 2015 (#)

There is absolutely zero evidence of Leon Brittan either raping any woman or being involved in organised child abuse; these are lies, pure and simple. After the Savile allegations took off, all manner of demented people (men as well as women) crawled out of the woodwork and some out of the gutter to accuse all and sundry. Some woman then decided to take a shot at Leon Brittan accusing him of raping her 45 years ago. At one time she would have been laughed out of the police station or even charged with wasting police time; that is what should have happened here. Now we are seeing even men of exemplary character being thrown to the wolves by radical feminists, corrupt lawyers and self-styled child protection experts in a modern Salem witch-hunt. Perhaps you'll wake up to that when they come for you.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
29th Jan 2015 (#)

My understanding of the situation was that Brittan may have suppressed - or even destroyed - the Dickens dossier when it reached him.

His motive for so doing is unlikely to have been personal - but there is no absolute proof of this one way or the other - but more likely that he sought to protect people named in the dossier who were close to him as friends or colleagues.

It is too soon to say definitely that all the accusations are lies - unless you happen to know something that the rest of us do not!

Reply to this comment

author avatar VennerRoad
29th Jan 2015 (#)

Absolute rubbish. Check out some of the stuff Dickens was raving about. He was in bed with Dianne Core (not literally); she is a total nutter. These are all lies and fantasies. Cover-ups and conspiracies don't operate like this. If you are still willing to believe, run his name and those of people like Hollie Greig, Ben Fellows and Bill Maloney through Youtube. These people are off the planet, but they are dangerous because their fantasies ruin innocent lives.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
29th Jan 2015 (#)

I would like to know how you can be so certain as to say that everything Dickens may have said was "absolute rubbish". If that was the case, why was the dossier not allowed to see the light of day?

I agree with you that wild and unproven fantasies are dangerous, but I would like to see some official pronouncement that states that there is absolutely nothing in any of the accusations that is worth investigating, and what the reasons might be for taking that line.

The Hollie Greig case is a disturbing one, but what needs to emerge is the truth, and that is not best served by an orgy of mutual accusation-slinging, which seems to be all we are getting at present.

Reply to this comment

author avatar VennerRoad
29th Jan 2015 (#)

If you take the Hollie Greig case seriously, you have obviously done little or no research on it. There is now enough information in the public domain to give a proper assessment. Basically, Greig's mother was and is deranged, and Robert Green jumped on the bandwagon. You will find documentation on this including a report of the court case against Green and, on YouTube, interviews with two of the women they accused. You really need to check out Dickens for yourself, and you will not be impressed.

Reply to this comment

author avatar Retired
29th Jan 2015 (#)

If what you say is the truth, then I'll certainly accept it. Likewise, if Dickens can be shown to have invented everything in his dossier, I will accept that too.

However, we do know that people in high places have done some despicable things - I need only mention Cyril Smith in this context - and people need to be assured that the truth has come out about all the other accusations, some of which could be true unless proved otherwise.

I also agree that newspapers of a certain kind love to print lurid stories, which in turn encourages people of a certain mindset to invent stories that might get an audience.

However, if only one such story in a hundred turns out to be true, it is very important that it is not dismissed simply because of the other 99.

The Leon Brittan connection is still murky, however, simply because he could not give a satisfactory explanation of what he had done with the Dickens dossier. If it was all rubbish, an investigation would soon have revealed it to be so. The fact that no investigation took place is what gives people concern, and is the reason why Brittan's reputation has been tarnished

Reply to this comment

Add a comment
Username
Can't login?
Password