More bullshit from starmer.

You’re not very bright are you?  If Saville was committing crimes while the Labour Party was in power then the Labour government must have known about it . What is is about this statement that you are unable to comprehend ?

Repeated just for you


Now firmly nestled up with the Blairs, in 1999 the couple invited McGee and his wife Kate to Chequers, for a dinner party from hell. Not because it included Dame Judi Dench or former Celtic chairman John Reid, who were also sat around the table of the prime minister’s 16th century country manor, but because the guest of honour was who we now know as one of Britain’s most prolific paedophiles: Jimmy Savile.

The bizarre scene plays out in Creation Stories with the strange revelation that the Blairs were on very friendly terms with Savile, and that the child abuser was given pride of place at the table. Savile (played bravely by Alistair McGowan) then proceeds to sexually harass McGee’s wife in full view of everyone.

In McGee’s autobiography, serialised in The Daily Record, he says: “At dinner, Kate was between Jimmy Savile and Judi Dench. Savile started to hit on Kate, kissing his way up her arms, kissing her fingers.

“I was thinking, ‘What a dirty old man’, but at Chequers, it’s not done to break Jimmy Savile’s nose. Kate came over and said, ‘He’s a pervert’. He left her alone once she was next to me.”

He added: “There was an edge to him, a quiet menace, the threat of violence. I come from Glasgow, I can tell when someone is dangerous...I’m convinced he was a gangster.

“Why he was invited I don’t know. It was as if he was the host rather than Tony. It really shows the connection he had to the establishment.”

www.esquire.com/uk/culture/film/a35892762/creation-stories-true-story/

My late brother worked at Stoke Mandeville hospital and it was a well known fact that saville was not what he portrayed. The authorities there only kept silent because of the money he was raising for the new wing......He had the run of the place and his very own key to the mortuary.......Who would have one of those if their intensions were honourable?

Just a simple matter of deduction and logic, see2.  Something way beyond your capability .
You need to get back to your nap or you might be too sleepy for Emmerdale.

LOL....

My opinions are perfectly logical. Just because they are not the same as yours does not make them any less logically valid. I can give logical arguments for anything I believe, but a ding dong about that would require a thread all of it's own. 

Feelings are important too though because they are often felt in response to political actions or inactions and they also are the foundations of values around which logical arguments which reflect those values can cohere. My own values which are strongly felt are a great belief in fairness and social justice, a dislike of economic inequalities where these are seen to be undeserved or excessive, a desire to champion the underdogs in life, a live and let live attitude, a distaste for excessive exploitation of those who are less advantaged, a loathing for pure greed, a belief in a fair deal for everyone who does his bit when he can, a love of freedom, a loathing for racism and all other forms of bigotries, a belief in true democracy, a society where work pays and where everyone who strives in whatever way can live in reasonable comfort and security, and so on. These values inform my politics, but the actual bricks and mortar policies I believe in and champion are derived logically, using logical ideas to express my values.

There is nothing illogical or extremist about that. That you cannot understand it, and indeed seem incapable of truly understanding the logic of anyone who disagrees with you, whether from the left or right is your own narrow-minded and excessively biased failing, not everyone else's.

You see, whilst I may fervently disagree with the right, I can still understand that many of them are motivated by values too, even if they are different from mine. It is in fact hardest of all to discern values from your persuasion simply because there appears to be little your lot won't sell out on in pursuit of power. New Labour revisited offers little but soundbites and even these seem tailored to sound appealing to specific groups informed by the revelations of focus groups rather than by any more deeply held values. Those who seek power for its own sake rather than for a purpose built on values are actually I think the last kind of people we should be putting in power.