Monday, 12 October 2015

The Overactive Imagination of Simon Danczuk

by Les May
IF you want to know what 'The Establishment' really is and how it works, look no further than what has happened since allegations of sexual abuse of a twelve year old boy were made against the late Sir Edward Heath at the beginning of August.

On 3 August the Daily Mirror was running the story with the headline 'Sir Edward Heath child abuse claims: Alleged victim was raped by ex PM when he was just 12', complete with the obligatory photographs of Heath with Cyril Smith and Heath with Jimmy Savile.
Simon Danczuk was quoted as saying:
'These are very serious allegations and they need to be investigated as a matter of urgency.'

In another Mirror article, he is quoted as saying:
'There have been rumours and allegations out there for some time, and I don’t say that lightly.'
Now this is a bit of a porky because in his book he is happy to make statements about child abuse by Cyril Smith being part of a paedophile ring in the absence of evidence of any kind.  Two days after the book was published in April 2014, he told the Today program:
'Had he been prosecuted, then the house of cards would have fallen, in terms of that paedophile network, and it could have brought the government down.'
Again no evidence is produced.

In July of last year, he said with reference to Geoffrey Dickens:
'I have no doubt whatsoever that Dickens was on the right trail and he caused a lot of problems for the establishment. In the early 1980s he famously gave a dossier to the then Conservative Home Secretary, Leon Brittan, giving names of paedophiles operating at the top of the British establishment. Jimmy Savile and Cyril Smith were said to be named in the 40-page dossier.'
As Danczuk never saw the so called 'dossier' he cannot know what it contained or how many pages it had, and all this is just another figment of his over active imagination, with a bit of hearsay thrown in. (Incidentally on 5 July 2014 the Mirror said it was 50 pages!)

By 5th, August, The Telegraph was running a story which cast doubt on some aspects of the story and The Guardian's Simon Jenkins was writing:
'The case against Edward Heath looks flimsy, but already the gutter is being dredged for lurid, unsubstantiated claims'.  He also wrote that the past weeks assault on Heath's reputation 'has been driven by political antipathy to Heath, by latent homophobia and by a general suspicion of people who seem to lead abnormal lives.'

In late August, Harvey Proctor 'outed' himself as a suspect and made a detailed statement about the nature of the accusations which had been made against him. This may have had some influence in shifting perceptions as what had seemed 'lurid' allegations began to look like 'ludicrous' allegations.

Five weeks after the initial claims about Heath the Daily Mail, which had been eager to serialise Danczuk's book about Cyril Smith, was writing; 'Nick: Victim or fantasist?  Rape.  Torture.  Murders'.  These were the extraordinary claims made by one man against leading Establishment figures.  Police called his story 'credible and true' but there's not a shred of evidence to back his allegations'

Then last Tuesday, a BBC Panorama programme cast serious doubt on the claims of a paedophile ring using the facilities of the Elm Street guest house, which seems to have been operated as a homosexual brothel, and on the accusations against the late Sir Leon Brittan and others.

In recent days we have had demands for an apology from Tom Watson with regard to statements he made about Brittan.  As these demands have been prominently reported in the Daily Mail there is no doubt a bit of added spice in being able to attack the Deputy Leader of the Labour party.

So in just nine weeks our print and broadcast media have at last woken up to the fact that it might be a good idea to adopt a slightly more sceptical approach to reporting allegations of child abuse.  Or
at least they have when the accusations are levelled at Establishment figures.

When Danczuk was interviewed by LBC on 10 October the accusations against Establishment figures were described as 'ludicrous', but the claims in his book about Smith being a paedophile were taken for granted as being true by the interviewers, though I doubt that either of them have actually gone to the trouble of reading it. Remember also that on 3rd, August Danczuk was quoted as saying:
'These are very serious allegations and they need to be investigated as a matter of urgency'.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist so I don't think this reflects an attempt at an Establishment 'cover up' to protect people in high places because I too think they are 'ludicrous'.  But if we are going to be asked to re-evaluate the allegations against Heath, Brittan and sundry others of the 'great and the good', should we not also re-evaluate the allegations of paedophilia against Cyril Smith and especially the claims in the Danczuk book?

Whilst no one can possibly defend what Tom Watson repeated about Leon Brittan after his death nor his attempt to pressure the Director of Public Prosecution, at least he has had the good grace to apologise for what he did say and to make an effort to explain some of his actions saying, 'I had been told of multiple allegations about Leon Brittan and I had met some of the people making those allegations at their request. I did not and could not know if they were true but I did believe their claims should be fully investigated'.

In contrast to Danczuk, Watson recognises in that last sentence that just because he was told something, he should not just assume it was true. Yet Watson is being vilified by Richard Littlejohn who calls him the 'Nonce Finder General' in the Daily Mail, whilst Danczuk, who never misses the opportunity to repeat his claims about Cyril Smith as if they had been proven to be true, seems to be immune from criticism. Perhaps the reason is that the Daily Mail paid him to serialise the book. Or is it that they consider him their 'tame' Labour MP always ready to criticise his party?

As a BBC report from November 2012 makes clear Danczuk's original intervention was with regard to 'indecent assault' by Smith who had carried out fake medical examinations and spankings of young men (not 'young boys' as Danczuk claimed) at Cambridge House hostel in the 1960s.

Although Danczuk has been happy to be seen as the person who unearthed this sordid story, in fact it was revealed in the Rochdale Alternative Paper (RAP) in May 1979 by the co-editors David Bartlett and John Walker.  Whilst these two could support their story with affidavits from six of the men indecently assaulted by Smith, Danczuk can offer nothing but assertions, and second and third hand gossip about Smith's activities after the closure of Cambridge House in the 1960s.  At least one of his claims involving a car boot load of child pornography, and Northamptonshire police looking the other way has been shown to be without foundation.

Is it not strange that the BBC can so quickly research and produce a Panorama programme casting doubt on the truth of some of the claims made against some very prominent figures, yet the organisation has been happy to offer Danczuk an option on his book about Cyril Smith being turned into a television programme?

Is it not doubly strange that even though we now know that Danczuk's former aide Matthew Baker has been accused of attempting to smear a former Labour Leader of Rochdale council with having knowledge in the 1990s of abuse in a Rochdale School, no-one has thought to question the veracity of some of the claims about abuse by Cyril Smith made in the book he co-authored with Danczuk?

What Simon Jenkins had to say about Heath can equally well be applied to Smith. Danczuk has repeatedly used Smith's actions at Cambridge House and his claims based on gossip and hearsay
against Rochdale LibDems and Nick Clegg, Smith was a homosexual, and his size and devotion to his mother no doubt made his life seem 'abnormal' to some people.

No comments: