David Beckham

please explain who in the uk has protected any high profile peado? and who in the Royal family has committed a serious sexual offence? I assume you mean Andrew who was accused of sleeping with a 17 year old? i'm not sure that counts as a 'serious sexual offence' mate, considering that she was to old for him to be a peado??
Just Google Westminster Child Abuse scandal.
 
Andrew was ***ing a 17 yr old trafficked girl, and seemed happy to pay out a lot of money to silence the victim, why?

I would also add in 1966 the year we hosted and won the world cup it was a criminal and jailable offence to be gay.

And considering England was been around since the 10th century and Qatar/UAE has existed 51 years, I would say give them a break.

How they and the rest of the UAE have moved forward is simply incredible. As said yesterday we could learn so much from them, our culture/Nation is falling apart at the seams.
Qatar and the UAE are not the same country anymore than England and Belgium are.

Just making this point as you say “they and the rest of the UAE”. We must be sure not to think each country is the same. The UAE tends to be slightly more welcoming and tolerant.
 
Ergh that was shown to be a disgraceful pack of lies that the useless incompetent Metropolitan police have been rightly totally discredited.
Not totally discredited.
Here is an extract from the enquiry conclusion .

It is clear that there have been significant failures by Westminster institutions in their dealing with, and confrontation of, allegations of child sexual abuse. This has included not recognising it, turning a blind eye to it, actively shielding and protecting perpetrators, and covering up allegations of child sexual abuse.

3. Even though we did not find evidence of an organised Westminster paedophile network, the lasting effect on victims of sexual abuse by individual abusers linked to Westminster has been profound. And it has been compounded by institutional complacency about child sexual abuse and indifference to the plight of victims. We found, in particular, that institutions regularly put their own reputations or political interests before child protection.
 
Not totally discredited.
Here is an extract from the enquiry conclusion .

It is clear that there have been significant failures by Westminster institutions in their dealing with, and confrontation of, allegations of child sexual abuse. This has included not recognising it, turning a blind eye to it, actively shielding and protecting perpetrators, and covering up allegations of child sexual abuse.

3. Even though we did not find evidence of an organised Westminster paedophile network, the lasting effect on victims of sexual abuse by individual abusers linked to Westminster has been profound. And it has been compounded by institutional complacency about child sexual abuse and indifference to the plight of victims. We found, in particular, that institutions regularly put their own reputations or political interests before child protection.
Oh please, have you read what you posted ?
They didn't find ANY evidence but the effect on the victims was profound !!!
The person who LIED was sent to prison. People, decent people, died before their names were cleared. It is a total stain on our society that people were desperate to believe the allegations just because it involved politicians.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.