Paedophile Information Exchange List
Discussion
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq62dp092nzo
It's shocking that a party like this existed in the UK, and that some of their members may have contact with children. I think parents would have a right to know if (for example) teachers were members.
It's shocking that a party like this existed in the UK, and that some of their members may have contact with children. I think parents would have a right to know if (for example) teachers were members.
Pebbles167 said:
Article says some climbed to be on that list by association from another group, ie: pro-homosexual rights.
You'd have to look at it case by case and do more digging before beginning a witch hunt.
In addition I seem to remember that PIE members aimed to be law abiding, which is probably why the article says there is no evidence of any surviving members being abusers.You'd have to look at it case by case and do more digging before beginning a witch hunt.
I know it seems (and seemed) a very odd position, as if would be burglars were demanding that breaking into houses was legalised, before they started doung it..
Pebbles167 said:
Article says some climbed to be on that list by association from another group, ie: pro-homosexual rights.
You'd have to look at it case by case and do more digging before beginning a witch hunt.
I knew someone from school who was in later years allegedly a member of PIE. He joined for the above reason - gay rights. He had apparently no interest in children whatsoever, sexual or otherwise. A founder of Pride in Edinburgh and eccentric, to say the least! John Hein. You'd have to look at it case by case and do more digging before beginning a witch hunt.
matchmaker said:
Pebbles167 said:
Article says some climbed to be on that list by association from another group, ie: pro-homosexual rights.
You'd have to look at it case by case and do more digging before beginning a witch hunt.
I knew someone from school who was in later years allegedly a member of PIE. He joined for the above reason - gay rights. He had apparently no interest in children whatsoever, sexual or otherwise. A founder of Pride in Edinburgh and eccentric, to say the least! John Hein. You'd have to look at it case by case and do more digging before beginning a witch hunt.
Ffs it was this sort of s
t that made people think gay men were all ill etc. If he joined PIE he is of questionable integrity to say the least.Test for this would you join any group with pedophile in it's name that did not also include hunt kill burn main said persons
Gecko1978 said:
matchmaker said:
Pebbles167 said:
Article says some climbed to be on that list by association from another group, ie: pro-homosexual rights.
You'd have to look at it case by case and do more digging before beginning a witch hunt.
I knew someone from school who was in later years allegedly a member of PIE. He joined for the above reason - gay rights. He had apparently no interest in children whatsoever, sexual or otherwise. A founder of Pride in Edinburgh and eccentric, to say the least! John Hein. You'd have to look at it case by case and do more digging before beginning a witch hunt.
Ffs it was this sort of s
t that made people think gay men were all ill etc. If he joined PIE he is of questionable integrity to say the least.Test for this would you join any group with pedophile in it's name that did not also include hunt kill burn main said persons
Harriet Harman should never have had the career she did given her intertwining with this organisation. Using gay rights and equality in age of consent to wriggle her way out of the shame exacerbated just how disgusting this episode was. The suggestion that decriminalising indecent images was to allow folks on the beach to take photos of their kids etc without repercussion was utterly risible. That the BBC article doesn't mention Harman once is hardly surprising.
You have to see this in context.
1960s the pill and decriminalisation of homosexuality
1970s Equal Pay Act and Race Relations Act.
Things were changing fast but despite the legislation these groups still encountered discrimination and campaigned together.
The PIE rather cleverly insinuated themselves amongst well meaning but naive progressives who included Harriet Harman and Patricia Hewitt. The perfectly reasonable debates about nature consent and age of consent (there was a mismatch between gay and straight at the time) were exploited by the nonces for nefarious purposes.
I'd like to think the world has moved on though I think there's modern parallel of this story in the hitching of gender identity to the (phenomenologically distinct) wagon of gay rights which quite a few in the gay community would prefer was unravelled.
I've got more respect for people who are well meaning, make mistakes, learn, move on and make a contribution to public life than those who hatch out of an egg with a full portfolio of reactionary prejudice.
1960s the pill and decriminalisation of homosexuality
1970s Equal Pay Act and Race Relations Act.
Things were changing fast but despite the legislation these groups still encountered discrimination and campaigned together.
The PIE rather cleverly insinuated themselves amongst well meaning but naive progressives who included Harriet Harman and Patricia Hewitt. The perfectly reasonable debates about nature consent and age of consent (there was a mismatch between gay and straight at the time) were exploited by the nonces for nefarious purposes.
I'd like to think the world has moved on though I think there's modern parallel of this story in the hitching of gender identity to the (phenomenologically distinct) wagon of gay rights which quite a few in the gay community would prefer was unravelled.
I've got more respect for people who are well meaning, make mistakes, learn, move on and make a contribution to public life than those who hatch out of an egg with a full portfolio of reactionary prejudice.
Edited by oddman on Wednesday 8th January 16:30
Getragdogleg said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: You know sometimes you read an article and you just don't know where to even start around processing it 
The stars have aligned and I agree with you.In the same way today's incautious paedophiles are caught by their online activity, yesterday's incautious and brazen paedophiles signed up to PIE and the information fell into the hands of police.
oddman said:
Getragdogleg said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: You know sometimes you read an article and you just don't know where to even start around processing it
The stars have aligned and I agree with you.In the same way today's incautious paedophiles are caught by their online activity, yesterday's incautious and brazen paedophiles signed up to PIE and the information fell into the hands of police.
FFS.
Getragdogleg said:
oddman said:
Getragdogleg said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: You know sometimes you read an article and you just don't know where to even start around processing it
The stars have aligned and I agree with you.In the same way today's incautious paedophiles are caught by their online activity, yesterday's incautious and brazen paedophiles signed up to PIE and the information fell into the hands of police.
FFS.
oddman said:
You have to see this in context.
1960s the pill and decriminalisation of homosexuality
1970s Equal Pay Act and Race Relations Act.
Things were changing fast but despite the legislation these groups still encountered discrimination and campaigned together.
The PIE rather cleverly insinuated themselves amongst well meaning but naive progressives who included Harriet Harman and Patricia Hewitt. The perfectly reasonable debates about nature consent and age of consent (there was a mismatch between gay and straight at the time) were exploited by the nonces for nefarious purposes.
I'd like to think the world has moved on though I think there's modern parallel of this story in the hitching of gender identity to the (phenomenologically distinct) wagon of gay rights which quite a few in the gay community would prefer was unravelled.
I've got more respect for people who are well meaning, make mistakes, learn, move on and make a contribution to public life than those who hatch out of an egg with a full portfolio of reactionary prejudice.
Again, WTAF.1960s the pill and decriminalisation of homosexuality
1970s Equal Pay Act and Race Relations Act.
Things were changing fast but despite the legislation these groups still encountered discrimination and campaigned together.
The PIE rather cleverly insinuated themselves amongst well meaning but naive progressives who included Harriet Harman and Patricia Hewitt. The perfectly reasonable debates about nature consent and age of consent (there was a mismatch between gay and straight at the time) were exploited by the nonces for nefarious purposes.
I'd like to think the world has moved on though I think there's modern parallel of this story in the hitching of gender identity to the (phenomenologically distinct) wagon of gay rights which quite a few in the gay community would prefer was unravelled.
I've got more respect for people who are well meaning, make mistakes, learn, move on and make a contribution to public life than those who hatch out of an egg with a full portfolio of reactionary prejudice.
Edited by oddman on Wednesday 8th January 16:30
Sex with 4 year olds!
How naive are we talking? Because from where I'm looking I'd happily line anyone up who thought that was OK and shoot them.
And my opinion wouldn't have been any different in 1975.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff