Leftist BBC gives air time to man who raped his 8 year old daughters

**A Voice from the Mountains** · 18th March 2017 09:22

BBC is blasted for not cutting off a paedophile who called a phone-in from jail to say how his daughters ENJOYED being abused by him when they were eight

The caller was on air for nearly five minutes discussing his sex crimes
Rather than cutting him off, presenter Allan Beswick engaged in conversation
The paedophile said as well as raping his daughters he makes child porn DVDs

The BBC has been blasted for not cutting off a paedophile who rang in a phone-in to say how his eight year old daughters enjoyed being raped by him.

He rang the radio show from prison and spent nearly five minutes on air discussing his sex crimes.

The caller even spoke about how he had started to make videos of child sex on the late night BBC phone-in show.

Rather than cutting him off, the presenter Allan Beswick engaged in conversation with the man for four-and-a-half minutes during the programme, which was broadcast on March 1 on BBC Radio Manchester and BBC Radio Lancashire.

Listeners were horrified to hear the man repeat graphic details of his alleged crimes and argue DVDs of ‘child sex’ should be supplied to adults to prevent them abusing children.

The paedophile said: 'Both my daughters enjoyed sex with me when they were eight years of age, with full consent and knowledge of their mother.

'I've now progressed to making DVDs of child sex and I argue very strongly that I'm doing a public service.

'There are a lot of professional people paying good money to watch a DVD of children having sex.'

At one point a flustered Beswick said: 'I'm glad to hear it.'

But eventually the 68-year-old presenter got rid of the caller by saying: 'You're vile, get off.'

The BBC Trust, who launched an immediate investigation after the incident, released a report yesterday stating the broadcast breached editorial guidelines and was ‘a most serious error of judgement’.

The report by the BBC’s editorial standard’s committee said: ‘Trustees were deeply troubled by the fact that the caller had been allowed on air in the first place.’

They added it was considered to be in breach of guidelines ‘irrespective of whether the caller was actually describing his crimes or whether it was a hoax call’.

The report found that the show’s producer, who is supposed to listen to every call, ‘became distracted’ and so only listened to the last minute of the conversation.

The next morning, the editor was informed of the incident and passed the caller’s contact details on to Greater Manchester Police.

In an apology broadcast the night after the programme was aired, Beswick said: ‘If you were listening last night, you might have heard from a caller who made a number of grossly offensive comments.

‘Now, I’ve listened back to what he said and I’ve discussed the matter with people that I trust, and I’m now convinced that I shouldn’t have allowed the call to continue.

‘I should have ended it sooner. A lot sooner. So I apologise for that. And I apologise because I think you’re entitled to expect rather better from me.’

A BBC spokesperson said: ‘This was completely unacceptable and clearly broke our strict editorial guidelines. A full, on air apology was made.

‘All those involved recognise it was wrong to broadcast such offensive content.

‘We have already reviewed and strengthened our procedures and provided additional training and supervision.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ast-radio.html

They didn't cut him off earlier because they didn't want to be seen as intolerant racist, sexist xenophobes, of course. I mean they have to honor their progressive values!

Hell, this man may have worked for the BBC in the past. Just like Jimmy Savile himself!

**Cidersomerset** · 18th March 2017 11:35

The paedophile said: 'Both my daughters enjoyed sex with me when they
were eight years of age, with full consent and knowledge of their mother.

'I've now progressed to making DVDs of child sex and I argue very strongly
that I'm doing a public service.

'There are a lot of professional people paying good money to watch
a DVD of children having sex.'

The only 'positive ' is that maybe somebody heard it that it shows how
wide spread this is and start taking the alternate community claims
of state collusion , blackmail , control covered up by power people
with dark secrets.....

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...-it----/page92

**norman** · 18th March 2017 12:13

I think something is afoot with the Beeb and Pedophilia.

I hardly ever listen to BBC Radio 4 these days, even though I record it 24/7 in case something big happens. I turned it on for half an hour a couple of weeks ago and heard something that was a bit spooky, considering what's going around about pedos these days.

I can't remember what the program was, or even if it was a news slot or what. Someone said something like this:

"should we reconsider how we deal with pedophiles?"

That struck me as a loaded meme insertion.

When the bbc airs a comment/question like that, I think they are fiddling with the matrix. Why would people high up in the bbc and government be interested in changing how we deal with pedophiles?

Beats me, I can't think why.....

**sheme** · 18th March 2017 17:23

The BBC has lost all credibility it has gone down the toilet very very fast- something is seriously wrong IMO. When you get once dignified professional presenters being disrespectful to The president of the USA sniggering and laughing like silly school children quoting ( unscripted) someone saying "Trump he is a tub of lard" you know they are run by the peado elite. I only listen to them to find out what they are choosing/ directed to ignore then that is where I choose to look else where-BBC is real FAKE news. Russia today makes for more truthful news these days.

**A Voice from the Mountains** · 18th March 2017 19:09

Posted by norman (here)
I think something is afoot with the Beeb and Pedophilia.

I hardly ever listen to BBC Radio 4 these days, even though I record it 24/7 in case something big happens. I turned it on for half an hour a couple of weeks ago and heard something that was a bit spooky, considering what's going around about pedos these days.

That's smart to record it like that. I'm glad there are people like you out there doing this for MSM, so we can keep a public record of sorts.

The Jimmy Savile scandal was enough to show that there is something really off in the BBC. And when the BBC itself was about to be "investigated" (very softly no doubt) for why it didn't act on Jimmy Savile complaints earlier, they moved the guy in charge of the BBC to the US and put him in charge of the New York Times.

How do you like that?

**Chakra** · 18th March 2017 19:20

[QUOTE=A Voice from the Mountains;1141113]

BBC is blasted for not cutting off a paedophile who called a phone-in from jail to say how his daughters ENJOYED being abused by him when they were eight

The caller was on air for nearly five minutes discussing his sex crimes
Rather than cutting him off, presenter Allan Beswick engaged in conversation
The paedophile said as well as raping his daughters he makes child porn DVDs

Hell, this man may have worked for the BBC in the past. Just like Jimmy Savile himself!

So the only thing we have to go by is that they claim he called from jail. We don't actually know for a fact that is the case.
It might have caused them more grief to hang up the call. Just in case that they were trying to trace the call. Keeping him on the air was the best way to keep him on the line, in that he could have been calling from an old phone line and they needed that time.

The thing that's not right is the claim he is? making or did? make DVDs.

'I've now progressed to making DVDs of child sex and I argue very strongly that I'm doing a public service.

**Cidersomerset** · 18th March 2017 20:24

BBC radio host allowed 'paedophile prisoner' to defend sex abuse on air

By Andrew Cheetham on 18 March 2017 GMT
D.Icke Headline page....

In a damning ruling, the Trust’s editorial standards committee said the
programme was a serious breach of BBC guidelines - on harm and
offence, reporting crime, and protecting the victims of sexual offences.

“Trustees were deeply troubled by this incident, which they considered
showed a grave lack of judgement by the presenter and a serious failure
to follow the programme’s protocols.”

read more...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...ply-troubling/

**DeDukshyn** · 18th March 2017 20:41

So ... you took a non-politically motivated story, added ta derogatory "Leftist" descriptor to the title of your post (where it did not exist at all in original content - this isn't a copy / paste thing), and made a politically motivated comment as to create "reasons" for the actions of that twit from the BBC, and pretty much smeared a large group of individuals - liberal minded people, and tried to group them in an ideology that only a "leftist" could do such a thing because they are afraid to not do it? The presenter made the decisions himself, apparently. I do expect better from my fellow avalonians.

I find it hard to believe some of us are still so suckered into this left / right wing trap that we actually "pump up" the divide and conquer strategies ourselves where none existed in the original content ... but c'est la vie.

**A Voice from the Mountains** · 18th March 2017 20:46

The BBC is obviously leftist. Everything they do is politically motivated. You think this call was an accident?

Next you will tell me that "right" and "wrong" and "good" and "evil" are false dichotomies too. Conservative politicians are certainly severely compromised too but the underlying ideological difference is night and day.

A true conservative, a champion of traditional family values, would never put up with this garbage for 5 minutes and you know it.

**DeDukshyn** · 18th March 2017 21:38

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)
The BBC is obviously leftist. Everything they do is politically motivated. You think this call was an accident?

Next you will tell me that "right" and "wrong" and "good" and "evil" are false dichotomies too. Conservative politicians are certainly severely compromised too but the underlying ideological difference is night and day.
...

My issue is that you added potentially inflammatory politically charged words to the article where none existed. All the politically charged elements to this story were ones you added - both in the title and in your comments. I don't disagree that BBC is likely more left leaning, but in order to not be sucked into that divide and conquer strategy we need to stop painting pictures of "leftist" and "rightist" and (although not here) terms like "lib-tard" and "contard". They do nothing but add to the divide and conquer strategies the elite want you to use against your fellow humans. It is their control mechanism -- not ours.

Was it inappropriate for this presenter to allow the conversation to go on for five minutes? Probably - I don't know, nor will pretend to know his reasoning. You claim that this happened only because he is a "leftist" ... well I've seen similar inappropriateness, like someone getting shot live on the news with my kids watching. Fox News, a right leaning station, is notorious for airing inappropriate crap. So is this really a "left - right" article? Story? Problem? Or did you just attempt to turn it into one?

I'd say that with both stations like Fox news and I'll assume also the BBC that this type of thing happens because it is sensationalism at its best -- and that gives ratings, and that keeps the "owners" happy, particularly when other people in turn enhance that sensationalism for politician reasons, which in turn keeps the owners "owners" happy.

Do you not think that at the very top of power, there is no "left / right" to them? It is a tool that they wield for exactly the purpose of further ensnaring benefits of one of the oldest conquer strategies in the book. Stop playing their game - everyone only loses at this game and our true adversaries only win.

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)
... A true conservative, a champion of traditional family values, would never put up with this garbage for 5 minutes and you know it.

And what ... a "true liberal" gathers all the kids around to enjoy stories of pedophilia every night? What on earth are you thinking? Are you implying that liberal minded people are responsible for pedophilia and conservative minded people have to fight the liberals to stop it? I am really at a loss to understand your perspective. But if you believe the former outright, than I suppose the added politically charged comments would make sense ... to you.

**Franny** · 18th March 2017 22:02

I so strongly agree with this. We can do better than fall for the divide and rule social programming.

...but in order to not be sucked into that divide and conquer strategy we need to stop painting pictures of "leftist" and "rightist" and (although not here) terms like "lib-tard" and "contard". They do nothing but add to the divide and conquer strategies the elite want you to use against your fellow humans. It is their control mechanism -- not ours.

Years ago I worked in the Washington DC area as an IT professional. One of my colleagues, Mike, had a friend that worked as a Congressional aid of some sort...it's been awhile so I don't recall his position. This friend stressed to Mike and he to us that at the top they were apolitical and laughed at the masses that bought into the right/left social engineering strategy. He pointed out that parties and platform are for public consumption, to make it appear to the public as if there was an actual difference. A few crumbs and loaves are tossed here and there to keep up the illusion -- and that is all it is.

He said the only thing at the top is: power, The Agenda and money.

**A Voice from the Mountains** · 18th March 2017 22:54

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)
My issue is that you added potentially inflammatory politically charged words to the article were none existed.

Why does pointing out that the BBC is leftist make it inflammatory for you? You don't think people on the far left are beyond criticism do you? So why should it be necessary to temper all criticism of the left with equal doses of criticism of the right? It has the effect of dismissing anything critical coming out of modern liberalism, which is a huge problem.

When Bush and Blair were in office I was just as critical of the neo-cons, though even the "right" in Britain is still on the left compared to the US. Actually the two systems really aren't even compatible because we have never been openly socialist and neither have ever been a monarchy. But I hope you get my point, which is that I'm not a fan of either side of the political establishment.

That doesn't mean I can't call a spade a spade. There is no reason for you to be triggered by the word "leftist" any more than by the word "neo-con."

I don't disagree that BBC is likely more left leaning, but in order to not be sucked into that divide and conquer strategy we need to stop painting pictures of "leftist" and "rightist" and (although not here) terms like "lib-tard" and "contard". They do nothing but add to the divide and conquer strategies the elite want you to use against your fellow humans. It is their control mechanism -- not ours.

I'm already way ahead of you on this brother. We gutted our establishment right-wing neo-cons when we put Trump in office. We just have to clean out Congress now. Britain is a different story.

Leftists at this point are far more dangerous than the crumbling neo-con establishment, for the same reason that China is a much more oppressive nation than Russia. The radical left has all the same negative qualities of the neo-cons except they are much more socially oppressive using political correctness to stifle free speech and simultaneously normalize absurd stuff like this "I raped my 8 year old daughters and they loved it" filth that they allowed to go on for nearly 5 minutes.

If you try to mention the fact that Islamic immigrants in Britain abuse women and children at an extremely disproportionate rate, the BBC hosts will flip out and shut you down in an instant. But then if you come on and talk about how great it was to rape your daughter they'll give you 5 minutes.

Was it inappropriate for this presenter to allow the conversation to go on for five minutes? Probably - I don't know

If it's so hard for you to decide if this was a mistake or not, help me understand how this could have been appropriate then. Explain to me why even giving this guy 30 seconds to say this stuff would have been appropriate.

Fox News, a right leaning station, is notorious for airing inappropriate crap. So is this really a "left - right" article? Story? Problem? Or did you just attempt to turn it into one?

For better or worse, whether you like it or not (and I have a feeling you don't like it), right-wingers get their morality much more from the Bible than liberals do, at least in the United States where we have Fox News as you mention. Biblical morality may be contradictory and used to justify terrible things (mainly religious conflicts), but one thing you won't see conservatives here giving air time is apologetics for incest and pedophilia. The left has a monopoly on that, because they have no foundation for their morality. If you have any examples to prove me wrong on that I'd be happy to see them, but I don't believe you'll find them.

That's not to say that people professing to be conservative don't engage in it, because again, the right is just as eat up in corruption as the left. The difference is in ideology. Corruption aside, the actual ideology of the conservative right in the US is based on traditional western values rooted in Christianity. That is my point.

Do you not think that at the very top of power, there is no "left / right" to them? It is a tool that they wield for exactly the purpose of further ensnaring benefits of one of the oldest conquer strategies in the book. Stop playing their game - everyone only loses at this game and our true adversaries only win.

You're barking up the wrong tree by trying to hammer me with this stuff. Both sides are corrupt. You're preaching to the choir. Again, I was a huge critic of Bush.

The ideologies are not equally perverse. That is my point.

Traditional Republicanism was the ideology of our founding fathers, that most people today don't seem to have read or understand. The modern left is founded on Marxism. We can have a big discussion on this if you want.

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)
... A true conservative, a champion of traditional family values, would never put up with this garbage for 5 minutes and you know it.

And what ... a "true liberal" gathers all the kids around to enjoy stories of pedophilia every night?

Liberals have arbitrary morals and are extremely secular. I don't care personally care what people do in their bedrooms, but there is a reason that the left pushed the legalization of gay marriage first. That reason is, again, because they have arbitrary morality.

There are some free online college/university courses at coursera.org if you want to know more about the foundations of western civilization and how far detached modern liberals have become from that.

**A Voice from the Mountains** · 18th March 2017 23:01

Posted by latte (here)
He pointed out that parties and platform are for public consumption, to make it appear to the public as if there was an actual difference. A few crumbs and loaves are tossed here and there to keep up the illusion -- and that is all it is.

I 100% understand this level of things, but what you are not getting is the philosophical level of the actual political ideologies. Corrupt politicians and political systems aside, there is a long history and tradition of both ideologies and they are different from each other. Even many "sheeple" realize that much.

Right-wingers and left-wingers don't actually promote the same policies in public, even if they end up voting for the same things (which you don't see happening now in the US, btw).

If you don't understand the fundamental differences in the ideologies of a Republican and a Marxist then it wouldn't matter whether or not it was all a puppet show, because you wouldn't know what ideas you would actually be voting for anyway.

**Franny** · 18th March 2017 23:17

I understand what you're saying quite well. However, ultimately, those at the top are the ones who decide what the policies are and what they vote into law. That's my point.

**DeDukshyn** · 18th March 2017 23:22

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)