Rudd, May accused of withholding child abuse evidence ‘for national security’

When Theresa May was Home Secretary, her department was discovered to have ‘lost or destroyed‘ huge amounts of vital evidence of sexual abuse of children by Establishment figures. Her successor, Amber Rudd, has now been accused of withholding more evidence from the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) – for ‘national security reasons’.

abbott tle.png

An article by The London Economic, tweeted this afternoon by Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott, quotes Labour MP Lisa Nandy – who three weeks ago reduced Theresa May to incoherence with a question about Tory whips’ cover-up of sexual harassment and abuse allegations – alleging that Rudd,

told me that some papers would be withheld from the Cyril Smith inquiry for national security reasons

There are no ‘national security reasons’ in the world big enough to justify yet another Tory cover-up of the abuse of our children by Establisment figures.

If Nandy’s allegation proves to be correct, Rudd and her boss/predecessor May must resign – and preferably face investigation for potential criminal charges.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

17 responses to “Rudd, May accused of withholding child abuse evidence ‘for national security’

  1. I ask what is national security in practice? it appears to be security of the British establishment and wealthy vested interests from scandal and transparent and open investigation.

    Like

    • ‘National security’ is to (westminster/royal/judiciary/clerical/military) nonces what ‘Commercial sensitivity’ is to westminster,/corporate/oligarchal fraudsters.

      The elitists think us plebs are happy enough with the odd(ball) obscure/retired ‘celebrity’ pervert being thrown under the bus every now & then.

      May they burn in hottest hell. And those who cover for them.

      Like

      • Are those interests separate these days? Lobbying and other mechanisms such as vested interest funded think tanks and advisors driving policy is endemic in Westminster, evidenced in one way by the revolving door culture where ex MPs and ministers move into banking and corporate positions and high ranking people from private vested interest entities are appointed to influential positions in the public sector.

        It appears to me that during the neoliberal era of cross party ‘privatise the world’ doctrine, our government and public sector and the influential wealthy private banking and corporate sectors have become too close and the economy and people are suffering from the policies, complicated laws and siphoning of public funds into private sector and tax havens that has resulted,

        Like

  2. Don’t worry, I am sure Mr Higerson will get his trusty binoculars out,
    find the evidence and report the crime.

    Like

  3. Another subversion of National Security Act 2014, which allows closed court procedures and withholding of documents, if deemed by the state to be in the ‘interests of national security’, interpreted as interests of the state ?

    Like

  4. Pingback: Rudd, May accused of withholding child abuse evidence ‘for national security’ | Jaffer's blog·

  5. The Tories have a long and consistent history on this

    EG
    On 23/02/2015 the conservatives voted down an amendment that would have exempted historic child abuse evidence from the ‘Official Secrets Act’

    The Solicitor General assured us in parliament that we could trust them to not hide evidence of child abuse.

    HANSARD 23/02/2015 column 86
    “I assure the hon. Member for Bassetlaw that the Government are committed to assisting Justice Goddard’s inquiry and all other inquiries into child abuse. We are satisfied that the Official Secrets Act is not, will not, and should not be a bar to evidence being provided, but I am grateful to him for raising that important issue.”
    https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm150223/debtext/150223-0003.htm

    Like

  6. Pingback: Rudd, May accused of withholding child abuse evidence ‘for national security’ | Hercules space·

  7. Pingback: Rudd, May accused of withholding child abuse evidence ‘for national security’ – paulh121·

  8. Pingback: Tories killed measure to stop Official Secrets Act blocking child abuse evidence | The SKWAWKBOX·

  9. If “National Security” prevents child abusers being prosecuted there must be the threat that if prosecuted they would reveal damaging secrets – which implies they’re either members of the security services or very high up the political food chain.
    And that they’re traitors of course…

    Like

  10. Not national security, TM’s personal problem. Her father is implicated in the enquiry. She’s been covering it up for years. Exposé is available on Google.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s