When every article written contains crusading language directed at those beginning to pull back the cover on past CSA, you could be forgiven for imagining ( be it a little conspiratorial to think ) that there is an agenda.
When every article is then shared among gloating and fawning initiates who praise the same word use but crafted in a different format, be it cartoon satire one week or blood and gore in Vietnam symbolising an imagined witch hunt against elite the next. When Zealous writers and legal professionals talk collectively of a tawdry unpleasant spectacle, caused by morally corrupt imaginings of accusers, who have a battalion of biased press or mobs that only see life through a prism of moral depravity ( that is of course not the middle class way so we shouldn’t worry our pretty little heads ).This is the state protectors way projecting their own rapacious attitudes on people who don’t think that way at all!
Soon there’s another emotive wave of misinforming pouring and spewing from the propagandists trying to smoothly inspire sympathy for old men’s tears, how they should never have to go through this horror ( that could happen to anybody ) it really does start to appear desperate. If that doesn’t work then it’s back to accusers dancing on graves or prosecuting dead people!
Oddly that’s often when they begin to bleat that the law is somehow contravened and the only motivation is correct orchestration of law. Ludicrous, if that were a strong argument then why all the spin? Such overt power abuse.
The latest article has all the usual themes, starts as it means to go on crusade dancing on graves in its title. Then it tells us people (that’s us all) are starting to express serious concern against inquisition into child sex abuse ( not the inquiry ) play on words. Immoral crusades, insatiable appetites, tragically zealous minds fuel demonology unleashing more evil than the actual abusers so it goes on to say! Quoting all you have to do is believe you are a victim that’s all. Its embellishes a flimsy understanding of the use of English to arrive at that idea. The police enquiry asked for anyone who ‘may’ have been abused by Heath to come forward. Another mark of the desperation to discredit validity of a serious institutional abuse inquiry. Police often say please come forward if you believe you ‘may’ have evidence or ‘may’ have witnessed an event, its a common way of talking, yet it was used to twist meaning by the writers imagination, people may think they have been abused and come forward in droves. It uses this theme of imagination, as if we public are so feeble minded we could be persuaded to imagine we were abused by Heath if requested to come forward!
Then back to the usual, the critical minded person reference, anyone who reads the sordid accounts on Heath would think it was from a play, ( not Kafkaesque this time ) but the usual theme used to prompt reactionary logic and automatic response in the scoff scoff mentality, or make those readers it believed before may confuse fiction and reality into thinking what was being investigated was something from the wizard of OZ.
A tactic of calling anyone who believed the whistleblower kids testimony “evil or foolish” was employed by judge Mrs justice Pauffley recently too. I personally resent being patronised and told not to think. It stinks of Russian gulags where they kept conspiracy theorist, so misinformation would read true.
If another approach is needed, these writers then turn to an imagined voracious enemy of justice who are now somehow managing law themselves, having in just a year climbed the institutions of power to direct Stalinist courts where all havoc of unimaginable things could break loose. The safety of knowing how things are in law is now under threat, who will it be next the hunger for justice, sorry I meant to say extreme vengeance for justice is on the loose!
The moral high ground abusers themselves often use and rely on is the tone of their mantra “how very dare you suggest such a thing” probably words an establishment itself would use if one could speak.
These terrifying spectacles of institutional attitudes that in the past were directed with a silencing prejudice toward singled out vulnerable survivors that never had a chance up against such bias and defaming, now show up in writing openly disuading public belief about the scale of abuse. That is still their task. How it will look in years ahead when the scale of institutional abuse is revealed is certain, but it’s a good demonstration now of exactly how each individual survivor was targeted and made to feel like they were swallowing the disgust society felt for such crimes. Often blaming themselves with little or no outlet in a hierarchy that wanted to ‘dispel’ the truth, like the them and us witch hunt it still supports. The difference is we are not the lepers anymore and each tactical use of wording tried each day to a more educated public is looking incredibly insulting and transparent. Here is one of the many articles.