Elizabeth Butler-Sloss – a cynically appointed and most improper, Establishment Scumbuster!

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts comprehensively!

By Stanley Collymore

 

In Britain the law is generally seen as an a*s by Establishment figures and the privileged elites and therefore contemptuously treated as a needless inconvenience by them. Hardly surprising then that they conspiratorially and pertinaciously ensure that we have donkeys administering it. Furthermore, the disturbing news - from any objective perspective �" that Elizabeth Butler-Sloss is to head the enquiry supposedly tasked with looking into the activities, criminal or otherwise, of a purportedly well-established Establishment paedophile ring that notoriously operated throughout Westminster and the corridors of power within Britain during the 1980s is, in my opinion, an utterly shameless, reprehensible and a most cynical move by those who appointed her with this task, and I don’t mind in the least explicitly and unapologetically saying so.

 

Elizabeth, let’s face facts, couldn’t be any more of an Establishment figure if she or anyone else for that matter essayed for her to be. She’s crucially an ex-member of the British judiciary �" itself as unrepresentative of the average British citizen or resident as one could possibly get; currently sits by political appointment rather than by voter election in the House of Lords �" even members of the patently corrupt US Senate are periodically elected by adult suffrage and can either be endorsed in or removed from office by the said electorate that put them there in the first place, not those in the House of Lords, Britain’s corresponding upper legislative chamber, and particularly the likes of Elizabeth who very much owe their status predominantly to unaccountable political patronage and accordingly reciprocate their gratitude for receiving it with unquestioning obsequiousness.

 

Additionally, Elizabeth is the sister of Michael Havers: a British Attorney General in the 1980s when this Establishment paedophile ring was in full swing, and who is known to have used his political and legal authority �" attorney generals apart from being the principal law officer in England and the UK and personally appointed by the incumbent Prime Minister, are also senior, prominent and highly influential members of both the Cabinet and government of the day �" to personally block the prosecution of paedophile and other sex abuse cases perpetrated by Establishment figures, allowing the perpetrators of these acts to get off scot-free and unjustly walk away with their so-called reputations “unblemished.” And like I said earlier Elizabeth Butler-Sloss is his sister.

 

So work out the utterly damaging repercussions of her unsuitable appointment and principal involvement as head of this mooted enquiry �" sibling loyalties aside if that’s at all possible �" for yourselves, as I’m absolutely sure that you don’t need me to do that for you even if you’ve only a modicum of commonsense to call upon as your own �" unless, of course, you’re completely brain dead!

 

Let me in the interim paint a near analogous scenario for you and suggest that a figure like Arthur Scargill was appointed with the same aplomb as those who appointed Elizabeth Butler-Sloss to carry out an official enquiry into and then authorized to propose as a result of it requisite recommendations for reforms to the British Trade Union Movement �" something that we all know, as things are in Britain, would never happen in a month of Sundays.

 

But humour me and let’s all pretend it did happen. Instantaneously we would have virulent and the most abusive condemnations of this action from these same Establishment b******s and b*****s and the fawning media pundits that drool on their every word vilifying everyone remotely connected with the Scargillesque appointment as sick, perverse, unjust, devoid of all integrity, classified as immoral and viciously painting them as sycophantically pandering to working class vested interests. No such reservations or condemnations, however, when it’s this Establishment lot who are ludicrously tasked with looking into the criminal activities of their own. And why?

 

Because they’re born to or omnipotently divined to be exceptionalist and indispensible to everything they do; something that the rest of us obviously aren’t and will never in their eyes be qualified to be. Elizabeth Butler-Sloss whether she cares to admit it or not has her own personal prejudices like the rest of us; the only difference being that in the rarefied, exceedingly narrow-minded and totally exclusive environment in which she noticeably lives, operates and ensconces herself in it’s one that’s diametrically at odds to how the vast majority of people in Britain live and work, and is like asking a Trappist Monk to hold forth on the problems of pregnancy per se or more specifically one-parenthood culture exclusively on working class council estates, something he knows absolutely nothing about or has any real interest in.

 

So think whatever you want, but it’s my firm belief that this much trumpeted enquiry forced onto the Prime Minister and Home Secretary �" that initially neither of them actually wanted�" is nothing more that a cynical sop to appease public opinion, while outwardly and fraudulently giving the impression that something is being done, when that is the last thing that either David Cameron or Theresa May want.

 

For if the opposite were the case why appoint a transparently, well-established Establishment figure to investigate people whom she either knows or additionally are friends with; those who’re still alive that is?  And when newspapers like the alleged liberal Guardian emphatically state on its front page that Elizabeth Butler-Sloss is the right person for the job, all that does is to cause me to firmly pinch my nose and hold my breath as one would, if suddenly and uncomfortably confronted with a dead and rotting dog in the road.

 

At the end of the day the Guardian though it deceitfully likes to give the impression that it’s different from the rest of the British media isn’t; and in most respects is worse than the rightwing tabloids, as they don’t make any pretence about what they really are. However, they all of them have one thing in common �" they’re deeply and sycophantically embedded with the Establishment, so why would they want to consciously destroy the goose that lays the golden eggs for these so-called journalists who have no concept of what real journalism is all about or the Fourth Estate for that matter? Compliant stenographers the lot of them!

 

What this enquiry desperately needs is not an Establishment figure to overseer it nor anyone with judicial expertise for that matter, but most definitely someone with integrity and commonsense who’ll do the job without fear or favour; and Elizabeth Butler-Sloss with her significant Establishment baggage is not the person for this task, unless it’s to spuriously given credence to what was intended all along.

 

To at best kick these so-called historic acts of paedophilia and other criminality into the long-grass or else with the fulsome help of a compliant media geared up for and quite willing to assist in hoodwinking the British public, also ensure that those criminally responsible will never be brought to book; as the professed enquiry led by Elizabeth Butler-Sloss will ultimately be nothing more than another Establishment and Westminster whitewash. Does Bloody Sunday and Hillsborough come to mind?