Peter Mandelson: why isn’t Keir Starmer already investigating his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell?
One of the reasons This Writer appealed for readers to sign a petition against Tony Blair receiving a knighthood was his association with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, who procured children for him to sexually abuse.
Blair’s name appears in Epstein and Maxwell’s infamous black book – once.
Blair lieutenant – and now an advisor to current Labour leader Keir Starmer – Peter Mandelson has 10 entries in it.
Starmer seems to think there’s nothing amiss with this.
So there’s a petition calling for Mandelson’s Labour Party membership to be suspended while an independent investigation into the extent of his involvement with Epstein and Maxwell’s sex trafficking, paedophilia and sexual blackmail enterprise takes place.
Visit the petition page to see seven reasons Mandelson’s behaviour should be investigated.
Accused and accuser: Prince Andrew (left) is said to have sexually abused the woman now known as Virginia Giuffre (right) while she was still a child – and is doing everything he can to avoid facing trial for it. This in itself casts suspicion on his claims of innocence. And it may be bringing the UK Monarchy into disrepute for protecting him.
Let’s start this article with the important question: is anybody tracking down the perverts who had sex with underage girls provided by Ghislaine Maxwell?
It’s all very well saying that the procurer has been convicted so the route via which these vile creatures gratify their disgusting desires has been cut off – but it only means they will find other ways.
Police – in America – are going through the now-infamous black book kept by Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, but they are treating the associates listed within merely as possible witnesses, rather than as possible suspects (until and unless evidence is found to justify criminal proceedings).
That may come as a relief to people like Keir Starmer’s recently-appointed henchman Peter Mandelson, who has 10 entries in the book (suggesting that he wanted the paedophile pair to be able to get hold of him wherever he may have been), and newly-to-be-knighted Tony Blair, who has an entry in the book himself.
It may not be so much of a comfort to Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, who appears in the book 16 times and is accused of child sex offences.
And the repercussions may undermine the foundations of the UK Monarchy – an institution that has survived for almost a thousand years. That’s plenty of time to fall into filth and corruption – and to hide it by abusing the privileges that come with the highest position in the land.
It’s being reported that Andrew has just begun to show concern that his alleged crimes may bring down the Monarchy. It seems he had not previously spared a thought for the fact that being involved with people in a paedophile ring (whether he was a part of it or not) might bring that ancient institution into disrepute.
In This Writer’s opinion, the acts that have really put the future of the Monarchy in question are his attempts at evasion – his refusal to travel to America to face charges is not the behaviour we would expect of an innocent man; I understand he has claimed that his accuser should not be permitted to continue with her case because she now lives in Australia, not the USA (but that should have nothing to do with it; this is an international sex crime case and it seems logical to base the prosecution in the country where the offence was allegedly committed); and it seems he has also put forward a claim to have been in a UK branch of Pizza Express with one of his daughters at the time of the alleged offence – although nobody has come forward to corroborate the claim (and members of the public would certainly remember, even from 21 years ago, if a Royal walked into their local fast food joint).
His continued attempts to avoid justice are hugely harmful to the UK Monarchy because it makes the Queen complicit in the alleged crimes; Andrew is seen as having committed them (whether he really did or not is immaterial to this part of it) and then gone running behind his mother’s skirt tails for protection from the consequences.
Bear in mind that both Epstein and Maxwell, along with another sex offender – the US film producer Harvey Weinstein, were photographed at the 18th birthday celebrations of Andrew’s daughter, Princess Beatrice. It seems that Royalty and sex crime are well-entwined.
In his evasion attempts, Andrew is hugely aided by the UK’s mass media organisations – particularly the BBC. Maxwell was the daughter of a newspaper magnate (who was himself disgraced after he fell off his yacht and died, when it was found that he had been stealing from the Mirror Group’s pension fund). This means she is well-known to many of the journalists who have been writing about her – and their work has reflected their own sympathy for this child abuser.
The hypocrisy enough to send you reeling: the same people who took glee in claiming that former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn should take responsibility for his brother Piers advocating criminal damage of Covid-19 vaccine-supporting MPs’ offices have conspicuously failed to suggest that Boris Johnson should take similar responsibility for his sister Rachel’s article, It’s hard not to pity Ghislaine Maxwell.
This Writer has absolutely no pity for anybody who uses children to gratify their (or other people’s) perverse sexual desires.
The BBC’s editorial position has also been characterised as calling for us to bless this poor lost soul – with manipulative choices of verbiage. So when referring to the girls or children who were abused in Maxwell’s paedo ring, the BBC describes them as “underage women”.
That’s sickening.
And there is worse. Coverage refers to Maxwell by her first name, as though she’s our friend; her victims are described as “accusers”; after previous reports of similar crimes referred to “grooming gangs”, there is no such attempt to whip up outrage here (quite the opposite); and there are no calls to interrogate participants in the abuse (going back to the black book).
The BBC went too far when it booked people who are known to be sympathetic to Maxwell, to comment on the case in its news programmes.
The backlash, after Epstein’s former lawyer Alan Dershowitz – himself now accused of child sex crimes – appeared on BBC bulletins, giving a sympathetic view of Maxwell and insisting on both his own and Andrew’s innocence, was huge.
The corporation’s bosses had to issue a statement admitting that Dershowitz’s appearance had not met BBC editorial standards, and that the matter would be investigated to find out “how it happened”.
The statement led to what some have described as “the Twitter burn of the year” – from the Sunday Sport‘s Twitter feed: “That’s putting it mildly. It didn’t even meet OUR editorial standards.”
Of course we all know how it happened. Dershowitz was booked by a BBC booking agent who – knowing that he is himself a suspect – contacted him or his agent/manager and asked to interview him. They then falsely presented him as an independent legal expert. It was deliberate – and deliberately misleading.
And now the BBC has lost any right to claim that its news coverage is impartial in any way, as people across the UK are accurately accusing it of deliberately protecting the rich and privileged at the expense of the poor and vulnerable.
I say accurately because, having admitted its fault over Dershowitz, the BBC compounded the mistake by booking Maxwell’s brother Ian, who was interviewed about his sister the very next day.
Of course he made a big fuss about claiming she was innocent – on a news platform that is watched and believed by 70 per cent of the UK’s population. Think about that.
A former BBC political news editor, Rob Burley, has claimed that failures like the Dershowitz booking are results of budget cuts at the corporation – to which critics responded by pointing out that such errors exclusively benefit the UK’s rich and powerful elite. They quoted a current saying: “It’s not a bug; it’s a feature” of the BBC.
Even former BBC reporters like Adil Ray have railed against the corporation’s biased coverage. In a tweet, he stated: “When I filmed a doc on the sexual exploitation of young girls by some Pakistani men it would not have been acceptable to hear a defence from their brothers. Why is it ok now?”
The answer is obvious: families of abusers who travel on buses, instead of luxury cars or yachts, simply don’t get that platform. And the question isn’t why the former don’t – it’s why the latter do.
And let’s face it – the BBC doesn’t have a good record of identifying, accusing and denouncing child sex offenders. Look at the way Jimmy Savile was protected for decades. He was a close friend of former prime minister Margaret Thatcher, of course.
Sadly, this deference to the rich and powerful isn’t limited to the BBC and Rachel Johnson – whose bias towards Maxwell is likely to be due to the fact that the child sex procurer was at Balliol College, Oxford, with her own brother: UK prime minister Boris Johnson.
See how the people in this group link up and protect each other?
Returning to Andrew, it’s one reason we should be grateful that proceedings against him are taking place in the United States; it is unlikely that the UK’s compromised legal system would ever have even accused him. It didn’t accuse Savile during his lifetime, after all.
And let’s remember that Metropolitan police commissioner Cressida Dick is another alumnus of Balliol College, Oxford, who may well have known Maxwell there at some point – either as a student or as a former student.
I’m sure I don’t have to tell you how accusations against this fellow Balliol alumnus may have been taken by a Dick police administration, because we have the evidence of the Christmas 2020 parties that allegedly involved fellow Balliol alumnus Boris Johnson to help us.
That’s right: if Ghislaine Maxwell had been accused in the UK, the police would probably have responded by saying they don’t investigate incidents from more than a year ago.
Below please find material from Twitter that may provide valuable further information:
Ghislaine Maxwell deserves to go to prison, but where the fuck are all the men who actually had sex with these girls???
Now that Ghislaine Maxwell has been found guilty of selling children for sexual abuse, don’t you think we should investigate whom she sold the children to?
I don’t want to hear another word about how tragic her life is, only want to hear about the devastation caused to victims
Julian Assange faces 175 years in a Supermax prison for exposing the crimes of the powerful, but Ghislaine Maxwell only faces "up to" 65 years in prison for running an international child-sex trafficking ring for the global elite?
Three sex offenders, including two paedophiles, attending the 18th birthday party of some Princess at Windsor Castle. We’ve really no idea how big this cess-pit is. https://t.co/oTI1HPNFy4
Interesting how people were screaming at Jeremy Corbyn for the actions of his brother Piers, are now silent on that fact that Boris Johnson’s sister literally wrote an article “It's Hard Not to Pity Ghislaine Maxwell"
For anyone in any doubt about whom the @BBC serve the #Maxwell case exposes its role in defending the establishment. It’s not independent it’s not neutral it’s a tool of the powerful to influence how we think.
The framing of this case & the language used @BBC is a reminder of how the narrative is being controlled. First names of the guilty; accusers not victims; no "grooming gang" outrage; no drive to interrogate those who participated; sympathetic spokespeople. https://t.co/vpc9vXsjde
If only the TV and radio stations showing compassion to convicted child trafficker #Maxwell would direct that care and understanding to the survivors we would live in a better world.
As well as being one of the accused, this is the guy @BBCNews went to for first reaction to Ghislane Maxwell’s guilty verdict. pic.twitter.com/trpa7RP4KJ
Not satisfied with giving Alan Derschowitz a platform to attack Desmond Tutu as an "anti-Semite" and a "bigot" the BBC two days later give him a platform to defend Ghislaine Maxwell… POST CONVICTION!!!! Horrendous from the beeb
Even longstanding critics of the BBC were shocked by its decision to interview Alan Dershowitz following the Ghislaine Maxwell verdict. What does this tell us about the state of the organisation? (Thread) pic.twitter.com/gvfBWikhsY
Ian Maxwell is on r4Today defending convicted sex trafficker #ghislanemaxwell just now. Can you imagine the #bbc giving the family of a convicted Pakistani grooming gang leader a similar platform to defend a relative?!
Why is @BBC giving airtime to the Maxwell family on their main news bulletin? Ghislaine was found guilty of sex trafficking. The Maxwell family cannot accept the verdict. Families of abusers who travel on buses, not luxury cars or yachts, do not get this platform.
Why is the BBC now running an interview with Ghislaine Maxwell’s brother, pleading her innocence, on its main bulletin on R4? Would they do that for any other child sex offender found guilty in a court of law?
So yesterday the BBC was forced to issue an apology for inviting Alan Dershowitz to “analyse” Ghislaine Maxwell’s conviction as he clearly wasn’t an independent voice.
Yet today they’ve literally handed a primetime platform to *her own brother* to back her up!
BBC & others running interview by brother of convicted #ghislanemaxwell, claiming her innocence. In 2011, when I filmed a doc on the sexual exploitation of young girls by some Pakistani men it would not have been acceptable to hear a defence from their brothers. Why is it ok now?
Does anyone remember the relatives of the Rochdale child abusers being given prime BBC slots after a guilty verdict to protest their innocence and undermine the testimonies of the victims? https://t.co/WiRqDLxbJD
Confess I'm genuinely surprised by the ongoing tone of the BBC's coverage of Maxwell's conviction. Mostly because it's hard to see who benefits. My best reading, it's not conspiratorial, it's a reflection of the deeply embedded deference to power & wealth across the organisation.
Interesting how quiet royal correspondents are. Or could it be, they are waiting for instructions from their publication owners, who in turn are waiting for the Palace to instruct their next move?
Of course the BBC News framing of Ghislaine Maxwell is appalling, they've been doing it for decades to protect the establishment, they lied about Scottish Independence, they lied about Jeremy Corbyn, etc Analyse any BBC News story and it's twisted to protect the powers that be.
Memo to @BBCNews : You can be rich, expensively educated and a criminal. It seems that you find that hard to believe, but trust me, just open your eyes and you will find the evidence all around you. And some are even convicted, however unlikely you think that to be.
It is surely now time for all those politicians and other public figures that have visited one of Epstein’s or Maxwells homes to be investigated for possible involvement in child sexual abuse. Can we now start to put together a list of U.K. residents known to be associated.
I fear that were Maxwell truly looking for a deal by giving evidence against Epstein's rich and powerful friends, she would suddenly discover she too had committed suicide.https://t.co/7zqyMTm326
The conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell is welcomed. I will state I believe after 3 years work on this case, I believe she was the chief and the former taxi driver Epstein the functionary. I now call on the Met Police to reopen their 1994 investigation into her activities in London.
I don't say this lightly, but I have grave doubts about whether the UK law enforcement and justice systems would have brought down two powerful figures like Epstein and Maxwell.
— Dorset Eye (Independent Citizen Community Media) (@dorset_eye) December 31, 2021
It’s amazing and shocking to think that after the disastrous impact of the Jimmy Saville cover up on the BBC, they’re still going with the “let’s be soft on famous paedos” strategy. pic.twitter.com/VltDlePCMP
We need to know who is paying Prince Andrew’s legal fees
I suspect it is the British people
It is hard to think of a more despicable use of our money than to help a very rich man in his attempt to escape justice from credible allegations of child rape
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Knighted: But whether you believe he’s a war criminal over Iraq, Tony Blair is an associate of sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell and child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Why should he be honoured by the Queen with that in his back pocket?
The so-called Establishment is rubbing our collective nose in its filth.
It is a matter of days since Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted on five charges of sex trafficking.
But now Tony Blair, who is listed as an associate of Maxwell and the late child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in their now-infamous black book, is to be knighted in the New Year Honours list.
The former Labour leader was nominated by the current Labour leader, Sir Keir Starmer. See how it works?
Nobody is (yet) saying any of the people named in the black book are guilty of any offences, but police in the United States have made it clear that they will press charges if they discover evidence that supports such a move.
Knowing that, This Writer would say it is unreasonable to nominate somebody listed in that book for an honour because, if investigations develop in that direction in the future, they may bring that system into disrepute.
Oh – who am I trying to kid, “may bring the system into disrepute”? It’s already deeply disreputable!
Look at some other knights of the realm – current and former:
Not everyone who gets a knighthood is admirable
Sir Jimmy Saville Sir Rolf Harris Sir Robert Mugabe Sir Nicolae Ceacescu Sir Philip Green Sir Cyril Smith Sir So Many More Dishonourables
Blair’s nomination for a knighthood is also deeply offensive because he took the UK into a war with Iraq that killed a million people, on the basis of fabricated evidence because the US government didn’t think attacking Afghanistan (the source of the 911 terrorist attack) would excite the public imagination enough.
I’ll add a few tweets illustrating the above points at the bottom of this piece.
For now, I want to end by letting you know that you can do something about this.
There’s a petition calling for Blair’s knighthood to be annulled, on the Change.org website.
The text states: “Tony Blair caused irreparable damage to both the constitution of the United Kingdom and to the very fabric of the nation’s society. He was personally responsible for causing the death of countless innocent, civilian lives and servicemen in various conflicts. For this alone he should be held accountable for war crimes.
“Tony Blair is the least deserving person of any public honour, particularly anything awarded by Her Majesty the Queen.”
The trouble is, with the Establishment grinding our faces into its dirt, it’s unlikely to pay any attention to a few signatures in an online petition.
But it’s better than doing nothing. So I still recommend signing the petition now.
If you need encouragement, have a look at these:
Sir Keir Starmer. Sir Tony Blair. The establishment loves giving knighthoods to their puppets who infiltrate the Labour Party and neutralise the working class to protect the status quo.
— Rachael Swindon Merrilly On High 🎄 (@Rachael_Swindon) December 31, 2021
As if the New Year's Honours List couldn't be cheapened any further than it already has been, Tony Blair becoming Sir Blood-Stained of Sedgefield plumbs hitherto untold depths…
The words Sir Tony Blair should be met with the sound of a nation collectively vomiting every time you hear it uttered and a double volley if the media refer to him making one of his rare interventions when they do.
2022 starts with Tony Blair in the honours list – please G-d may it end with him in the dock, while all the oppressed and exploited and exhausted live free xxxx
Tony Blair lied the country into an illegal war that killed a million people.
Today, he's been knighted.
Julian Assange exposed US war crimes in the aforementioned war.
Today, he's languishing in Belmarsh and facing extradition to the US and life behind bars.
Happy New Year.
— Frank Owen's Legendary Paintbrush 🟨🟥🥀🇵🇸 (@WarmongerHodges) January 1, 2022
Jeremy Corbyn would neither be offered a knighthood nor accept one. That tells you everything you need to know about Britain's corrupt establishment and Corbyn's disregard for it.
— Frank Owen's Legendary Paintbrush 🟨🟥🥀🇵🇸 (@WarmongerHodges) January 1, 2022
Now that there is no frontline politician seeking to challenge or change the establishment it is clear to see that the establishment is getting brazen. The elite are now flaunting the fact that the system is rigged.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
