'Soham 2002' by May Ayres.

2002

 

“The difference between an outlaw and a war criminal is the difference between a paedophile and a Pederast: The paedophile is a person who thinks about sexual behaviour with children, and the Pederast does these things. He lays hands on innocent children – he penetrates them and changes their lives forever.

Being the object of a paedophile's warped attentions is a Routine feature of growing up in America – and being a victim of a Pederast's crazed 'love' is part of dying. Innocence is no longer an option. Once penetrated, the child becomes a Queer in his own mind, and that is not much different to murder.

Richard Nixon crossed that line when he began murdering foreigners in the name of “family values” - and George Bush crossed it when he sneaked into office and began killing brown-skinned children in the name of Jesus and the American people.

When Muhammad Ali declined to be drafted and forced to kill “gooks” in Vietnam he said, 'I ain't got nothing against them Viet Cong. No Cong ever called me Nigger.'

I agreed with him, according to my own personal ethics and values.

He was Right.

If we all had a dash of Muhammad Ali's eloquent courage, this country and the world would be a better place today because of it.

Okay. That's it for now. Read it and weep.... See you tomorrow, folks. You havent heard the last of me. I am the one who speaks for the spirit of freedom and decency in you. Shit. Somebody has to do it.

We have become a Nazi monster in the eyes of the whole world- a nation of bullies and bastards who would rather kill than live peacefully. We are not just Whores for power and oil, but killer whores with hate and fear in our hearts. We are human scum, and that is how history will judge us.... No redeeming social value. Just whores. Get out of our way, or we'll kill you.

Well, shit on that dumbness. George W Bush does not not speak for me or my son or my mother or my friends or the people I respect in this world. We didn't vote for these cheap, greedy little killers who speak for America today – and we will not vote for them again in 2002. Or 2004. Or ever.

Who does vote for these dishonest shitheads? Who among us can be happy and proud of having all this innocent blood on our hands? Who are these swine? These flag-sucking half wits who get fleeced and fooled by stupid little rich kids like George Bush?

They are the same ones who wanted to have Muhammad Ali locked up for refusing to kill gooks. They speak for all that is cruel and stupid and viscious in the American character. They are the racists and hate mongers among us – they are the Klu Klux Klan. I piss down the throats of these Nazis.

And I am too old to worry about whether they like it or not. Fuck them.”

Hunter S Thompson. 'Kingdom of Fear'. 2002.

In 2002 while Doctor Thompson was ruminating upon his own nation's new and shiny 'global war on terror', two schoolchildren in a sleepy rural town in England became the objects of a pederast's attention.

As the partner of the man now revealed to be the murderer of two children they had recently befriended, Maxine Carr was elevated to the status of 'the most reviled woman in Britain'.

Her crime had been that she provided an alibi for her lover in the form of a statement to the police that Ian Huntley had been with her during a time when in reality he was murdering two schoolgirls at the couple's home, while she was away visiting relatives.

The horror and disgust that this case generated in peoples hearts everywhere was cynically exploited by a nation's own tabloid press.

A campaign of fear and loathing was whipped up against Maxine Carr as she was being tried and then committed to prison to serve her sentence.

She was found guilty of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, but the jury accepted that she was a dupe rather than an accomplice, and so she was spared the consequences of a far graver conviction.

Even as her release date approached though, it was clear that she remained in danger from a public that was being daily reminded of it's need for vengeance.

This was at a time when paediatricians were being attacked on the streets of Britain by the more illiterate, confused and aggressive among us.

The British establishment attempted to diffuse a volatile situation by producing fresh charges against Maxinne Carr, this time for benefit fraud commited some eight years previously, so that she might remain safely in prison while her fate was being considered.

This appears to be an example of what Edward Snowden has recently described in NSA and GCHQ speak as 'look back', where the machinery of state power focuses upon the potential criminality of any individual by accessing their history and examining it for a felony, and then prosecuting it.

In Ms Carr's case, decisions were made and the necessary arrangements and conditions for her safe return to society were eventually established.

Her identity was changed, and while we remain uninformed of the costs of protecting her, it remains a certainty that for the rest of Maxinne Carr's life, she will have to live with the fear of being outed by our tabloid press.

The costs of providing her with anonymity and protection are drawn from the public purse, and are a direct consequence of what one ex editor of a national tabloid newspaper has described as a “model campaign”, designed for; “whipping up the kind of public hysteria guaranteed to incite misguided people to take the law into their own hands.”

This of course is the very same press which today complains about how much Maxinne Carr's protection is costing us all.

Exactly how much of this hysteria was a construct generated by an aggressive and vindictive spin machine may best be considered in the light of somebody else who has been charged with the very same offence which Maxine Carr once was.

This case has many similarities in that it also concerns the murder of a child in England, an obstruction of the police's line of enquiry,  while also occurring in the same year of 2002.

Having had his way with a fourteen year old schoolgirl whom he had just abducted, Levi Bellfield tossed her dead or dying body aside to a place where it lay for six months before being discovered.

Following the murder of Milly Dowler, her mobile phone's inbox had began to fill with text messages from concerned family members and friends.

The News of the World newspaper hacked into it and deleted these messages once the inbox had filled up, because it was looking for ways to keep the story going, and was mining the mobile phone for data.

The police who were investigating her disappearance noted that her mobile was still in use, and duly informed Milly Dowler's family of the possibilty that the young girl might still be alive.

The confusion and anxiety that her parents were enduring was now compounded by the suspicion that their daughter might have run away from home.

On May 15 2012, an ex national news editor named Rebekah Brooks appeared at Westminster Magistrates Court accused of conspiring to pervert the course of justice.

Unlike Maxinne Carr, who had faced the very same charge some ten years previously, there were no baying mobs screaming for blood outside the court where Ms Brook's committal hearings took place. 

No two minutes of hate for this ex-editor of the Sun and the News of the World.

Mainstream media coverage of Ms Brook's forthcoming trial will therefore be interesting to compare against that which was dished out against Ms Carr.

Paying attention might even lead us to conclude that large media corporations wield a substantial degree of power in deciding as to who and what matters, and what is important in our world. What in fact is a scandal and what is not. Who is a menace to society and who is not.

In 2002 when the world was being told by Western corporate media that Saddam Hussein was the personification of evil, it was not just Doctor Thompson who understood what was really happening, and what the likely outcome would be.

The fact that the Vice President's office was leaking disinformation to the US press, and then going on TV talk shows citing these very press reports to support his push to attack Iraq would only emerge later. There was however, a mountain of conflicting evidence which was being deliberately ignored by mass media at the time.

There is now little doubt that while Rebeka Brooks and others quite rightfully face trial charged with perverting the course of justice, their paymasters should also be on trial, charged with perverting the course of history into an abomination which has caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children.