Daily Mail at it again - Sir Edward Heath

[Vimana.]

Why would an attempt to expose Heath be "a cloak to protect against further potential claims of systemic about in high places"? The story is just a load of nonsense which might sell a few more newspapers and might put a few bob in the pockets of some liars and fantasists.


..

.

I thought I'd been clear there with the notion: "If this comes to nothing, then there would be very little appetite for pursuing any further revelations involving politicians (etc) thereafter would there?"

i.e. there are so many incredulous stories flying about in our lives these days that - should some genuinely ludicrous event be uncovered - then it may likely just appear to be just another crazy, crazy story dreamt up by crazies.
Not just upon this subject. Every-bloody-where.

If this whopper of an 'on-high paedophilia' story is shown to be apparent bollocks (whether is it or isn't) and gets dashed upon the rocks - with many left reeling - then who will believe the next mind-blowing case? And who would dare run with it? Would the public even care by then?

As for your (or your MB persona's) notion that Savile was likely 'a bit hard done by', and your stated belief that "most" people will lie for money. ... Good grief...