[pmachinery]

You mean the Establishment allowed its own police to investigate crimes by members of the Establishment and it turned out that accusers against the Establishment are the real bad ones and Establishment figures are all just innocent old war heroes?

My word, who could have predicted that twist?

It's the easiest, and most obvious, thing in the world for a regime to kill a scandal or exposure of a conspiracy by poisoning the well with outrageous and easily exposed claims by easily discredited accusers.

[Veen]

A masterful exhibition of reasoning! Let me see if I follow:

Premise 1) If there was a pedophile conspiracy, the conspirators would try to poison the well with easily discredited witnesses.

Premise 2) The only evidence of a pedophile conspiracy comes from a single completely discredited witness.

Conclusion) Therefore, the pedophile conspiracy definitely happened.

[chordalkeyboard]

> Premise 2) The only evidence of a pedophile conspiracy comes from a single completely discredited witness.

This is an artifact of selective perception and contradicted by both evidence and the public record.

[pmachinery]

As I follow it, you're the one arguing it definitely didn't happen, based on one discredited witness, when there's evidence going back decades of abuse by political, military and intelligence figures in children's homes across Britain and Northern Ireland, and cover ups going all the way to the Prime Minister.

And what's the alternative to 1? That the Establishment commits suicide by allowing investigations capable of destroying (all public faith and confidence in) the Establishment? I'd love to know why that would ever happen.