As Max Clifford suggests Alan Clark abused two 14 year olds, we suggest that he, as a PR ambassador for the BBC’s Children in Need, should step forward and declare what he really knows
First it was Jimmy Savile and then, unsurprisingly, convicted paedophile Gary Glitter. Freddie Starr was arrested and then it was hinted that there was a senior Tory, close to Margaret Thatcher, who was another abuser. A former bishop has been arrested, the late Sir Cyril Smith MP (1928 – 2010) has been accused and this morning another man, said to be in his 60s from Bedfordshire, was also taken into custody.
The wildcard David Icke, as many of our readers know, has named various Conservatives on websites but little may realise that he and others did that years ago. When Lord McAlpine’s name hit Twitter, the BBC did nothing to dispel the rumours until they realised that the alleged victim of the “Tory paedo” hadn’t even seen a real picture of him. That allegation has now been utterly trounced after Steve Meesham issued the following statement:
“I want to offer my sincere and humble apologies to him [Lord McAlpine] and his family. After seeing a picture in the past hour of the individual concerned, this [is] not the person I identified by photograph presented to me by the police in the early 1990s, who told me the man in the photograph was Lord McAlpine.”
Today, thanks to a businessman named Ian Puddick, we share a covertly recorded YouTube clip of the “celebrity PR” Max Clifford stating that the late Alan Clark MP abused two 14 year olds. The interviewer is supposedly Dominic Carman, son of the late barrister George Carman QC (1929 – 2001), and in it Clifford admits to “creat[ing] false image[s]” and “deceiving people.” These words, to the shame of the man who utters them, precisely sum up why this current scandal keeps running.
It is time that Max Clifford and his ilk got their houses in order. To suggest that he “know[s] where everything is and where the evidence… the proof” is, but not share it with the authorities is just wrong. Max Clifford may well believe that he can protect those he represents by trading the names of others with the press, but he also became the PR ambassador for the BBC’s Children in Need in July 2011. If he really does “know” the names of child abusers, surely this alone should make him disclose this evidence willingly. If he doesn’t, shame on him.
To watch the covert YouTube video of Max Clifford, go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFYbPnk_hzA&feature=player_detailpage
To view Ian Puddick’s website, go to: http://ianpuddick.com
Transcript of Dominic Carman (supposedly) interviewing Max Clifford:
MC: No problems at all as long as they’re not interfering with little
kids. Absolutely no problems. Because I know that the truth will
destroy them, and they don’t deserve that. So I create a false image. I’m
deceiving people, I’m lying, for sure. But for me, it’s the same kind
of lie when you got to a dinner party, and your host says: ‘Did you
enjoy the meal?”, and you think: well it was awful. You say: “It was
lovely, thank you.” It’s that kind of situation.
DC: Where do you get your inspiration from? Some of it’s marvelous.
MC: From the public.
DC: Chelsea football shirt and David Mellor. The Harkess coven with Alan Clark?
MC: Again, they come to me. I don’t go to them. They come to me, and we go from there.
DC: You managed to persuade a judge: “I should, or would, have him horsewhipped” — I thought that, I always thought that was his…
MC: I think that… things I get credited with. It’s like Alan Clark. Wonderful piece in that was when she, Mrs Clark, started talking about “below stairs”. Nothing to do with me, but wonderful.
DC: Straight out of Upstairs Downstairs.
MC: Wonderful for me. You couldn’t have written the script, to make it even better and inflame it. And he enjoyed the whole thing. Alan Clark loved the whole thing. The only thing about it, you had… They made a lot of money out of it. He’d used them, so they wanted to make money out of it, they had a moan, so they did. He enjoyed it: he sold even more books. The only slightly serious side about it was he’d actually interfered with those girls from the age of fourteen.
DC: That wasn’t publicised was it?
MC: No, It didn’t come out. Because by the time the pair of them came over here, most of the time they were totally pissed, and mother and daughter were fighting each other to get on this television show. Turned into a farce and a pantomime.
DC: Must admit I never saw that. Must have been quite a combination. Extraordinary story.
MC: It was. The whole thing was. And most of the things are. What’s really going on. It’s the funniest thing, which is why it will be intriguing if Laurence and Gran, Birds of a Feather and all that? They’re doing a TV series, based on me.
DC: Oh, are they?
MC: Of course I can bring out the stories and the adventures, and just change it around, it’s all fiction…
DC: Who will play you?
MC: Possibly Adam Faith.
DC: He’s a good friend of yours, isn’t he?
MC: Yes, been mates since 1958. In fact, he was here earlier on. That’s all in the melting pot, it’s up to them. But that could be funny. That then could give me the perfect scenario to bring out the truth. People wouldn’t know it to be the truth. You move it around, it’s not a politician, it’s a pop star. What happened is exactly… people would think: ” I can’t believe that. No way.” I’ve said: I’ll never write the book, I’ll write the funny stories one day. Because I don’t want to harm, it’s never been my nature.
DC: And there’s the defamation risk?
MC: No, that’s easy for me because I’ve got all the evidence. I’m the one who’s hidden it from the world. I know where everything is and where the evidence… the proof is.
DC: It’s not stored in the cupboard?
MC: No, it’s a long, long way from here, I can promise you. You can see my point. That’s why I have such a good relationship with the people I work with. Because ten, twenty, thirty years go by and no-one in the world knows. I could have retired on one of these things, whether it was…whoever, any of the people.