Baby P: Child Abuse, Social Services, and socialist boroughs. This is quite interesting in a macabre and sinister way. Guns and children. Let’s smell some rats.
(Here’s what we are gong to say tomorrow, about Baby P.) This is what’s commonly and Stalinistically called: “a leak”.
I don’t quite know how far to come out in the open and risk enemy fire, here. But I am sort of intrigued in a Sherlock-Holmsian way, you know, sort of, by the seemingly endless trail of poor wretched children, mostly from inner cities and under the care of Stalinist New Labour Soviets boroughs, who seem to be left to die, by “Social Services” while “under their observation”. The news only gets out after the poor child’s terrible death at the hands of a violent male or some other feckless “carer”. there was the Victoria Climbié business some years ago, and now this, from Obnoxio, but also reported on Guido.
I decided not to pick it up as the issues are not strictly theoretical-Libertarian, but I do begin to smell a rat, and, er ….. and see it floating in the air.
Could it be that a regime of draconian State “Child Protection” (and State-child-databasing) is being engendered (and by whom?) through a series of “regulated and allowed” high-profile cases of the death of a small child, in which the “Social services” are instructed actually NOT TO intervene until it’s too late?
Are the “pretty children” who occur from time to time in these scenarios, (who of course will need to be saved immediately) being farmed off quickly somewhere (and by whom, and for whom?) which is why we never see any?
Or hear about them?
And why the poor dead ones have been those few who were really in the soup beforehand? And about whose deaths “lessons can be learned”?
Is this rather like the Dunblane business and guns?