Was 'Kids Company' a Victim of the Westminster Paedophile Ring Cover Up?

A couple of weeks ago in the UK the media was amass with allegations of sexual abuse and financial mismanagement relating to the UK charity Kids Company founded and headed up by Camila Batmanghelidjh.

As far as i am aware the child abuse investigations are now being investigated, and rightly so; however, what the media hasn't reported so vehemently is that Camila Batmanghelidjh, who is quite an outspoken individual is now fighting back by claiming that she is the victim of a smear campaign to discredit her resulting from previous allegations she has made regarding child abuse by establishment figures.

Ministers hid abuse, says charity chief

Source:
www.thetimes.co.uk...

After having done a bit of reading into this it seems that a whole month before this 'scandal' became public knowledge she was being pressured to resign after she approached the government with a list of establishment figures involved. She also alleges that following this threats were made with regards to withdrawing her state funding, which obviously a month later, has now happened.

'I've been targeted for speaking out about child sex abuse by powerful people', claims Kids Company founder

Source: www.dailymail.co.uk...

In an interview on BBC Radio 4 she stated...

There is more that is being suppressed and some of it involving historic sexual abuse of children involving very senior members of the establishment. And some child protection police officers have come to me to say that their investigations are being squashed

Sadly, the video of this interview seems to have now been removed... Will look for another source.

Personally, i find it a bit suspicious that over a month ago she was interviewed by the times newspaper where she made these allegations and now they seem to have transpired.

a reply to: HumanPLC

Although I do believe there was/is abuse of children going on by former/present high profile figures, based on what I read the charity was mismanaged financially (no coin in the coffers to shore them up over a 'dry' period of funding for starters!) Hence the sudden closure.

And the govt. is saying the charity did get its £3M funding just the other month...despite being advised it was not value for money therfore not in the taxpayers interest etc. ...they were just so badly mismanaged it didn't last long.

I think the people blaming it on a cover up of abuse allegations are taking advantage of a sick situation and are devaluing the abused childrens claims when trying to cover their own liability for ruining the charity with such allegations.

There is a whitewash going on in Whitehall and it would not surprise me one bit if the charity going under is a direct result of the allegations made by the CEO.

If it has any substance, any substance at all, then there need to be resignations at the very top. Unfortunately though, they will go to any lengths to protect the establishment.

a reply to: HumberWarrior

As far as i am aware she has produced the email(s) to show the government/cabinet clearly knew that the money (3 mill) was going to be used to pay wages.

Im not condoning high level salaried workers in charities, i think it sucks; however she has demonstrated that the reasons given by the government were not only false, but also a deliberate lie.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

I agree... And, you know, on a side note, i think this is where these Eddie Heath allegations will be quite significant.

The way i see it is that the other, lesser members of parliament had free time for a social life and so they could have partaken in these sick activities privatley; but not the PM! At the very least he would have had protection officers with him 24/7... And that shows that there had to be some form of collaboration or cover up.

There have been communications between MI5 and the Prime Minister (Thatcher) advising that a certain cabinet member had a penchant for young boys that could very well have embarrassing consequences on the Government of the day. No mention about protecting these young children, just a note to say it could be embarrassing and/or a security breach if this was to be made public.

In other words, security services have been covering it up and Heath could well have been one of those being protected.

It's beyond many people's comprehension, simply because it is such an abhorrent act, but these people are so abhorrent and think it is a natural thing.

a reply to: HumanPLC

source please.

Not being antagonistic but genuinely interested in the details behind the soundbite driven version of events, regarding both the child abuse allegations from many many quarters, and the closure of this charity however it came about. Whether the two are one in the same is still undecided for me.

Appreciation in advance.

I sick of the media hammering kids company, they are basically working on the front lines of what Cameron once labelled Broken Britain. Working with the kids that will end up homeless or in prison, the toughest of the tough, they don't get huge sums of money and all organisations are guilty of being clumsy with finances, both private and public sector. The government has been cutting back on social services for you young people and turning it over to the charities expecting the charities and volunteers to sort out huge societal problems expecting the " Big Society"to rake on these failures in governmental public policy. One of my friends who I used to work with at the youth charity I work at got a job at kids company. She was amazing with young people and one of those people that just make things happen rather than just talking or hypothesising over solutions

I think the government and the media are just kicking kid company, because it's easy and Distracting from more serious issues closer to home

a reply to: woodwardjnr

Kid's Company started in 1996. It doesn't take too much imagination to consider that they, too, were compromised.

Just the pot calling the kettle and the kettle calling the pot.

Sort it, out guys! What a debacle. I do not trust her and I don't trust the authorities either. Still too many important untouchables alive to protect. We're stuck with this for a while I think. It is a way of bombarding and hampering any hope of a transparent investigation. Too big to handle, too hot to handle.

a reply to: woodwardjnr

Being a self referral service also contributed to the challenges of Kids Company.
Calculating budgets and numbers of service users is nigh on impossible when no child is turned away. Personally I'd be happy for such a service to get more of my taxes because the service users they dealt with either wouldn't or couldn't engage with statutory authorities.

...interesting if she did make claims of 'higher up' abuse in the last month or so though, that certainly raises some questions, suspiciously so.

a reply to: HumanPLC
No, I think the government (and the previous Blair one) got too sucked into supporting a charity with a charismatic leader who unfortunately started thinking she was in herself a celebrity. Problem with a lot of charities seems to be in managing their funds responsibly, but I know any chance to kick out at the elected government is too hard to resist for some people on ATS.

The abuse claims appear to be against people who work for the charity, so you may want to think this through a little.

a reply to: HumberWarrior
Here is the link to the article on the BBC.

But Ms Batmanghelidjh said "huge discussions" had taken place with the Cabinet Office before Kids Company decided to use part of the £3m grant to help pay its monthly wage bill.

She said an email was sent by the charity to the Cabinet Office saying the money would be needed for staff wages, but the Cabinet Office did not respond and say the money could not be used in this way.

www.bbc.co.uk...

a reply to: HumanPLC

Royal commission anyone?

Rolf Harris, Jimmy Saville, and the late PM Sir Edward Heath has been accused as well-These allegations can't be ignored. There needs to be an investigation.

On the other hand the term 'mismanagement' can be a blanket term that spans everywhere between a typo or embezzlement-PR is good at painting a picture in fifty shades of grey. But why?

Camila Batmanghelidjh has accused the Government of suppressing evidence of child abuse "involving very senior members of the establishment".
www.independent.co.uk... he-work-of-her-charity-10442429.html

a reply to: woodwardjnr

Mate, ive relinked/fixed link on this as its an important video.. It seems to have been removed from other places i have checked.

Child sex abuse by senior Establish figures is worse than we think

I believe that the problem that elements of government and civil servants are having with me is because I am very outspoken

There is more [than we know about] that is being suppressed, and some if it involves historic sexual abuse of children, involving very senior members of the establishment

Link to video interview on times website.

goo.gl...

a reply to: uncommitted

Okay, ive thought it through and i still think that anyone who, even in the smallest way, is involved with helping to cover up the activities of those who seek to harm children, who are amongst the most innocent and vulnerable in our society need bringing to justice.

Dude, many of these elected officials have done f'd up stuff to kids which is still being covered up, dont even try to justify their actions.

originally posted by: HumberWarrior
a reply to: HumanPLC

Although I do believe there was/is abuse of children going on by former/present high profile figures, based on what I read the charity was mismanaged financially (no coin in the coffers to shore them up over a 'dry' period of funding for starters!) Hence the sudden closure.

And the govt. is saying the charity did get its £3M funding just the other month...despite being advised it was not value for money therfore not in the taxpayers interest etc. ...they were just so badly mismanaged it didn't last long.

I think the people blaming it on a cover up of abuse allegations are taking advantage of a sick situation and are devaluing the abused childrens claims when trying to cover their own liability for ruining the charity with such allegations.

Yes they did get the money, through Cameron's intervention I believe, but there is a million or so left that needs to be returned.
But still, it is all a bit stinky. Let's face it this child abuse thing has been rattling on for decades now, and I include America's scandal that was squished involving Boy's Town, and children imported, the White House, Bush and Reagan.
The 'Conspiracy of Silence' documentary made jointly* by Yorkshire television, and Discovery, or Nat Geo on the same subject, that was never broadcast as far as I know, but is now on Youtube some twenty years later. Someone it seems managed to save a copy.
It's beginning to look like people won't be told everything about ALL those involved until they are well dead, or doo lally and while living evidence slowly dissipates. It's hard to know what part Camila What's her name has in all this though. One thing is pretty sure this is an international scandal.

20 minute interview on the Victoria Derbyshire show: 06 August 2015
Here: www.liarpoliticians.com...

Channel Four article with a video report, including interviews with staff at kids company and Mayor of London Boris Johnson.
www.channel4.com...

News night interviews with Camila:
6th August
17th July

a reply to: HumanPLC

cheers.

Will definitely be looking into this as deeply as I can.......even if it takes quite some time to get at info. If its there.

If there is a direct link between allegations made against the establishment by Ms Batmanghelidjh and the treatment of Kids Co. regarding funding it should be evidenceable.

Both aspects of this (allegations and charity closing suddenly) are highly emotive subjects on their own. Becoming emotionally involved can lead to a situation where detractors can easily dismiss evidence without really regarding the evidence itself.

I shall tread carefully. While being empathetic I shall also remain objective and tenacious.

I hope others follow this up in the same manner and maybe this thread could be the place where any and all evidence is placed for review.

originally posted by: HumanPLC
a reply to: uncommitted

Okay, ive thought it through and i still think that anyone who, even in the smallest way, is involved with helping to cover up the activities of those who seek to harm children, who are amongst the most innocent and vulnerable in our society need bringing to justice.

Dude, many of these elected officials have done f'd up stuff to kids which is still being covered up, dont even try to justify their actions.

Who are you referring to currently in office? It's clear there was mismanagement, the Newsnight interviews others are referring to had former residents/clients of Kids Company saying that people within the charity were abusing them. The charity received millions in funds, but couldn't pay its staff - any normal business would go bust much more quickly and without the leader being allowed to get a victim status, they may have even been prosecuted.

The head of this charity (disproportionately funded if you ask me, given it's actual coverage) is in total and complete denial about all of that - yet you believe she is credible and appear to be justifying her. How does that work? Don't you think a place to start would be questioning her fitness to actually run the charity given its funds rather than what she is now claiming?

More to the point, why is she making such claims now - some people would say that is trying to deflect any questions over her own behaviour, if she was the genuine person she claims to be, and there are valid questions, did she just take the money to keep quiet while members of her own staff abused those in their care?

Abuse against children or any vulnerable person happens at all levels in society, to think that the corridors of Whitehall are somehow more likely than an alley in (insert provincial town of your choice) are more down to bias than anything else. Where there is justifiable information or evidence then anyone, regardless of their job or position should be investigated.