GREG LANCE WATKINS OUTED

Greg Lance-Watkins Outed

Posted on 20. May, 2010 by  in Greg Lance-Watkins

Mark Daly who was critical of Robert Green and Anne Greig on Manchester Radio Online.
Ever since Mark Daly made an appearance on Manchester Radio Online with Anne Greig and Robert Green in attendance, Greg Lance-Watkins has done a volte-face on the Hollie Greig case. His current stance is astounding and after some scrutiny we can reveal that his position has more to do with anything but a true desire for justice.
For those that don’t know, Greg Lance-Watkins is the man behind the so-called “official” Hollie Greig sites hosted by Google’s “blogspot” or free blog websites. Described as an investigative journalist in some quarters, he also hosts many other blogs discussing controversial “truth” issues and has appeared in several videos available on sites such as YouTube and Google Videos. His main gripe seems to be with the European Union and he talks in public on this controversial topic.
Shortly after Daly’s controversial online radio appearance, a lengthy article appeared on the website clydesidetv.com (here). Written by Matt Quinn, the article was copied in full without permission by Lance-Watkins and posted on the “official” Hollie Greig blog. Greg used Matt Quinn’s article as a springboard to attack the sterling work done by Robert Green in bringing the Hollie Greig story to the public attention in the early part of 2010.

Greg Lance-Watkins speaking at Marlborough in September 2007
Quinn’s article was well written and made a lot of good and valid points. It missed the point in a few areas and was slightly knee-jerk in its analysis of the Daly-Green-Greig broadcast on Manchester Radio Online but the really curious fact was the way in which Greg Lance-Watkins took it and expanded on its content to further vilify the key victims in this sad tale.
The fallout was inevitable. Anne and Hollie Greig immediately withdrew their endorsement of Lance-Watkins’ blog and the title of the blog was sarcasticly amended to reflect the Greig’s revised stance. One would have thought that would be the end of the blog and that it would have been frozen at that moment in time.
On the contrary…
Mr Lance-Watkins has continued to post with increased vigour and in particular has emphasised that there is no valid evidence in the Hollie Greig story and that until there is, then there is effectively no point to the campaign. Ruffling many feathers along the way he has attacked Robert Green, Stuart Usher, and Paul Drockton in the USA.
And that is the situation in a nutshell. Some people who jumped on the Hollie’s Army Bandwagon will no doubt be disappointed or may even feel that they have somehow been duped if they believe all that Greg Lance-Watkins has to say.
But here is the surprising thing. Greg Lance-Watkins has known all about the available evidence since the story surfaced. After all, he is the one who ran the “offical” website to expose the story. He is the one who has consulted and discussed the evidence with Robert Green for many months before his sudden u-turn. If everything Lance-Watkins is saying now is true then why wasn’t he saying this months ago or last year? He certainly didn’t need to rely on Mark Daly or Matt Quinn for new information. Why has he become a turncoat?
It doesn’t make sense and if anything, something is fishy about the whole situation.
Let’s just take a look at some of the exact things Greg Lance-Watkins is saying. Critically, let’s look at his article “Seeking Justice and Valid Evidence” written on May 14, 2010 (original article here):
Here are a few quotes from that piece:
  • There is absolutely no substantive or corroborative evidence linking these individuals or the 7 NAMED victims with ANY offence against Hollie Greig.
  • Do YOU believe in the main tennet of British law – Innocent until proven guilty, a law which protects us all?
  • After 100s of hours of work by way of web sites, dictating letters, phone conversations with Anne, Hollie & Robert I have seen much paper, heard many claims but as yet have seen not one wit of compelling evidence.
  • However Robert Green has denied numerous people Justice in a criminal manner and it is a matter for those so clearly defamed (for defamed they have been unless Robert Green can provide irrefutable evidence). It is the duty of the society to restrain such individuals from further damage as he has defamed not only 18 unjustly accused so called paedophiles and 7 claimed victims.
  • He has also defamed the media, BBC, Courts, Police, Lawyers, politicians and many more.
There are many more quotes from that article as the reader can see for themselves, but the gist of the above quotes is that despite Greg Lance-Watkins’ own admission of participating in hundreds of hours of work on the case and support by creating an official website, he now claims there is not one wit of compelling evidence. He also claims that Robert Green is denying others justice and that he has clearly defamed people unless Mr Green can provide proper evidence.
This is a damning indictment on those who have courageously supported Anne and Hollie Greig.
Let’s now turn to a completely different subject involving Greg Lance-Watkins.
In a two-and-a-half hour video entitled “The New European Soviet“, Greg Lance-Watkins talks at length about everything that is wrong with the  EU, the BNP and other topics of interest. To the uninformed, Greg Lance-Watkins comes across as a very knowledgeable gentleman. His delivery and speaking skills are very persuasive and he speaks with confidence and has an air about him that will be very convincing to many people.
But as he has chosen to put the Hollie story under the microscope with a sustained campaign of self-righteousness, let’s have a look to see just how consistent Mr Greg Lance-Watkins is when trying to tell others how to act.
Here are claims made by Mr Lance-Watkins in his video recorded at Marlborough in September 2007:
  • Tony Blair was fined £50 for importuning at Bow Street Magistrates Court under the name Charles Lynton in 1983.
  • Gordon Brown spent his early years openly with under age rent boys.
  • Gordon Brown had two meetings with Thomas Hamilton.
  • Lord Robertson had a public battle with Thomas Hamilton in the street.
  • Sarah Macaulay was paid £140,000 to act as Gordon Brown’s fiance.
  • Sarah Macaulay was paid £50,000 a year to stay as his fiance.
  • Macaulay’s fees were paid for by the “Black Widow” fund set up by New Labour.
  • The Black Widow fund came out of the Robert Maxwell pension fund.
  • Brenda Dean received “payola” for not discussing the details of this pension fund.
  • The Speculative Society in Edinburgh involves all of the senior police officers in Scotland andall of the judiciary.
The reader is urged to watch the video (here) to verify the above claims made by Greg Lance-Watkins. As the video is very long, it is easiest to fast forward to about 1 hour 16 minutes to verify the above details.
Now here is the million dollar question:
Where is Mr Lance-Watkins’ evidence to substantiate any of his extremely controversial claims?
And didn’t the same man make a claim that a tenet of British law is that a man is innocent until proven guilty? If so, then has Mr Greg Lance-Watkins not defamed Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Sarah Macaulay and Brenda Dean?
Where is a shred of evidence to substantiate any of the above claims in the same way he expects Robert Green et al to supply some new (presumably bullet-proof) evidence that Hollie Greig was abused?
In the same video, Mr Lance-Watkins continues with a revisionist history lesson focusing on the Cathars who occupied the Languedoc-Roussillon area of southern France in the 12th century. He claims:
  • The early crusades (to Jerusalem) were set up by the Cathars.
  • The Cathars were done away with in the 1400s by the Papacy.
  • The Cathars were concerned with the bloodline of Christ.
  • They (he’s still talking about the Cathars) threw the Saladin out of Jerusalem.
Sadly, Mr. Greg Lance-Watkins is so far off the mark with this erroneous history lesson, his credibility is too wide of the mark to make any kind of meaningful critique of his claims. But his remarkable closing sentence after this flawed chapter of history is a classic. He says:
We digress but it does tie in with paedophilia.
Our conclusion here at HollieGreig.info is that Mr. Lance-Watkins has got some serious credibility issues as proven by his own sense of hypocrisy, self-righteousness and poor historical accuracy.
And as for that broad catch-all statement about paedophilia, what is he talking about? Is that not a generalisation that goes well beyond anything ever stated by Robert Green and the Greigs?
This article is not meant as an attack on Greg Lance-Watkins. The man has obviously been an ally in the past. What would be nice is if he could firstly supply some proven documented evidence to substantiate his claims about Scottish Politicians, the Scottish Police Force and the Scottish Judiciary and secondly explain why he waited until May 2010 to attack evidence he has seen over a year ago.
Until he provides evidence to support his own propaganda, his own credibility is seriously flawed through his own doing.

– See more at: http://holliegreig.info/2010/05/greg-lance-watkins-outed/#sthash.NtskO3ki.dpuf

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *