[microscope]

Originally Posted by kizzy

Microscope you appear to have taken a real interest in this issue, and in particular omahs comments.
These were in response to media articles yes, and are his reaction to them.

Yes it is of interest to me. I don't like how the media works sometimes and the fact that they can destroy people, especially when there is profit to be made and they can get away with it. 'Trial by Media' I believe it's called. Very sad - especially when the person they are attacking is dead, so he can't defend himself.

I replied to Omah's comments he made to my post a few pages back, so I responded.

Your standpoint appears to be those who accuse are wrong/ mercenary, however those who are accused deserve a fair hearing, do you not see the double standard?

All those who are accusing are alive. They can have their say and tell whatever story they like to the police or media and the media will be more than happy to print it, as it's in their interest to and they are allowed to by law. Jimmy Savile is dead, so therefore cannot fight back in any way-shape or-form. Nobody in his family (what little he has) is going to fight his corner, unlike Michael Jackson who would have had his family fight for his good name if he had died a lot earlier before he first got accused.

Also if you read what I first wrote on page 29 of this thread - 13th post down, you will read my other views regarding this man and the whole politically correct nanny state of today which was not so apparent years ago.

[Omah]

Originally Posted by microscope

Yes it is of interest to me. I don't like how the media works sometimes and the fact that they can destroy people, especially when there is profit to be made and they can get away with it. 'Trial by Media' I believe it's called. Very sad - especially when the person they are attacking is dead, so he can't defend himself.

But wasn't it "the media" who have known that Savile was a rampaging paedophile all along and kept their mouths shut - so he was "spared" 'Trial by Media' ..... in fact, the master manipulator used his "antics" to line his own pockets and those of the media moguls by feeding off the mugs who bought into the Savile public image .....

[Omah]

Originally Posted by microscope

All those who are accusing are alive.

Well, yes .... otherwise, they'd be dead, like Savile .....

[microscope]

Originally Posted by Omah

Your Original 24-10-2012, 09:53 PM
My Reply 24-10-2012, 11:51 PM


Backatcha .....

What took you so long .....

Still trying to find proof of payments .....

You'll have to try harder to keep up with events .....

I have other things going on in my life apart from spending 24/7 on a flipping forum and my response to your replies to my post were hardly worth my time before today when I found some time.

What payments??

Grow up...

[Omah]

Originally Posted by microscope

I have other things going on in my life apart from spending 24/7 on a flipping forum and my response to your replies to my post were hardly worth my time before today when I found some time.

Well, events have moved on, but, apparently, you haven't .....

What payments??

I thought the whole crux of your diatribe against the media coverage of the Savile scandal was that everybody was using it by fabricating stories to make money .....

Grow up...

Thats a very poor response....

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Omah

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...nighthood.html

Yeah, remove and nullify .....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20108980

Savile was made a Knight Commander of St Gregory the Great by Pope John Paul II for his charity work. It is one of the highest awards the Pope can bestow.

There is no established process to remove a papal knighthood posthumously because the honour dies with the recipient.

Speaking to BBC News, the Vatican's official spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said the Holy See "firmly condemns the horrible crimes of sexual abuse of minors," adding it considered the Savile revelations as "very grave".

"It is deeply saddened that a person who has been soiled in this way could in his lifetime have been proposed for an honour by the Holy See, which in the light of recent information should certainly not have been bestowed."

Father Lombdardi went on: "As there does not exist any permanent official list of persons who have received papal honours in the past, it is not possible to strike anyone off a list that does not exist.

"The names of recipients of papal honours do not appear in the Pontifical Year Book and the honour expires with the death of the individual.

"The most important thing, therefore, is to reaffirm the Church's condemnation of all forms of sexual abuse, and particularly abuse of minors, as extremely grave crimes. The Holy See is adamant on this point."

How weird that the Holy See does not keep records of honours .....

[arista]

Caught on camera: Jimmy Savile gropes terrified teenage girl as he presents Top Of The Pops

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2AWShmyDa

[Omah]

Originally Posted by microscope

If you went back just 10 years ago to 2002 before the politically-correct-nanny-state-culture which has taken over our world to the extent it is today. If you heard that an older man looked or showed interest in someone below the age of '18' years of age, but no younger than '13', then you may look upon that as being a bit weird or you could class that person as a 'cradle snatcher', which had nothing to do with 'paedophelia' back then unlike it is today to the majority of people. Celebrity Kerry Katona only commented recently that she felt that Jimmy Savile was a pervert just by the way he looked at her. The word 'Perv' obviously meaning 'Paedophile' these days. Even though they are both adults and large age-gaps in relationships isn't illegal yet. Although one day I'm sure it will be, the way things are going...

But if you go back to 1984 there was a 14 year old Mandy Smith with a 48 year old Bill Wyman as shown here :- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...-life-God.html

And as you can read within that article. Bill would be treated a lot worse today. In fact locked up and life ruined...over!!

So you can imagine what was going through the mind of celebrities such as Jimmy Savile at that time. If Bill can do it then why not them? If you were caught having sex with someone underage back then, then you would be breaking the law and end up in court for it, just like if you stabbed somebody. But it wasn't looked upon as serious as it is today. Today it's classed a million times worse by the majority! And if a pop star was caught kissing a 14 year old groupie who was probably a jail-bait-bitch anyway and loved every minute of it, then do you really expect the police or the courts to do much about it when it wasn't deemed so bad huh?? of course not!. And thats why he got away with it...simples...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012...?newsfeed=true

A child protection expert has rejected the assertion of pop stars of the 1960s and 1970s that the "hedonism" of the era was an excuse for having sex with children.

Paul Roffey said that the pop stars used their position to manipulate young women to carry out acts which were as illegal then as they are now.

Roffey said: "There is obviously much greater awareness of paedophilia today but in the 1960s everyone knew about the age of consent and people were regularly tried for breaking the law over it. The fact that someone may have looked 16 or 21 if they were male may be mitigation but it is no defence."

Paedophilia became a subject of national concern in the 1970s as it emerged as a civil rights issue. In 1974, paedophiles set up the Paedophile Information Exchange to lobby for the abolition of the age of consent and to oppose the banning of child pornography. The group operated openly until 1978 when the police arrested and charged some of its members. The group was the subject of newspaper exposés and criticism by campaigners including Mary Whitehouse.

On Friday, Clifford said young pop stars at the time had gone from working in a factory one week to performing in front of thousands of people, "and girls are screaming and throwing themselves at them then".

Roffey remains unimpressed by special pleading. "You don't need a birth certificate to realise the age of a girl even if she looks older than her age. People invariably know they are breaking the law and they still know now," he said.

[Sticks]

May I recommend you all read "The Lucifer effect" by professor Philip Zimbado (The same professor behind the Stanford Prison Experiment

[arista]

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Sticks

May I recommend you all read "The Lucifer effect" by professor Philip Zimbado (The same professor behind the Stanford Prison Experiment

a) Do you mean Dr. Philip G. Zimbardo?

b) Who are "you all"?

c) Why whould "we all" read it?

[Omah]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012...licy-newsnight

The BBC's crisis over Jimmy Savile has intensified after accusations that the corporation's head of editorial standards knowingly misled parliament.

David Jordan, director of editorial policy and standards at the BBC, told last Tuesday's culture select committee that he had issued inaccurate public statements concerning the nature of Newsnight's Savile sex abuse investigation, but that he did so before he had been told about the true nature of the programme by its producer, Meirion Jones.

BBC sources say, however, that his version is incorrect. They claim instead that Jordan repeated misleading statements about the programme's investigation after he had been warned by Jones that his account was wrong.

Sources within the BBC newsroom said it was concerning that Jordan, who had sat alongside director general George Entwistle during last week's challenging select committee appearance, should have committed such an error. One said: "The chronology of what he knew when is apparent. He could be said to have misled the committee."

..... or "lied"!

[Omah]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012...licy-newsnight

The BBC is braced for the legal ramifications arising from allegations that other BBC employees were involved.

Child abuse lawyer Trevor Sterling, of Slater & Gordon, said:: "From what we've heard there were others working in association with Jimmy Savile; there have been many stories of people, for example, taking children to his dressing room. What's emerging now is the suggestion that there was a more formalised ring."

His comments corroborate the latest findings from the National Association for People Abused in Childhood whose chief executive, Pete Saunders, described "an element of widespread organisation" regarding abuse at the BBC.

It just gets worse .....

[Sticks]

Originally Posted by Omah

a) Do you mean Dr. Philip G. Zimbardo?

b) Who are "you all"?

c) Why whould "we all" read it?

So spellings are off

Dr Zimbardo talks about a bad barrel as opposed to a bad apple, where a system set up can corrupt people. The sub title of his book is "How good people turn evil"

A lot of people here seem to be gleefully awaiting a torrent of arrests of names from the past. How many of you passing judgement would have been able to avoid being corrupted by the system or the way things were.

See Matthew 7:3-5 or Luke 41-42

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Sticks

So spellings are off

Well, getting a name right has helped me enormously in several professions .....

Dr Zimbardo talks about a bad barrel as opposed to a bad apple, where a system set up can corrupt people. The sub title of his book is "How good people turn evil"

Seems like a statement of the blindingly obvious to me .....

A lot of people here seem to be gleefully awaiting a torrent of arrests of names from the past. How many of you passing judgement would have been able to avoid being corrupted by the system or the way things were.

IIRC, "the way things were" in the mid-20th century may have included "consensual" underage sex but did not include molesting and assaulting children of either sex at every possible opportunity - those particular anti-social activities have, thankfully, always been the inclination the few rather than the many ....

See Matthew 7:3-5 or Luke 41-42

Only a priest would say that .....

[microscope]

originally posted by Omah

But wasn't it "the media" who have known that Savile was a rampaging paedophile all along and kept their mouths shut - so he was "spared" 'Trial by Media' ..... in fact, the master manipulator used his "antics" to line his own pockets and those of the media moguls by feeding off the mugs who bought into the Savile public image .....

The media have to be very careful what they print in newspapers especially when wealthy celebrities are still alive and they would indeed run to their lawyers for legal advice and it wouldn't be long before the newspaper/s would hear from them wanting to know why they have printed the libelous story and would need a lot more than one persons sayso. Their word against His.

Many celebrities get accused of wrongdoings all the time by random people and for many different reasons. The media who chose not to print anything back then obviously didn't have enough proof of the so-called accusations of paedophilia so when it comes to 'lineing pockets', I suggest you look towards the media - not Jimmy Savile. All he did was get paid for the work he did during his lifetime and that was quite a lot - many of which was good.

And how do you know that he was a 'rampaging paedophile'?? All you have is loads of people coming forward telling stories and the newspaper keeps printing them, and I have already given my views regarding all that, as I feel that many many are indeed false.

originally posted by Omah

I thought the whole crux of your diatribe against the media coverage of the Savile scandal was that everybody was using it by fabricating stories to make money .....

Not everybody.

Re-read what I wrote previously..

originally posted by Omah

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012...?newsfeed=true

That link means jack-s**t to what I wrote above.

1) I stated that it was illegal to have under-age sex back then.
2) I stated that today it's classed a million times worse by the majority.
3) I also stated that if an older man showed an interest in a girl below the age of '18' years of age, but no younger than '13' then you may be looked upon as being a bit weird or you could class that person as a 'cradle snatcher', which had nothing to do with 'paedophelia' back then unlike it is today to the majority of people.

I'm trying to work out why you posted that link in reply to what I said??

I know it is illegal to have under-age sex, but I also know that the way it was treated was a lot different then as it is today. Back then it was not more of a crime than other crimes like being stabbed or being raped or murder. And people didn't feel so strongly about it as they do today. Hence, 'a million times worse'.

And when I said, 'showing an interest in someone between those two ages I quoted' - I wasn't talking about any sexual act taking place of any girl under 16, as that is illegal. But if someone such as Jimmy Savile liked someone who was underage but didn't do anything with her of a sexual nature then no law is broken, as if he wishes he could wait until she is 16 and then rush off to Gretna Green in Scotland and marry her, even without her parents consent.

[Omah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20114378

Former pop star Gary Glitter has been arrested on suspicion of sex offences by police investigating Jimmy Savile abuse claims.

He has been taken from his home into custody at a London police station.

Glitter, whose real name is Paul Gadd, was jailed in Vietnam in 2006 for child sex offences.

Police are investigating allegations the late TV presenter Savile sexually abused some 300 young people over a 40-year period.

Met Police confirmed officers from Operation Yewtree had "arrested a man in his 60s in connection with the investigation".

"The man, from London, was arrested at approximately 7:15 BST on suspicion of sexual offences. The individual falls under the strand of the investigation we have termed 'Savile and others'."

[Omah]

Originally Posted by microscope

2) I stated that today it's classed a million times worse by the majority.

I can't argue with unsubstantiated assertions .....

[microscope]

originally posted by arista

Caught on camera: Jimmy Savile gropes terrified teenage girl as he presents Top Of The Pops

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2AWShmyDa

This is ridiculous?

That picture shows nothing. Could have been Jimmy being cheeky and tickling her. So what, no big deal!

[Kizzy]

I fail to see why because he is dead some think this case should not proceed...
If a gunman killed and injured several people before shooting himself dead, would the reasons and causes not be investigated?
This smoke and mirrors defence that some men have younger partners is ridiculous, the key word here is consent.
Why the trips to approved schools, prisons, hospitals, childrens homes?
Are some suggesting that these children from up and down the country are suffering from some shared delusion?
That we have all been whipped up into a media frenzy by the tabloids?
To be fair I think this is one instance where the public is (for once) not being controlled into a mindset.
For years the papers have fed us political and social ideology and we gobble it up with our cornflakes, for once I believe we are making a stand for the real victims. Not accepting the 'different culture' soundbites.
Along with the hillsbourgh revelations, it seems now everyone is saying 'ok we've had enough lies and coverups we demand the truth!'

[Omah]

Originally Posted by kizzy

This smoke and mirrors defence that some men have younger partners is ridiculous, the key word here is consent.!

Yeah, I agree .... who among us, while "growing up", has NOT has underage consensual sex .....

But I'd guess that most of us who passed into "maturity" didn't feel the need to pester, molest, assault and rape underage and vulnerable persons of either sex well into our seniority .....

[Omah]

You're so hot, teasing me
So you're blue but I can't take a chance on a chick like you
That's something I couldn't do
There's that look in your eyes
I can read in your face that your feelings are driving you wild
Ah, but girl you're only a child

Well I can dance with you honey
If you think it's funny
Does your mother know that you're out?
And I can chat with you baby
Flirt a little maybe
Does your mother know that you're out?

Take it easy (take it easy)
Better slow down girl
That's no way to go
Does your mother know?
Take it easy (take it easy)
Try to cool it girl
Take it nice and slow
Does your mother know?

I can see what you want
But you seem pretty young to be searching for that kind of fun
So maybe I'm not the one
Now you're so cute, I like your style
And I know what you mean when you give me a flash of that smile (smile)
But girl you're only a child

Well I can dance with you honey
If you think it's funny
Does your mother know that you're out?
And I can chat with you baby
Flirt a little maybe
Does your mother know that you're out?

A word of caution from Björn Ulvaeus .....

[Kizzy]

Haha! nice one omah
Abba never did a song called 'lie back in my specially adapted landrover emotionally disturbed girl' did they?...

[Omah]

Originally Posted by kizzy

Haha! nice one omah
Abba never did a song called 'lie back in my specially adapted landrover emotionally disturbed girl' did they?...

Not AFAIK .....

[billy123]

Originally Posted by arista

Its a strange day when charities start claiming they deserve more money at the expense of other charities because they deem themselves to be more entitled.