Forum menu
Breaking news on BBC Twitter feed.
I wonder what he's done?
Never saw that coming!
Maybe he was the cow...
Just looked at the story. WHY does he insist on looking like a freak? Seriously, he is playing a very dangerous game.
I just feel they are using Gary Glitters notoriety to give the whole Jimmy Saville story credence.
Theres far more important things going on in Britain today. I just feel its a smoke-screen to divert attention from Afghanistan/economy/jobs/immigration/welfare cuts/etc
WHY does he insist on looking like a freak?
There are more wrong things going on with him than his dress sense.
I just feel its a smoke-screen to divert attention from Afghanistan/economy/jobs/immigration/welfare cuts/etc
I feel that you may be a little bit paranoid then.
I just feel its a smoke-screen to divert attention from Afghanistan/economy/jobs/immigration/welfare cuts/etc
Do you really think that the average person is interested in such mundane things? This is the Jeremy Kyle generation..
There are more wrong things going on with him than his dress sense.
Oh, I totally agree. But, if you were going to court for <whatever reason> you would not dress in a track suit and tell the judge to **** off.
His entire demeanor seems to try to justify his actions.
[quote=mooman said]I just feel they are using Gary Glitters notoriety to give the whole Jimmy Saville story credence.
Theres far more important things going on in Britain today. I just feel its a smoke-screen to divert attention from Afghanistan/economy/jobs/immigration/welfare cuts/etc
Who are "they" ?
I just feel its a smoke-screen to divert attention from Afghanistan/economy/jobs/immigration/welfare cuts/etc
Hmmm, I think you're in the minority there; IME most people tend to be against child abuse.
I just feel they are using Gary Glitters notoriety to give the whole Jimmy Saville story credence.
Who are "they"?
Edit: my thoughts (and words) exactlly allthepies
He only wants people to be in his gang
Jeremy Kyle generation would seem a very good description indeed.
True or not true ... Isnt the Saville allegations still unproven? Lots of stories, but no real solid evidence?
But hey ... Its a showbiz story eh!
Isnt the Saville allegations still unproven? Lots of stories, but no real solid evidence?
Well not proven in court I suppose, same as Lance?!
lol .. bringing Lance Armstrong into it ..
Yep, I reckon it's all just a conspiracy of women in their 50s desperate for fame and fortune and controlled by MI5. 300 separate cases with the same details couldn't be plausible otherwise could it? Poor Jimmy. Poor Gary. The lengths "they" will go to...
Kaesee/£5
Can Godwins Law be extended to include Lance now?
It's all a smokescreen to divert atention from Justin Lee Collins, I tell thee. 😆
I think its very concerning, as the revelations seem to point towards the possibility that instead of isolated predatory paedophiles, these people were acting together as some form of 'gang', presumably with one of them acting as a type of father figure, or 'leader'...
MI5? Nahh ... Prince Phillip is more conspiracy theory friendly for the Jeremy Kyle audience I think ..
Or Aliens??
Or maybe both Prince Phillip & Lance Armstrong are really aliens??
Jim fixed it for JLC to be forgotten very quickly.
I *think* we're agreed that Savile, Glitter, etc. are/were bad men.
But i read an article yesterday that Max Clifford has had loads of 60's, 70's, even 80's stars approach him with 'revelations' that they may have had relations with a succession of groupies back in the day and they were never that disposed to checking birth certificates. Technically still in the wrong, also morally questionable to make use of your status to this kind of advantage, but I do have a degree of sympathy for the 'that's just how it was back then' rationale. I hope that if this all starts to come to light the public can make a distinction between predatory paedolphilia and being a 70's pop icon.
The first single I bought was I Love You Love Me Love by GG & the b-side was (Hand's Up) It's A Stick Up Baby.
Should have seen it coming really..
It's the collective media led outrage at all this that is doing my head in now. If the allegations are true and proven then yes, Saville was a vile human being and likewise the BBC and others who seemingly ignored complaints or responded nonchalantly should be investigated and held to account but once again the trial by media and and collective outrage based on little more than stories I'm finding hard to stomach.
I don't know why I'm surprised.
trial by media and and collective outrage based on little more than[ [b]300+ unconnected but matching[/b] ]stories I'm finding hard to stomach.
I agree, the abuse of position to take advantage of vulnerable people is hard to stomach.
(Or is that not what you meant 😐 )
Mooman, you are joking right?
On the radio Thursday they said the police were preparing to arrest up to a dozen celebrities
Things you do in the dark must come out in the light......
Just seen him on the news, he looks dressed like a bad santa!
I think Britain needs sensible 'prescription' laws, statutory limits to how long you can be brought to justice for each type of crime. Dragging stuff up from the 70s is pointless IMO. In France the délai de préscription for rape is 10 years, the 10-year period starting at the victim's eighteenth birthday for younger victims.
When I was a kid it was drummed into about nonces etc. So I wont believe that it was alright back then. At school in the early 80s we were told about age/restrictions. 70/80s werent a different era. ALL Beeb staff whi knew the rumours aided and abhetted in the abuse. Turning a blind eye to save your job...****ers
The films thread has reminded me of "Tamara Drew" directed by Stephen Frears. A 15-year-old-girl fan who seduces a 25-year-old rock star is a successful heroine in the film!
Dragging stuff up from the 70s is pointless IMO.
I'm sure that the victims will agree once they've had a good chance to think about it rationally.
A 15-year-old-girl fan who seduces a 25-year-old rock star is a successful heroine in the film!
What's your point caller. If the allegations are to be believed, there was only one person doing the "seducing"*.
*If it is indeed possible to seduce a disabled child.
Dragging stuff up from the 70s is pointless IMO.
I couldn't agree more.
Closure for the victims should be avoided at all costs.
I couldn't agree more.
Closure for the victims should be avoided at all costs.
Quite agree, and if you can sexually assault a couple of hundred kiddies and hide it for 30 years you deserve your knighthood.
Lock them up. Throw away the key.
Remember Ronan Polanski evadinv justice over his charge of Paedophilia/rape of a underaged girl. Some media types defend. Funny how its media types who blur the lines!
It was odds-on the bastard was going to be involved at some point in this.
I can rig up some gallows in no time if the CPS want me to.........
why arrest Glitter? Just prepare the firing squad !
novaswift - Memberwhy arrest Glitter? Just prepare the firing squad !
Ahemm ... before firing squad can we propose torturing these people medieval style? Then perhaps harvest some organs for spare parts? The left overs can be recycle by turning into fertiliser or fattening up the salt water crocodiles.
[i]derek_starship - Member
Maybe he was the cow...
POSTED 5 HOURS AGO #
[/i]
nah, he's the goat.
someone has to be as Savile's dead, so they can't get him.
I can't wait for the inevitable "Paul McCartney shagged me when I was twelve" revelation now that compensayshun is on the table and the ambulance chasers are on full alert. **** me how old was that Pre pubescent girl on the Stones album that caused a bit of a stir? Why I bet we could even implicate Cliff Richard in fact **** it why not maybe I could get some cash...
Just looked at the story. WHY does he insist on looking like a freak? Seriously, he is playing a very dangerous game.
??? What are you on about, the guys a pervert who shouldn't be allowed to breath, have sympathies do you.
[i]
??? What are you on about, the guys a pervert who shouldn't be allowed to breath, have sympathies do you.
? See my post further on before you jump to conclusions. Yes, the guy is a genuine contender for the gallows. My point (which you missed by a mile) is that he dresses like a freak which only adds credence to the case against him. That, or I am genuinely a peado sympathizer.
igrf - Member
I can't wait for the inevitable "Paul McCartney shagged me when I was twelve" revelation now that compensayshun is on the table and the ambulance chasers are on full alert.
Surely you don`t mean these allegations could be anything other than 100% true?
That people would sniff a bit of £££ by selling a Jimmy Saville story to a tabloid newspaper hungry for stories?
No - not in this day and age ..
The Freddie Starr thing showed what they were up to. They need someone to make up for the fact that they ignored Savile while he was alive. Anyone will do, even Glitter, who has already been banged up. Seems like an easy enough target.
Next to be implicated will be Jonathan King.
They need someone to make up for the fact that they ignored Savile while he was alive. Anyone will do, even Glitter, who has already been banged up. Seems like an easy enough target.
So Gary Glitter is innocent then, and its all a set up ?
EVERYONE knows Gadd isn't innocent. That's why he's an easy target to cover their incompetence.
On arriving at the police station do we think Glitter said "Hello, It's good to be back"?
/coat already on
EVERYONE knows Gadd isn't innocent. That's why he's an easy target to cover their incompetence.
I'm not really sure what your point is.
Everyone knows he's guilty, so the police should leave him alone so people don't accuse them going for easy targets ??
Slightly puzzled how in attaining evidence for Gadd's 1999 conviction, Savile wasn't implicated in any way at that stage.
I don't see why people are having trouble seeing that Glitter is a scapegoat who will pay for the failings of a national institution. One thing you can be certain of is that the person that invited all those under-age girls to BBC events won't be charged with anything. BBC employees were acting as pimps but Glitter is an easier target and will deflect flak.
Edit: on the Sky thread people are calling for an anmnesty for the likes of Yates and any doped rider or dope trafficking DS that 'comes out'. As far as we know Glitter has been clean a lot longer than anyo f the cycling world peple want amnesties for.
^^ Does that make it clearer for you Nealglover?
^^ Does that make it clearer for you Nealglover?
Not really.
If he is guilty then he should be arrested/questioned/charged
The fact that he is an easy target is irrelevant.
What do you expect the people running the investigation to do when his name comes up, ignore it ?
Maybe just move on and go for a more "difficult" target as people don't approve or the "easy" "guilty" type.
John Craven maybe ??
oh, well, I thought it explained it clear enough.
Max Clifford, why would anyone risking exposure go to him? Surely you would seek out a bloody good Solicitor?
Max Clifford promoting himself yet again more like...
I can't wait for the inevitable "Paul McCartney shagged me when I was twelve" revelation now that compensayshun is on the table and the ambulance chasers are on full alert. * me how old was that Pre pubescent girl on the Stones album that caused a bit of a stir? Why I bet we could even implicate Cliff Richard in fact * it why not maybe I could get some cash...
Or perhaps a long term paedo has finally been uncovered and something will be done to bring closure and stop it happening again
Its ludicrous to think all these allegations are simply the result of an attempt at gaining money.
BBC employees were acting as pimps but Glitter is an easier target and will deflect flak.
You have a well versed history in hatred of the BBC but I would expect dome pretty compelling evidence for the accusation which I would assume is libellous/defamation.
The vast majority if the incidents dont seem to have happened on BBC grounds but dont let the actual fact gets in the way if your hatred for the BBC
I am not saying the BBC will be faultless here but accusing them of pimping under age girls is way OTT
😯John Craven maybe ??
Always thought he looked a bit shifty. The dorty pediatrician.
oh, well, I thought it explained it clear enough.
So what do you think the police should do when people you consider to be "easy targets" are named in the investigation then ?
Didn't Saville defend Glitter/Gadd when he was banged up the first time?
nice to see that the hysterical "hang the paedo, burn the paedo" crew are in tonight.
Kiddie fiddlers are normal people, as in they a part of our society.
They are family members, colleagues and friends, lets look closely at ourselves and identify these manipulating c)Nts and prosecute them.
As for GG, to think that his vile perversions were only restricted to the third world where money only was a simple way into having sex with children was to be never going to be the end of the story.
Weak men and women who use power over the vulnerable
Edukator - Member
I don't see why people are having trouble seeing that Glitter is a scapegoat who will pay for the failings of a national institution. One thing you can be certain of is that the person that invited all those under-age girls to BBC events won't be charged with anything. BBC employees were acting as pimps but Glitter is an easier target and will deflect flak.
[b]Not into kiddy fiddling.[/b]
This is a cover up why pick him up at early hours in the morning,not sure but is he still on the register to sign in.Plod missing the guy with the white stick easy cop.
Lets hear who they have in their sites and when they will produce the goods not an easy bail out.
We have had Grand kids for weekend and anyone touch them there would be issues.
Why have we not heard about the poor child still not found "plod using the easy get out clause".
Who are the other names (Let Joe public know) coming up to panto time.
Let us decide who we take our children/grandchildren to see.
Let the Grampian police check this one out as it has to be better than looking after a golf course.
not agreeing with any thing to do with child abuse.
They could do with reshowing the Brass Eye documentary on the subject.
Jimmy Saville was clearly a predator and everyone already knew what Glitter was like. I just hope the media hype doesn't bringing totally innocent celebs under suspicion as the mud always sticks.
Hopefully the difference between predators like Glitter and Saville specifically targetting vulnerable young girls and a 70's rock star with a groupie who looks old enough will be recognised.
I don't see why you don't get it neilglover, no one is saying that GG is innocent or should not be arrested, just that clearly there are many many others involved, and it looks very easy just to I'll him in and let people like you feel content that justice has been served. Too many other powerfull people are involved and it seems a bit convenient.
Too many other powerfull people are involved and it seems a bit convenient.
You think that GG is going to be the end of it and no more heads will roll? Or could this just be the start of something a bit deeper?
...Too many other powerfull people are involved and it seems a bit convenient.
Nobody has said Glitter will be the last person brought in ?
I'm sure there will be plenty more.
And if bringing people like Gary Glitter to justice "seems a bit convenient" then I don't see an issue with it.
Get it done.
So many involved I doubt we will ever really know the truth.
How many knew and turned a blind eye, including police and government.
WHY does he insist on looking like a freak?
He's from Banbury, there all like that!!
now that compensayshun is on the table and the ambulance chasers are on full ... I bet we could even implicate Cliff Richard in fact
Complete nonce-sense. There's not going to be any compensation for anyone-it's all too long ago and, err, Savile is dead. If it is correct that the majority of the stories are consistent and independent, then your sniffing is woefully misplaced.
Meanwhile, I reckon Cliff Richard is probably one of the few people from that era who can rest easy...
One thing you are right about, Junkyard, I do have 10-year history of slagging off the BBC on forums.
Biased and inaccurate reporting of plausible threats in the run up to Gulf War two. Never seriously challenging Blair's claims when their European counterparts did.
Giving Clarkson a platform to encourage dangerous driving and the persecution of minority road users.
Assuming we the viewers are thick and showing lowest-commmon-denominator material.
Being a royalist institution operating under royal charter.
Being a tax on the poor. The license fee is a non-progressive tax which disproportionately taxes the poor. It's also a tax for a service thinking people may never use that you can't opt out of if you choose to watch alternatives. Like being obliged to pay a subscription to the Sun even if you read Metro.
And now you can add inviting a flock of jail bait for the amusement of DJs and rock stars, and turning a blind eye to what what happened in dressing rooms even when many people at the BBC knew exactly what was going on and could have easily stopped it. Try running a hotel or bar with private rooms under similar conditions and you'll soon have the police knocking on your door accusing you of running a brothel and being a proxénète.
The Beeb has been under the cosh from the 'right' for many many years, that in order to seem neutral has probably gone the other way IMO.
It is definitely, like the NHS, an alternative to 'market forces' institutions, and for all its faults, remains a bastion of quality in a sea of mediocre alternatives-
The funding is a different issue, its a service, so should be centrally funded out of taxation.
In case i missed it which national media objected to all the warmongering blair did at the onset ?
French and German, Rudeboy. German channels such as Eins Extra gave a lot of time and credibility to Hans Blix while the French channels, both public and private, made it clear that WMDs meant Scuds without chemical or nuclear capacity. Dominique de Villepin summed up the French view:
If you didn't see this speech in full at the time don't blame French or German channels.
The BBC relies heavily on folk-hero star presenters for it's viewing figures and gives them far to much scope for over personalising the programming to the point it becoems a series of one-(wo)man's rant shows. Whether it's pop (Saville), cars (Clarkson), cooking, houses, politics, the environment ... one is faced with some OTT character on soem personalised rant that from an objective point of view fails the viewer.
The cooks are fat slobs oozing grease, the drivers incompetent road ragers, the house designers don't know what a passivhaus is, the married couples row all the time, the kids are gob-shites, the political experts are fans of Attila the Hun. The "serious" stuff makes Eastenders look aspirational.
Edit: marks out of 10 for my rant ?
The cooks are fat slobs oosing grease, the drivers incompetant road ragers, the house designers don't know what a passivhaus is, the married couples row all the time, the kids are gob-shites, the political experts are fans of Attila the Hun.
You couldn't make it up in broken Britain, you're going to hell in a handcart, it's PC gone mad, we'll be sued for compensation by gypsy refugees...and [b]you're[/b] paying for it!
I would rather trust the BBC to impartial report the facts than I would trust someone with your powers of analysis, bias and flair for the hyperbole
I was rather waiting for your evidence of them acting as pimps as well as an explanation as to why most of the offences happened on non BBC premises.
one is faced with some OTT character on soem personalised rant that from an objective point of view fails the viewer
Your right why can they not have more well balanced views like your on there - perhaps with as little evidence a syou present and with as much regard for the actual facts.
So can you prove the BBC were pimps yet? Is the sort of calm and rational type of anlysis we are missing from the BBC?
3/10 you can do far better - please dont see that as a challenge 😀
Who broke it then? Whoever it was did it with the Beebs co-operation.
Sorry, i did mean in the mealy mouthed uk press, sure on the continent where you are it will be more objective.
BBC -- the 'popular' channel (1) is a race to the bottom with ITV, but other channels especially BBC4 are an oasis in a desert of shite.The Radio channels also provide some good stuff, all are open to improvement,and yes i agree with you on the dumb stuff.
What level of proof are you looking for, Junkyard? You'll need a time machine to go back for the forensic proof that Saville and co. had sex with under-age people. I'd need a time machine to plant a load of bugs and CCTV cameras to prove my assertions beyond what those concerned have already admitted (which is enough to justify the use of the word "pimp" in its "procurer" sense). I hadn't noticed a lack of proof getting in the way of any libelous statements in this whole media circus around Saville, Glitter and co.
It sure is distracting people from issues that really concern them though.
This far into the thread yet no one is asking how it was that a film crew was there to record the arrest.
This far into the thread yet no one is asking how it was that a film crew was there to record the arrest.
they get tipped off-- publicity stunt-- Gadd knew as well, got dressed as Bad Bad Santa for it!
So who in the met tipped them off? That's a serious case of professional misconduct.