[Closed] Oh Rolf 🙁

Or Kevin Bacon, presumably...

I've already provided the links earlier in the thread; do your own research...

Whilst you're at it, you could investigate Savile, Prince Charles and Lord Mountbatten

I Like to do my research on You tube and the david icke website - where do you do your?

Mickey taking aside this one looks like it may actually have some facts behind it

Whilst you're at it, you could investigate Savile, Prince Charles and Lord Mountbatten

Will do.

BTW any clues concerning who murdered Princess Di ? Or is it still the most obvious suspect ?

BTW any clues concerning who murdered Princess Di ? Or is it still the most obvious suspect ?

We'll get to that, one thing at a time eh 😉

John Dillinger's landlord, wasn't it?

I am dismayed how Edukator has been basically accused of saying child abuse is acceptable.

It is perfectly clear the point he was trying to make.

The example of the headteacher in the 1960's being a case in point.

It is perfectly clear he did not say that behaviour was acceptable but that it was tolerated i.e hush hush swept under the carpet, etc.

The example of his cycle club is also clear. The older members knew or suspected what was going on but turned a blind eye. This is tolerating it.

If you ask me it is not he who is trolling this thread.

However, I do strongly disagree with his views about a custodial sentence for rolf harris. I think it would be a travesty of justice were he not sentenced to time in prison.

to clarify - before I am subjected to the selective quoting barrage - tolerated more widely or perhaps seen as an unpleasantness that wasn't spoken about by society.

I work with a couple of guys in their 60's and they worked in local authority in the early 70's. The stories they tell of some of the really quite outrageous behaviour by some of their older colleagues back then - well, it's remarkable and wouldn't be allowed these days and rightly so

You do know the troll has troll added to his name as a clue
IMHO it is classic trolling lesson 1. Say something personal no one else can prove [ that is extremely unlikely]- insist it is true , get upset if someone says it is not etc. Take an inflammtory position few will agree with and murder it to death.
If you want to fall for it then that is your choice.

I am dismayed how Edukator has been basically accused of saying child abuse is acceptable.

and for those dismissing jivehoneyjive as a conspiracy crank.

There are now over 100 MPs supporting a call for an enquiry (on the scale of that carried out into Hillsborough) into organised child abuse in Britain with allegations that some of those perpetrators are involved in the so-called 'higher echelons' of British society.

David Cameron's opening response to Tom Watson MP's question was that this was a 'difficult and complex matter' or words to that effect.

Really? what's difficult about wanting to bring child rapists to justice?

and for those dismissing jivehoneyjive as a conspiracy crank.

That's what he is though.

But obviously, if you swing blindly at everything that moves, sooner or later you might hit something by dumb luck.

That doesn't mean he's not a conspiracy crank.

Say what you will, the facts remain... 8)

The example of his cycle club is also clear. The older members knew or suspected what was going on but turned a blind eye. This is tolerating it.

An "example" of what ...... homosexual grooming being tolerated in his cycling club ? Well yes of course, that's perfectly possible.

An example of homosexual grooming being tolerated more in the 1970s than now ? Certainly not. I lived in the 1970s and it was no more tolerant of homosexual grooming than now.

In fact the 1970s was considerably more intolerant of anything to do with gay sex than now. The age of consent for gays was 21 and as I mentioned earlier the "pastime" of queer bashing was not unheard of.

Legal homosexuality was barely tolerated and it had only been decriminalized a few years earlier.

Any suggestion that "homosexual grooming" was more tolerated in the 1970s than now is false imo, whatever happened in Edukator's cycling club.

And while I'm sorry that you are "dismayed" grantus I firmly believe that Edukator is not beyond reproach should he make statements which clearly deserve to be challenged.

Say what you will, the facts remain...

Facts do remain yes.

You just rarely seem to share any.

Yes Ernie but he's basically been accused by some people of saying that child abuse is ok.

I wasn't around in the 70's but can you imagine PIE being tolerated nowadays?

I think there is merit in the argument he was trying to make.

Facts do remain yes.

You just rarely seem to share any.

I can't help but wonder if you're too lazy to trawl the whole thread G Dog...

[url= http://www.channel4.com/news/lord-leon-brittan-home-office-paedophile-dossier ]Anyhoo, here's a freshie, you lucky scamp [/url] 😆

There are now over 100 MPs supporting a call for an enquiry (on the scale of that carried out into Hillsborough) into organised child abuse in Britain with allegations that some of those perpetrators are involved in the so-called 'higher echelons' of British society.

I have been aware of such rumours ever since Thatcher threaten to take legal action against anyone who named a cabinet minister as a suspected pedophile (rumours were circulating but no name had been mentioned). Private Eye magazine, in true Private Eye style, published an announcement that Leo Britan was [i]not[/i] a suspected pedophile, which finally gave a name to the story. Everything was quietly dropped after that.

but he's basically been accused by some people of saying that child abuse is ok.

This comment was made as he was adamant in not wanting a custodial sentence for a pedophile.Was going on a bit too much about it.
Even though Harris was convicted on 12 counts by a British jury.

but he's basically been accused by some people of saying that child abuse is ok.

This comment was made as he was adamant in not wanting a custodial sentence for a pedophile.Was going on a bit too much about it.
Even though Harris was convicted on 12 counts by a British jury.

Edit Mods please delete double post

I have been aware of such rumours ever since Thatcher threaten to take legal action against anyone who named a cabinet minister as a suspected pedophile (rumours were circulating but no name had been mentioned). Private Magazine, in true Private Eye style, published an announcement that Leo Britan was not a suspected pedophile, which finally gave a name to the story. Everything was quietly dropped after that.

In that case, [url= http://rt.com/op-edge/168876-savile-scandal-bbc-presenter/ ]I'll draw your attention to this piece[/url] , which although I can't wholly verify, certainly contains many truths and no falsehoods of which I'm aware...

clever. So a fellow party MP turns up with information about child sex abuse involving people likely known to Mr Brittan but he doesn't actually read the details, simply passes it off to someone else?

One must suspect Brittan himself was not implicated however if what he says is true, and he didn't look at the papers, then for all he knew he could have been passing them to someone implicated who would clearly not take the matter any further which would be incompetence on a grand scale.

However, surely it is inconceivable that the names in the dossier would not be discussed at that meeting so - rather than being merely incompetent it's much more sinister and he (Brittan) has protected reputations and is therefore complicit in the perpetration of these crimes. Who knows how many kids have been abused as a result of the failure to act on the information presented?

Regardless, i'm sure it will be a long time before we see Mr Brittan stand before an enquiry and answer for his actions 🙁

grantus - Member
Yes Ernie but he's basically been accused by some people of saying that child abuse is ok.

It's the subject innit. Stuff like this always brings out the hysterical "WHAT IF IT WAS YOUR KIDS" brigade. No room for debate; unless you're with the mob screaming for blood then you're clearly a mega-nonce yourself.

Yes Ernie but he's basically been accused by some people of saying that child abuse is ok.

I wasn't aware that anyone had accused Edukator of saying that child abuse is ok, if that's true that's unacceptable.

What Edukator [i]has[/i] said is that Rolf Harris should get nothing more than a suspended sentence, and that it would have been even better if he had not been prosecuted at all.

I disagree with that and I don't think it helps his victims who have a lifetime of dealing with Harris's criminal behaviour, and it would appear that the prosecution has helped them.

It is perfectly acceptable imo to challenge Edukator on those points grantus even if you're dismayed by it.

Without trying to be condescending, I think a lot of the issues here are differences of experiences. What one person perceived as the norm of an era will differ for the next person. I mean, human nature is so fickle two folk stood shoulder to shoulder observing the same event have the capacity to perceive it in two totally different ways.

All this talk of what happened in the 60s/70s is foolish - it boils down to your frame of reference and experience and how you perceived such things. As an example, a friend of mine experienced exactly what Ernie Lynch thought ludicrous.

Also, goading through insulting is trolling just as much as having an opinion that differs from the majority. Possibly more so as it's deliberate and generally childish and nasty.

You still haven't read back then, Ernie. Others have so you won't fool them. They know I clearly defined the context.

I note you are accusing me of lying too now, Junkyard. You're analysis is false. I am neither lying nor trolling.

Don't worry, Woppit, I don't feel any need for counseling. Situations one manages well build confidence. I've got used to declining advances from gays which started in my teens, there might be something about me that attracts them. It's usually a lot less complicated than declining advances from women. There have been exceptions though, both while hitch-hiking; I got dumped on the hard shoulder several kms from a road in the Alps and had an argument with a truck driver that led to some erratic driving. I still hitch hike.

You still haven't read back then, Ernie. Others have so you won't fool them.

Yes of course, I'm trying to fool people concerning what you said, because I thought only me had read your posts.

Still, now that we've firmly established that everyone has fully understood what you said you're happy - right ?

I suspect not.

I've got used to declining advances from gays which started in my teens, there might be something about me that attracts them. It's usually a lot less complicated than declining advances from women.

Edukator you are Leslie Phillips and I claim my £5

Well that's nice, Edukator bares his soul and informs everyone of the burden that his attraction to both sexes causes him, and you poke fun at him Kryton. I'm frankly dismayed.

I can't help but wonder if you're too lazy to trawl the whole thread G Dog...

I can assure you, not clicking on your various YouTube links and David Icke/Alex Jones stuff isn't laziness.

Quite the opposite really.

I've got better things to do with my time than indulge the fantasies of Alex Jones and David Icke, and certainly don't want to provide traffic to their sites and increase their income.

They do pretty well already out of entertaining the gullible, they don't need any help from me.

Are you Ernie? You don't find his modesty, or trolling effort with regard to that modesty somewhat distasteful to the point that taking the piss out of it is probably the best response?

I think its far worse to attempt to highlight your sexual attractiveness in a thread of this nature IMO. Trolling score 10/10 and Ernie takes the bait.

He was taking the piss, Stan.

Edit : I was under the impression one had to use the backward sloping sarcasm font in such circumstances but hey...

I know he was Teasel... but it served to highlight a point 😉

Ah, I see. Maybe it's you that needs to use the sarcasm font, then...

However, being serious I don't read his claims of attracting males or females anything but written musings, possibly foolishly so in this case, but it's an example of how something you write can be taken in a way that isn't necessarily how it was meant.

Edit : ...and blown out of proportion for the purpose of ridicule.

I note you are accusing me of lying too now, Junkyard. You're analysis is false. I am neither lying nor trolling.

As for the truth can I go on record as saying I do believe you have been blighted, all your life, by unwanted advances from both genders.
I feel your pain

I vote we have a whip round for a shitty stick for him 😉

DP

Blimey, so much mud thrown !!
I sort of agree with some of Edukator's stance but if you are guilty regardless of how long ago you should be punished. We cannot have a system when you get so far down the road that you become innocent because of a time lapse.

Jailing Rolf though, his careers ruined he is 84 years old his family must loathe him blimey and the public vilification will probably be enough. Also apparently not in great health what does locking him up serve other than to cost the tax payer even more !!I would be suprised if he reoffended and realistically this won't be a warning to the others.

I don't care how long ago it was touching anyone regardless of there age against there consent is wrong.

Now for a cup of tea to calm down

My mother was groped by the 21-year old brother of one of her friends, and had to push him off and went running out of the room. When she told her friend, her friend's parents called her a slut and told her she wasn't welcome anymore. My mother was 11 at the time.

A few years later, when another friend tearfully told my mother she'd been molested by a teacher, my mother told her to tell her parents. The girl's parents told her that she should just avoid him, but not tell anybody, as it would bring shame on her and the family, as people might suspect she was 'loose'. She was 14 at the time. A few years after that, the teacher was later the subject of a police manhunt when he kidnapped another teenage pupil.

Both of those were in the early 50s - people knew it was wrong, but because of a mixture of it being so taboo, and because sexism was a bigger problem back then, victims were often powerless.

Leaping forward to the mid-80s to early 90s, my best friend and her sister were both abused by the same paedophile,and in the case of the younger one also his son, who were both friends of the family. They were 6 - 10 years old at the time. They told their mother, but she didn't believe them, and given that the one person they trusted let them down, they told no-one else and went on suffering.

The guy in question ended up in jail after he was convicted of raping two other little girls, but my friend and her sister never went to the police. They never told anyone else until over twenty years later - they didn't even realise that they'd both been abused. They've contemplated going to the police, but they don't want to relive it given that the older man is already in jail and his son is on the sex offenders register. They were both pretty messed up by what they went through, and are worried about how they'd be treated if it ever went to court.

It's why I think it's so important for rapists and abusers to be prosecuted and sentenced according to their crimes, regardless of the time that has past - it sends out a clear message that such behaviour is intolerable, and that people shouldn't be scared in speaking out against it. Rolf Harris knew what he was doing was awful, [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-28112605 ]he did a 20 minute video warning children against people like himself[/url].

what does locking him up serve

It seems odd to claim the trial is enough tbh
As for re-offending there are many parts to a sentence- most murders are crimes of passion who wont re-offend so we should let them off? Most people who kill someone in a car wont do it again etc
1. Deter others
2. Punish the offender
3. Rehabilitate
4. Education
5. protect society

IMHO custodial sentence is the only option here given the number and time scales involved.

However, being serious I don't read his claims of attracting males or females anything but written musings, possibly foolishly so in this case, but it's an example of how something you write can be taken in a way that isn't necessarily how it was meant.

Edit : ...and blown out of proportion for the purpose of ridicule.

Precisely. Either a thoughtless act given the context or just trolling. Highlighting it was aimed at edukator for his er, education bearing in mind the last sentence of my previous post.

I can assure you, not clicking on your various YouTube links and David Icke/Alex Jones stuff isn't laziness.

Quite the opposite really.

I've got better things to do with my time than indulge the fantasies of Alex Jones and David Icke, and certainly don't want to provide traffic to their sites and increase their income.

They do pretty well already out of entertaining the gullible, they don't need any help from me.

Find a link to David Icke, or Alex Jones in this whole thread... I dare you 😆

Your prejudice toward me is noted, but I can assure you, all links are 'trusted' media sources 8)

IMHO custodial sentence is the only option here given the number and time scales involved.

Agreed. In his argument its been stated that regardless of his age "he felt powerless not to look at the....getting changed" (I feel a bit sick/saddened now so I'd rather not write the rest).

If he's psychologically compelled he probably will re offend.

It's why I think it's so important for rapists and abusers to be prosecuted and sentenced according to their crimes, regardless of the time that has past - it sends out a clear message that such behaviour is intolerable, and that people shouldn't be scared in speaking out against it.

The most sensible thing said on this thread.

Your

prejudices

FWIW you remins me of a mate of mine who thinks like this

My views, though not agreeing, are all delivered as banter between mates.

said without prejudice

Your

prejudices

free thinking views unencumbered by state sponsored media are also noted

FWIW you remins me of a mate of mine who thinks like this

My views, though not agreeing, are all delivered as banter between mates.

Aye, it's all good 😀

You can't begin to imagine the research and effort I've put into this matter... was a mite perturbed at the immediate assumption that all my links were from 'conspiracy crank' sites, when if you take the time to check, they are almost all respected verified sources on a subject which is making significant national news...