[Split Thread] Claims of sexual abuse of teenagers by Jimmy Saville - Page 12

Straw Man · 24th November 2012, 06:40 PM

Originally Posted by JihadJane

Evidence suggests that Savile raped and abused his way through life with impunity, frequently targeting vulnerable young teenagers and children. What makes you think it appropriate to use this thread to indulge in puerile banter? It seems kind of sick to me.

Okay, I will bite.

The evidence, as far as I'm aware is hearsay. I spent some time in the company of Jimmy, alone, and he never laid a finger on me.

I also remember a family friend that found himself in the midst of a child abuse scandal, and he lost his marriage, home and family. He died before he was exonerated.

The world of today is totally different to the world of the 70's and 80's, and even earlier than that was a different place. As I think I may have mentioned in this thread, I knew girls of 14 who actively sought out the chance of a quick fumble with a Radio 1 DJ at a roadshow.

I actually witnessed one. If she ever decides to start claiming any sort of abuse, I will happily be a witness for the defence. She knew exactly what she was doing.

I also remember a girl who actively sought out ex-Blue Peter presenter John Leslie, and was so pleased to big it up until he faced accusations, and then suddenly she was a victim.

I'm not yukking it up in any way. Any child abuse should be investigated, and if the accusations are true, the perpetrator should be punished.

Whatever, an investigation does not mean getting a cheque from a newspaper.

Fortunately, for the newspapers, dead people don't sue, and for certain newspapers, to get a chance to attack the BBC is wonderful. If it is viable, then it makes them a lot of money. Bonus is that dead people don't sue.

DragonLady · 24th November 2012, 07:50 PM

Quote:

The world of today is totally different to the world of the 70's and 80's, and even earlier than that was a different place.

That's true. I remember when child molesters were "funny uncles". It was only after all the witch hunts of the late '70s and early '80s that sexual abuse suddenly started making headlines everyday.

JihadJane · 25th November 2012, 03:57 AM

Originally Posted by Straw Man

Okay, I will bite.

The evidence, as far as I'm aware is hearsay.

Multiple witnesses have come forward, independently, with very similar accounts of Savile's behavior. For this reason, and others, the police have said that they now consider that Savile was, indeed, a prolific sex offender.

Quote:

I spent some time in the company of Jimmy, alone, and he never laid a finger on me.

So what? Harold Shipman never murdered his wife.

Quote:

I also remember a family friend that found himself in the midst of a child abuse scandal, and he lost his marriage, home and family. He died before he was exonerated.

Yes, false accusations happen but the weight of testimonies against Savile (450 allegations and growing), including some from the man himself about his own behavior, point away from this in Savile's case.

Quote:

The world of today is totally different to the world of the 70's and 80's, and even earlier than that was a different place.

The world of the 70s and 80s might have been different in the detached, sexual-abuse facilitating bubble of TV, radio and popular music entertainment but for the victims and survivors of sexual abuse the experience of being sexually abused by people with more power than oneself is still boringly the same. What has changed is that survivors are less likely to be shamed and blamed when they speak out.

I think the chances that Savile was not a serial sexual abuser of children and young teenagers is vanishingly small. I can understand that that it may be harder to accept when you have known hm personally, but, if he was indeed guilty, you'd only be one of hundreds (thousands?) he successfully hoodwinked, if that's any consolation!

Quote:

As I think I may have mentioned in this thread, I knew girls of 14 who actively sought out the chance of a quick fumble with a Radio 1 DJ at a roadshow.

None of the witnesses speaking out against Savile have described his actions as a quick fumble, as far as I am aware. The encounters usually went much further than that and/or were part of a series of related assaults. You also appear to be forgetting who is deemed the legally responsible party in such encounters.

Quote:

I actually witnessed one. If she ever decides to start claiming any sort of abuse, I will happily be a witness for the defence. She knew exactly what she was doing.

If she was under age at the time, then her willingness would do little for the defense.

Quote:

I also remember a girl who actively sought out ex-Blue Peter presenter John Leslie, and was so pleased to big it up until he faced accusations, and then suddenly she was a victim.

If you suggesting that all the Savile accusers are all similar to this one person and, therefore, opportunistically lying when they say, for example, that he raped them against their will, I suggest you watch the videos I have linked to below.

Quote:

I'm not yukking it up in any way. Any child abuse should be investigated, and if the accusations are true, the perpetrator should be punished.

Whatever, an investigation does not mean getting a cheque from a newspaper.

Fortunately, for the newspapers, dead people don't sue, and for certain newspapers, to get a chance to attack the BBC is wonderful. If it is viable, then it makes them a lot of money. Bonus is that dead people don't sue.

I don't regard newspapers, on their own, as 100% trustworthy about anything. The evidence against Savile is not dependent on newspapers and the BBC victim-playing card (the BBC was only one of several institutions that Savile worked) is irrelevant to whether or not Savile was a serial sex offender.

ITV's documentary 'Exposure The Other Side of Jimmy Savile' (review) is an investigation by an independent child welfare expert containing interviews with witnesses and victims. It concludes with an independent legal opinion that the evidence presented in the documentary would be sufficient to warrant Savile's arrest. Here is a follow-up to 'Exposure The Other Side of Jimmy Savile' (may not be available outside UK):

'Exposure Update - The Jimmy Savile Investigation'

I can no longer find ITV's 'Exposure The Other Side of Jimmy Savile', in full, online - it has been blocked by the BBC on copyright grounds - but there are still extracts available:

'Jimmy Savile - Exposure - The Other Side Of Jimmy Savile - 2 of 5 '

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

'Jimmy Savile - Exposure - The Other Side Of Jimmy Savile - 3 of 5

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

'Jimmy Savile - Exposure - The Other Side Of Jimmy Savile - 4 of 5 '

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

'Jimmy Savile - Exposure - The Other Side Of Jimmy Savile - 5 of 5'

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

zooterkin · 25th November 2012, 04:25 AM

Originally Posted by JihadJane

Multiple witnesses have come forward, independently, with very similar accounts of Savile's behavior. For this reason, and others, the police have said that they now consider that Savile was, indeed, a prolific sex offender.

And I, and many others, are inclined to agree that it is seems very likely that he was an abuser of underage girls. That doesn't mean that we should uncritically accept every allegation that is made against him, and some of them seem particularly dodgy.

Quote:

Yes, false accusations happen but the weight of testimonies against Savile (450 allegations and growing), including some from the man himself about his own behavior, point away from this in Savile's case.

I'd prefer to see the evidence evaluated for quality rather than quantity.

Quote:

If you suggesting that all the Savile accusers are all similar to this one person and, therefore, opportunistically lying when they say, for example, that he raped them against their will, I suggest you watch the videos I have linked to below.

I don't think anyone is saying that (though I don't know if it has been ruled out as a possibility), but it doesn't mean the converse is true, either. One believable accuser doesn't validate all the rest.

Quote:

ITV's documentary 'Exposure The Other Side of Jimmy Savile' (review) is an investigation by an independent child welfare expert containing interviews with witnesses and victims. It concludes with an independent legal opinion that the evidence presented in the documentary would be sufficient to warrant Savile's arrest.

I agree there would seem to be a case to answer, so arrest would be appropriate, were he still arrive. Note that it says "arrest', though, not "conviction".

Childlike Empress · 25th November 2012, 08:11 AM

Originally Posted by JihadJane

I can no longer find ITV's 'Exposure The Other Side of Jimmy Savile', in full, online - it has been blocked by the BBC on copyright grounds - but there are still extracts available:

Another reason why one shouldn't rely on google alone as a search engine. Seems like they "cleaned" their index of links to it. Duckduckgo promptly delivers a link to dailymotion (third hit).

JihadJane · 25th November 2012, 09:29 AM

Quack, quack! Thanks!

Very useful.

Rrose Selavy · 25th November 2012, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Another reason why one shouldn't rely on google alone as a search engine. Seems like they "cleaned" their index of links to it. Duckduckgo promptly delivers a link to dailymotion (third hit).

No they haven't cleaned their index of it , just slightly changed the search page layout options for all searches. I found it just found your link using normal Google.

Originally Posted by JihadJane

I can no longer find ITV's 'Exposure The Other Side of Jimmy Savile', in full, online - it has been blocked by the BBC on copyright grounds - but there are still extracts available:

.

Why would the BBC be blocking an ITV program on copyright grounds? It's nothing to so with the BBC, Is this another of your BBC conspiracies or just another inaccuracy?

-

zooterkin · 25th November 2012, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by JihadJane

Quack, quack! Thanks!

I do hope you're not introducing levity into a thread about sexually abusing children and young teenagers.

Professor Yaffle · 25th November 2012, 11:20 AM

Quote:

This video contains content from BBC Worldwide, who has blocked it on copyright grounds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nHDZ...A&feature=plcp

Childlike Empress · 25th November 2012, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by Rrose Selavy

No they haven't cleaned their index of it , just slightly changed the search page layout options for all searches. I found it just found your link using normal Google.

You found a link to duckduckgo on google? Colour me skeptical.

Originally Posted by Rrose Selavy

Why would the BBC be blocking an ITV program on copyright grounds? It's nothing to so with the BBC, Is this another of your BBC conspiracies or just another inaccuracy?

-

See Prof. above.

Rrose Selavy · 25th November 2012, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

You found a link to duckduckgo on google? Colour me skeptical.

No problem finding link to duckduckgo.com site on Google.
Not any finding the full doc on DailyMotion on Google
Whatever the distribution arrangement for the particular blocked link If the BBC and Google are conspiring to stop us finding it they're not doing a very good job.

-

vwgub · 25th November 2012, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by JihadJane

Sorry, so what was your point in posting that video with the comment "It was so common that bands recorded songs advocating it."

Were you having a little laugh about sexually abusing children in the park?

That's what I was thinking. Because thinking about sexually abusing children is so funny. You know instead of making fun of sexual abuse which is funny.

angrysoba · 25th November 2012, 08:14 PM

nm

Sledge · 26th November 2012, 03:26 AM

Originally Posted by vwgub

That's what I was thinking. Because thinking about sexually abusing children is so funny. You know instead of making fun of sexual abuse which is funny.

As Phil Collins would say, you're talking nonce sense.

Matthew Best · 26th November 2012, 03:53 AM

I don't believe these allegations against Jimmy Saville. I met him in Leeds General Hospital in the 1980s and he seemed very nice. Next people will be telling me he wasn't actually qualified to perform my prostate examination.

Captain_Swoop · 26th November 2012, 09:56 AM

I thought he was all heart When i was young he fixed it for me to wear a blindfold and milk a cow.

Matthew Best · 26th November 2012, 10:03 AM

People go on and on about "those poor children", but they didn't mind - most of them were already dead.

oody · 26th November 2012, 12:16 PM

Dave Seville was doing what? With whom?

Darat · 27th November 2012, 12:11 PM

Nothing much to say about this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...ester-20516533 Why it wasn't stopped is beyond a mystery to me.

Rrose Selavy · 27th November 2012, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by Darat

Nothing much to say about this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...ester-20516533 Why it wasn't stopped is beyond a mystery to me.

The conspiracy theorists might say it was possibly influenced by the picarious position of the Govts of the day often relying on the Liberal vote and not wanting a scandal to rock the political boat..

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...stminster.html

Captain_Swoop · 27th November 2012, 03:10 PM

Will they want to dig his body up like they want to do with Savile?

richardm · 29th November 2012, 02:30 AM

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Will they want to dig his body up like they want to do with Savile?

I'd like to see them try.

Edit:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Smith was a reasonable singer. He sang "She's a Lassie From Lancashire" on Jimmy Savile's early-1970s TV show Clunk Click

It's so tempting to read something into this, but Smith was quite the popular character at the time, as was Savile whose Clunk Click programme hauled in minor celebs to do I know not what.

Actually I really do not know what they did on that show, I have no recollection of it whatsoever and the internet is quite unforthcoming.

uk_dave · 29th November 2012, 03:16 AM

Originally Posted by richardm

I'd like to see them try.

Edit:

It's so tempting to read something into this, but Smith was quite the popular character at the time, as was Savile whose Clunk Click programme hauled in minor celebs to do I know not what.

Actually I really do not know what they did on that show, I have no recollection of it whatsoever and the internet is quite unforthcoming.

You raise an interesting point and I, for one, will no longer wear a seatbelt in a moving car.

Take that, savile!

Captain_Swoop · 29th November 2012, 03:30 AM

'Clunk Click every trip' was the 'catch phrase' for the TV ads explaining the new seat belt laws in the 1970s.

Savile was the Celeb who fronted the ads.

richardm · 29th November 2012, 06:31 AM

[Captain_Swoop;8805016]'Clunk Click every trip' was the 'catch phrase' for the TV ads explaining the new seat belt laws in the 1970s.

Savile was the Celeb who fronted the ads.[/quote]

Yes, I know that. But what I didn't know is that there was also some kind of variety programme called "Clunk Click" that went out on the BBC on Saturday nights, which he hosted. It was apparently a precursor of Jim'll Fix It.

Edit: It ran for 20 episodes between 1973 and 1974, apparently. Which no doubt explains why I don't remember it.

Edit again: Actually just as a point of order they were just public safety adverts; seat belt use didn't become law until the 1980s.

catsmate1 · 29th November 2012, 07:29 AM

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

'Clunk Click every trip' was the 'catch phrase' for the TV ads explaining the new seat belt laws in the 1970s.

Savile was the Celeb who fronted the ads.

I thought it was "Clunk, click. even on the shortest trip."

richardm · 29th November 2012, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by catsmate1

I thought it was "Clunk, click. even on the shortest trip."

It started out as "...every trip", but the "...on the shortest trip" came along later because of the tendency for people to think "ah, I'm only just going round the corner, it's not worth bothering with this incredibly cumbersome strap".

Captain_Swoop · 29th November 2012, 09:32 AM

I don't remember the variety show either!

richardm · 29th November 2012, 09:56 AM

Police interview man in his 80s under caution

Rumours are rife that it's Rolf Harris in the frame now

zooterkin · 29th November 2012, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by richardm

Police interview man in his 80s under caution

Rumours are rife that it's Rolf Harris in the frame now

I hope it turns out to be someone (or something) else.

Sledge · 29th November 2012, 10:58 AM

Good grief. My childhood hasn't felt this defiled since Michael Bay started making Transformers films.

commandlinegamer · 29th November 2012, 11:29 AM

An interview under caution isn't an arrest, far less a charge.

Nor is it the same as being cautioned, which may result if a person admits an offence but the matter does not go to court.

Justin39640 · 29th November 2012, 07:28 PM

Originally Posted by Rrose Selavy

No problem finding link to duckduckgo.com site on Google.
Not any finding the full doc on DailyMotion on Google
Whatever the distribution arrangement for the particular blocked link If the BBC and Google are conspiring to stop us finding it they're not doing a very good job.

-

Comes up on my Google search.
On a Google search result page (not the main page), click the gear icon in the upper right hand corner. In the pulldown menu hit "search options". Set your "SafeSearch filtering" setting to "no filtering". Most likely the issue.

ETA: I only noticed a few weeks ago mine was set to "moderate" and switched it. Must be the default.

wobs · 30th November 2012, 01:29 AM

I would be interested in what many think of the Savile related posts in this blog:
http://stevemoxon.blogspot.co.uk/

richardm · 30th November 2012, 01:33 AM

Originally Posted by commandlinegamer

An interview under caution isn't an arrest, far less a charge.

Nor is it the same as being cautioned, which may result if a person admits an offence but the matter does not go to court.

No it isn't, but it's a very worrying indication that the police suspect you of having committed an offence, and they question you under the same caution you get when you are arrested, i.e. the "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence" etc spiel. It's important for them to do that because they anticipate hauling you up in front of a judge at some point, and unless you're interviewed under caution they can't use the interview as evidence.

It doesn't say anything about whether you're guilty or not, just that the police think they have a bit more to work with than should be handled by a friendly chat - otherwise it would be just a straightforward interview.

Of course having interviewed you under caution they might decide there's no grounds to proceed, and I'd like to think it's the case here.

The Don · 30th November 2012, 02:16 AM

Originally Posted by richardm

Police interview man in his 80s under caution

Rumours are rife that it's Rolf Harris in the frame now

[small kid outside a courthouse in 1920] Say it ain't so Joe [/small kid outside a courthouse in 1920]

Guybrush Threepwood · 30th November 2012, 02:41 AM

Originally Posted by wobs

I would be interested in what many think of the Savile related posts in this blog:
http://stevemoxon.blogspot.co.uk/

Whiny, poorly written, well poisoning drivel like the rest of his blog.

catsmate1 · 30th November 2012, 02:45 AM

Originally Posted by Guybrush Threepwood

Whiny, poorly written, well poisoning drivel like the rest of his blog.

Indeed:

Quote:

The particularly high-status older male together sexually with the nubile girl, as we can see throughout history, is as natural as it gets. Only in contemporary Western culture since the advent of the 'political-correctness' political-philosophy within the past two decades has this been regarded as a form of abuse.

richardm · 30th November 2012, 03:03 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

[small kid outside a courthouse in 1920] Say it ain't so Joe [/small kid outside a courthouse in 1920]

Well it might not be so, it's all just rumour at the moment.

Mind you at the rate things are going whoever it is should probably be glad to be picked up early and avoid the rush.

Rrose Selavy · 30th November 2012, 03:31 AM

Originally Posted by richardm

Well it might not be so, it's all just rumour at the moment.

Mind you at the rate things are going whoever it is should probably be glad to be picked up early and avoid the rush.

The main source for the specific name this time is a tweet from Mark Williams-Thomas, the guy who was involved in the original ITV documentary.

24th November 2012, 06:40 PM	#441
Straw Man Flammable Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: In your argument Posts: 8,188	Originally Posted by JihadJane Evidence suggests that Savile raped and abused his way through life with impunity, frequently targeting vulnerable young teenagers and children. What makes you think it appropriate to use this thread to indulge in puerile banter? It seems kind of sick to me. Okay, I will bite. The evidence, as far as I'm aware is hearsay. I spent some time in the company of Jimmy, alone, and he never laid a finger on me. I also remember a family friend that found himself in the midst of a child abuse scandal, and he lost his marriage, home and family. He died before he was exonerated. The world of today is totally different to the world of the 70's and 80's, and even earlier than that was a different place. As I think I may have mentioned in this thread, I knew girls of 14 who actively sought out the chance of a quick fumble with a Radio 1 DJ at a roadshow. I actually witnessed one. If she ever decides to start claiming any sort of abuse, I will happily be a witness for the defence. She knew exactly what she was doing. I also remember a girl who actively sought out ex-Blue Peter presenter John Leslie, and was so pleased to big it up until he faced accusations, and then suddenly she was a victim. I'm not yukking it up in any way. Any child abuse should be investigated, and if the accusations are true, the perpetrator should be punished. Whatever, an investigation does not mean getting a cheque from a newspaper. Fortunately, for the newspapers, dead people don't sue, and for certain newspapers, to get a chance to attack the BBC is wonderful. If it is viable, then it makes them a lot of money. Bonus is that dead people don't sue.
	__________________ The trouble with quotes on the Internet is that you can never know if they are genuine. -Abraham Lincoln You are a lawyer. You should know that evidence is not stuff printed from the internet. - Judge Margines: Taitz v Obama et al.

24th November 2012, 07:50 PM	#442
DragonLady Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Under the Starry, Starry Night Posts: 1,833	Quote: The world of today is totally different to the world of the 70's and 80's, and even earlier than that was a different place. That's true. I remember when child molesters were "funny uncles". It was only after all the witch hunts of the late '70s and early '80s that sexual abuse suddenly started making headlines everyday.
	__________________ It's NOT denial. I'm just very selective about the reality I accept. -- Calvin (Calvin and Hobbes) The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One

25th November 2012, 04:25 AM	#444
zooterkin Nitpicking dilettante Moderator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Berkshire, mostly Posts: 24,596	Originally Posted by JihadJane Multiple witnesses have come forward, independently, with very similar accounts of Savile's behavior. For this reason, and others, the police have said that they now consider that Savile was, indeed, a prolific sex offender. And I, and many others, are inclined to agree that it is seems very likely that he was an abuser of underage girls. That doesn't mean that we should uncritically accept every allegation that is made against him, and some of them seem particularly dodgy. Quote: Yes, false accusations happen but the weight of testimonies against Savile (450 allegations and growing), including some from the man himself about his own behavior, point away from this in Savile's case. I'd prefer to see the evidence evaluated for quality rather than quantity. Quote: If you suggesting that all the Savile accusers are all similar to this one person and, therefore, opportunistically lying when they say, for example, that he raped them against their will, I suggest you watch the videos I have linked to below. I don't think anyone is saying that (though I don't know if it has been ruled out as a possibility), but it doesn't mean the converse is true, either. One believable accuser doesn't validate all the rest. Quote: ITV's documentary 'Exposure The Other Side of Jimmy Savile' (review) is an investigation by an independent child welfare expert containing interviews with witnesses and victims. It concludes with an independent legal opinion that the evidence presented in the documentary would be sufficient to warrant Savile's arrest. I agree there would seem to be a case to answer, so arrest would be appropriate, were he still arrive. Note that it says "arrest', though, not "conviction".
	__________________ The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell Zooterkin is correct Darat Nerd! Hokulele Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

25th November 2012, 08:11 AM	#445
Childlike Empress Ewige Blumenkraft Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Ivory Tower Posts: 7,843	Originally Posted by JihadJane I can no longer find ITV's 'Exposure The Other Side of Jimmy Savile', in full, online - it has been blocked by the BBC on copyright grounds - but there are still extracts available: Another reason why one shouldn't rely on google alone as a search engine. Seems like they "cleaned" their index of links to it. Duckduckgo promptly delivers a link to dailymotion (third hit).
	__________________ Breaking The Set

25th November 2012, 09:29 AM	#446
JihadJane Penultimate Satisfaction Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 42,744	Quack, quack! Thanks! Very useful.
	__________________ THE END of the recession IS NIGH

25th November 2012, 11:13 AM	#447
Rrose Selavy Stranded in Sub-Atomica Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: UK Posts: 2,930	Originally Posted by Childlike Empress Another reason why one shouldn't rely on google alone as a search engine. Seems like they "cleaned" their index of links to it. Duckduckgo promptly delivers a link to dailymotion (third hit). No they haven't cleaned their index of it , just slightly changed the search page layout options for all searches. I found it just found your link using normal Google. Originally Posted by JihadJane I can no longer find ITV's 'Exposure The Other Side of Jimmy Savile', in full, online - it has been blocked by the BBC on copyright grounds - but there are still extracts available: . Why would the BBC be blocking an ITV program on copyright grounds? It's nothing to so with the BBC, Is this another of your BBC conspiracies or just another inaccuracy? -

25th November 2012, 11:18 AM	#448
zooterkin Nitpicking dilettante Moderator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Berkshire, mostly Posts: 24,596	Originally Posted by JihadJane Quack, quack! Thanks! I do hope you're not introducing levity into a thread about sexually abusing children and young teenagers.
	__________________ The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell Zooterkin is correct Darat Nerd! Hokulele Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

25th November 2012, 11:20 AM	#449
Professor Yaffle Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Emily's shop Posts: 15,356	Quote: This video contains content from BBC Worldwide, who has blocked it on copyright grounds. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nHDZ...A&feature=plcp
	__________________ I think you'll find it's a little bit more complicated than that. My blog "Well I think I've made it abundantly clear in this thread I have no idea what I'm talking about..." - truethat

25th November 2012, 11:44 AM	#450
Childlike Empress Ewige Blumenkraft Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Ivory Tower Posts: 7,843	Originally Posted by Rrose Selavy No they haven't cleaned their index of it , just slightly changed the search page layout options for all searches. I found it just found your link using normal Google. You found a link to duckduckgo on google? Colour me skeptical. Originally Posted by Rrose Selavy Why would the BBC be blocking an ITV program on copyright grounds? It's nothing to so with the BBC, Is this another of your BBC conspiracies or just another inaccuracy? - See Prof. above.
	__________________ Breaking The Set

25th November 2012, 11:57 AM	#451
Rrose Selavy Stranded in Sub-Atomica Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: UK Posts: 2,930	Originally Posted by Childlike Empress You found a link to duckduckgo on google? Colour me skeptical. No problem finding link to duckduckgo.com site on Google. Not any finding the full doc on DailyMotion on Google Whatever the distribution arrangement for the particular blocked link If the BBC and Google are conspiring to stop us finding it they're not doing a very good job. -

25th November 2012, 05:36 PM	#452
vwgub Muse Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Seattle Posts: 591	Originally Posted by JihadJane Sorry, so what was your point in posting that video with the comment "It was so common that bands recorded songs advocating it." Were you having a little laugh about sexually abusing children in the park? That's what I was thinking. Because thinking about sexually abusing children is so funny. You know instead of making fun of sexual abuse which is funny.
	__________________ God, I love this place! A total geekout on a baseball question. - Piggy

25th November 2012, 08:14 PM	#453
angrysoba Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 8,587	nm

26th November 2012, 03:26 AM	#454
Sledge Grammaton Cleric Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Swingin' on a star Posts: 7,123	Originally Posted by vwgub That's what I was thinking. Because thinking about sexually abusing children is so funny. You know instead of making fun of sexual abuse which is funny. As Phil Collins would say, you're talking nonce sense.
	__________________ "The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.

26th November 2012, 03:53 AM	#455
Matthew Best Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Leicester Square, London Posts: 4,147	I don't believe these allegations against Jimmy Saville. I met him in Leeds General Hospital in the 1980s and he seemed very nice. Next people will be telling me he wasn't actually qualified to perform my prostate examination.

26th November 2012, 09:56 AM	#456
Captain_Swoop Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: North Yorkshire Posts: 3,947	I thought he was all heart When i was young he fixed it for me to wear a blindfold and milk a cow.

26th November 2012, 10:03 AM	#457
Matthew Best Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Leicester Square, London Posts: 4,147	People go on and on about "those poor children", but they didn't mind - most of them were already dead.

26th November 2012, 12:16 PM	#458
oody Muse Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Arkansas Posts: 929	Dave Seville was doing what? With whom?

27th November 2012, 12:11 PM	#459
Darat Lackey Administrator / JREF Forum Liaison Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 64,795	Nothing much to say about this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...ester-20516533 Why it wasn't stopped is beyond a mystery to me.
	__________________ If it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart? - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn 1918-2008

27th November 2012, 12:57 PM	#460
Rrose Selavy Stranded in Sub-Atomica Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: UK Posts: 2,930	Originally Posted by Darat Nothing much to say about this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...ester-20516533 Why it wasn't stopped is beyond a mystery to me. The conspiracy theorists might say it was possibly influenced by the picarious position of the Govts of the day often relying on the Liberal vote and not wanting a scandal to rock the political boat.. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...stminster.html

27th November 2012, 03:10 PM	#461
Captain_Swoop Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: North Yorkshire Posts: 3,947	Will they want to dig his body up like they want to do with Savile?

29th November 2012, 02:30 AM	#462
richardm Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,270	Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop Will they want to dig his body up like they want to do with Savile? I'd like to see them try. He was cremated. Edit: Originally Posted by Wikipedia Smith was a reasonable singer. He sang "She's a Lassie From Lancashire" on Jimmy Savile's early-1970s TV show Clunk Click It's so tempting to read something into this, but Smith was quite the popular character at the time, as was Savile whose Clunk Click programme hauled in minor celebs to do I know not what. Actually I really do not know what they did on that show, I have no recollection of it whatsoever and the internet is quite unforthcoming.
richardm Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,270	__________________ Rimmer: Look at her! Magnificent woman! Very prim, very proper, almost austere. Some people took her for cold, thought she was aloof. Not a bit of it. She just despised fools. Quite tragic, really, because otherwise I think we'd have got on famously. Last edited by richardm; 29th November 2012 at 02:46 AM.

29th November 2012, 03:16 AM	#463
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,866	Originally Posted by richardm I'd like to see them try. He was cremated. Edit: It's so tempting to read something into this, but Smith was quite the popular character at the time, as was Savile whose Clunk Click programme hauled in minor celebs to do I know not what. Actually I really do not know what they did on that show, I have no recollection of it whatsoever and the internet is quite unforthcoming. You raise an interesting point and I, for one, will no longer wear a seatbelt in a moving car. Take that, savile!
uk_dave Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 7,866

29th November 2012, 03:30 AM	#464
Captain_Swoop Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: North Yorkshire Posts: 3,947	'Clunk Click every trip' was the 'catch phrase' for the TV ads explaining the new seat belt laws in the 1970s. Savile was the Celeb who fronted the ads.

29th November 2012, 06:31 AM	#465
richardm Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,270	[Captain_Swoop;8805016]'Clunk Click every trip' was the 'catch phrase' for the TV ads explaining the new seat belt laws in the 1970s. Savile was the Celeb who fronted the ads.[/quote] Yes, I know that. But what I didn't know is that there was also some kind of variety programme called "Clunk Click" that went out on the BBC on Saturday nights, which he hosted. It was apparently a precursor of Jim'll Fix It. Edit: It ran for 20 episodes between 1973 and 1974, apparently. Which no doubt explains why I don't remember it. Edit again: Actually just as a point of order they were just public safety adverts; seat belt use didn't become law until the 1980s.
richardm Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,270	__________________ Rimmer: Look at her! Magnificent woman! Very prim, very proper, almost austere. Some people took her for cold, thought she was aloof. Not a bit of it. She just despised fools. Quite tragic, really, because otherwise I think we'd have got on famously. Last edited by richardm; 29th November 2012 at 06:39 AM.

29th November 2012, 07:29 AM	#466
catsmate1 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Dublin (the one in Ireland) Posts: 7,134	Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop 'Clunk Click every trip' was the 'catch phrase' for the TV ads explaining the new seat belt laws in the 1970s. Savile was the Celeb who fronted the ads. I thought it was "Clunk, click. even on the shortest trip."
	__________________ Yes I gave in and configured an avatar.

29th November 2012, 07:35 AM	#467
richardm Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,270	Originally Posted by catsmate1 I thought it was "Clunk, click. even on the shortest trip." It started out as "...every trip", but the "...on the shortest trip" came along later because of the tendency for people to think "ah, I'm only just going round the corner, it's not worth bothering with this incredibly cumbersome strap".
richardm Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,270	__________________ Rimmer: Look at her! Magnificent woman! Very prim, very proper, almost austere. Some people took her for cold, thought she was aloof. Not a bit of it. She just despised fools. Quite tragic, really, because otherwise I think we'd have got on famously.

29th November 2012, 09:32 AM	#468
Captain_Swoop Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: North Yorkshire Posts: 3,947	I don't remember the variety show either!

29th November 2012, 09:56 AM	#469
richardm Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,270	Police interview man in his 80s under caution Rumours are rife that it's Rolf Harris in the frame now
richardm Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,270	__________________ Rimmer: Look at her! Magnificent woman! Very prim, very proper, almost austere. Some people took her for cold, thought she was aloof. Not a bit of it. She just despised fools. Quite tragic, really, because otherwise I think we'd have got on famously.

29th November 2012, 10:29 AM	#470
zooterkin Nitpicking dilettante Moderator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Berkshire, mostly Posts: 24,596	Originally Posted by richardm Police interview man in his 80s under caution Rumours are rife that it's Rolf Harris in the frame now I hope it turns out to be someone (or something) else.
	__________________ The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell Zooterkin is correct Darat Nerd! Hokulele Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

29th November 2012, 10:58 AM	#471
Sledge Grammaton Cleric Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Swingin' on a star Posts: 7,123	Good grief. My childhood hasn't felt this defiled since Michael Bay started making Transformers films.
	__________________ "The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.

29th November 2012, 11:29 AM	#472
commandlinegamer Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Mazes of Menace Posts: 5,904	An interview under caution isn't an arrest, far less a charge. Nor is it the same as being cautioned, which may result if a person admits an offence but the matter does not go to court.
	__________________ He bade me take any rug in the house.

29th November 2012, 07:28 PM	#473
Justin39640 Illuminator Join Date: May 2009 Location: New York Posts: 3,646	Originally Posted by Rrose Selavy No problem finding link to duckduckgo.com site on Google. Not any finding the full doc on DailyMotion on Google Whatever the distribution arrangement for the particular blocked link If the BBC and Google are conspiring to stop us finding it they're not doing a very good job. - Comes up on my Google search. On a Google search result page (not the main page), click the gear icon in the upper right hand corner. In the pulldown menu hit "search options". Set your "SafeSearch filtering" setting to "no filtering". Most likely the issue. ETA: I only noticed a few weeks ago mine was set to "moderate" and switched it. Must be the default.
	__________________ "I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine "The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus Last edited by Justin39640; 29th November 2012 at 07:35 PM.

30th November 2012, 01:29 AM	#474
wobs Thinker Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 236	I would be interested in what many think of the Savile related posts in this blog: http://stevemoxon.blogspot.co.uk/
wobs Thinker Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 236	__________________ "To vowels. They stop consonants sticking together like boiled sweets in a paper bag."

30th November 2012, 01:33 AM	#475
richardm Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,270	Originally Posted by commandlinegamer An interview under caution isn't an arrest, far less a charge. Nor is it the same as being cautioned, which may result if a person admits an offence but the matter does not go to court. No it isn't, but it's a very worrying indication that the police suspect you of having committed an offence, and they question you under the same caution you get when you are arrested, i.e. the "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence" etc spiel. It's important for them to do that because they anticipate hauling you up in front of a judge at some point, and unless you're interviewed under caution they can't use the interview as evidence. It doesn't say anything about whether you're guilty or not, just that the police think they have a bit more to work with than should be handled by a friendly chat - otherwise it would be just a straightforward interview. Of course having interviewed you under caution they might decide there's no grounds to proceed, and I'd like to think it's the case here.
richardm Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,270	__________________ Rimmer: Look at her! Magnificent woman! Very prim, very proper, almost austere. Some people took her for cold, thought she was aloof. Not a bit of it. She just despised fools. Quite tragic, really, because otherwise I think we'd have got on famously.

30th November 2012, 02:16 AM	#476
The Don Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Cymru Posts: 8,265	Originally Posted by richardm Police interview man in his 80s under caution Rumours are rife that it's Rolf Harris in the frame now [small kid outside a courthouse in 1920] Say it ain't so Joe [/small kid outside a courthouse in 1920]