Jimmy Savile Deid

[tup]

As proven by my earlier posts which were deleted months ago, I tend to err forcefully on the 'aye, he's a paedo' side, until proven otherwise.

 

Then I might grudgingly accept I jumped the gun.

[360]

Saw a member of Savile's family on the news the other night saying that the documentary shouldn't be aired because he is not alive to defend himself.

 

I agree, because Savile is dead, we should all forget the whole thing and move on.

 

[tup]

All the more reason to get torn into him I say.

 

Beast that he was.

[Top Cat]

As proven by my earlier posts which were deleted months ago, I tend to err forcefully on the 'aye, he's a paedo' side, until proven otherwise.

Then I might grudgingly accept I jumped the gun.

 

How might someone prove they're not a paedo?

[tup]

How might someone prove they're not a paedo?

 

I tend to favour mob rule in these instances.

 

If enough folk start saying it, it's true is my mantra, which I've adhered to since childhood.

 

If someone telt me so and so was a suspect character, I'd make sure to spread it about enough folk to ensure that person was tarred for life with that handle, whether they deserved it or not.

 

No smoke without fire as they say.

[diamondsr4ever]

Do you think their claims are genuine?

 

Why?

 

It works both ways.

 

I've seen the world we live in, and what people will do for a little publicity and / or money, so I don't tend to believe these stories until they've actually been proven.

 

Wasn't big Sav given the 'insufficient evidence to continue' of these claims years ago? Why not step forward back then those people who claimed he touched them? It was perfect opportunity of getting jusitce? Why now?

 

I've no idea if their claims are genuine or not, if they are why now? again no idea...I've never been subject to abuse to answer why people leave it this long, it is however common for those who have been abused to keep this a secret until their abusers are dead, especially within families etc, it just takes one person to be brave for others to follow.

 

you need to read a bit about it to understand it, maybe then it will help you answer the questions you ask and not just think its for the money.

[tup]

This is even better, seeing the beast smeared when he's pan breid. Fuck him and his family. They'll all be weirdos too.

 

This is the kind of stuff I want to hear.

 

Just say it, fuck his family and whatever they think.

 

Guaranteed they knew he was a paedo but kept their traps shut as long as the cash rolled in.

 

Making them complicit and making me not give a fuck about what they think about what's happening now.

[Bluto10]

bripod

 

always be wary of someone who looks out for a positive celtic result.

 

wee bripod knows.

[Top Cat]

I tend to favour mob rule in these instances.

 

If enough folk start saying it, it's true is my mantra, which I've adhered to since childhood.

 

If someone telt me so and so was a suspect character, I'd make sure to spread it about enough folk to ensure that person was tarred for life with that handle, whether they deserved it or not.

 

No smoke without fire as they say.

 

So what you're saying is, I, for instance, would need to organise a pre-emptive "Top Cat is not a paedo" mob. Just in case some bitter, angry, little man decided to try and tarnish my upstanding reputation. Otherwise, I would be assumed guilty by not denying something I hadn't been accused of.

 

I think the phrase, "Whoever smelt it, dealt it" is more apt.

[tup]

So what you're saying is, I, for instance, would need to organise a pre-emptive "Top Cat is not a paedo" mob. Just in case some bitter, angry, little man decided to try and tarnish my upstanding reputation. Otherwise, I would be assumed guilty by not denying something I hadn't been accused of.

 

I think the phrase, "Whoever smelt it, dealt it" is more apt.

 

I'm neither bitter, little nor angry.

 

I just enjoy giving folk abuse.

 

Especially if they're weird or they've got something wrong with them.

[The Boofon]

I think it's called Richard Gough syndrome.

 

Say something often enough and it becomes true.

 

A bad choice Bripod as it's a known fact that he is indeed a child molester so it hasn't become true because it's been said enough.

 

It's an accurate song.

[Top Cat]

To my mind, it was always mark hateley or terry hurlock who had 'that look about them'.

[tup]

I would not have liked to be in a cub scout pack in a dark forest at night with Tommy Burns in charge of the troop.

[minijc]

Holy fuck. The McCanns used Madeleine to try and claim money? I've heard it all now.

 

Did they deliberately leave it open for her to be abducted or did they "try and claim money" after the event?

 

How the fuck can you, of all people, look at both sides? You don't see fuck all let alone one side through the fog of your thick mind.

 

There is overwhelming evidence that he has always been a paedo. Whenever it comes to light is irrelevant.

 

Given the various competing motivations to keep a lid on it, of course it wasn't going to come out then.

 

This is even better, seeing the beast smeared when he's pan breid. Fuck him and his family. They'll all be weirdos too.

Nope but they fair milked it and avoided charges for child neglect, I can't stand that pair one bit.

[Big Man]

'Saville attacked me at 13'.

 

Why's it taken you this long to say anything then?

 

They all come out the woodwork now to be heard or get a bit of money from it for 'trauma over the years' of dealing with it.

 

You really ken fuck all about the human condition don't you...

[tommo1903]

Tup is a peado as well, allegedly.

[woohoo]

He's a necrophiliac too.

 

According to David Icke anyway.

[The Boofon]

He's a necrophiliac too.

 

According to David Icke anyway.

 

Who Tup?

 

I didn't think Tup knew David Icke.

[Monkey]

You really ken fuck all about the human condition don't you...

 

Bit harsh.

 

I think Roberto's question about why these people have only now come forward after some 30 years is a fair one.

 

There may be perfectly good reasons for it or they may be as I think Roberto is suggesting "at it".

[The Boofon]

I'm betting there are a few stories surface now he's deid.

 

He's dodgy all right. Properly dodgy.

 

Anyone who shags dead bodies must be strange.

 

I believe the term used is BOOM?

 

 

i remember seeing Jimmy Saville at Parkhead during a Celtic v Aberdeen game in the 80's. He was up here doing a marathon or something and he came out of the tunnel and the whole stadium started cheering and shouting encouragement.

Then a Celtic supporter threw him a scarf and the home supporters got noisy. Of course the away end wasnt so chuffed and gave it " Jimmy Saville - yer a wanker,yer a wanker"

So he continued his jog around the stadium and heard the aberdeen chants and he sorta lowered his trackie-breeks to show a pair of red shorts and a huge cheer went up in the Aberdeen end - "Theres only one Jimmy Saville". The whole stadium were in unison once again.

 

Happy moments.

 

It would appear that the saying it takes one to know one couldn't be more correct in this instance.

 

Celtic fans cheering on a kiddie fiddler. Well I never.

[The Boofon]

I'm very fortunate to have Jimmy as one of the few celebrities who I haven't met.

 

Although to be fair I'm over the age of 16, not dead and not a female so I'd have been safe enough as he shagged underage girls and dead bodies.

 

Is it safe to mention Steve Lomas on this board again?

[Monkey]

It's very likely not just the case that they're "at it" given one of the main reasons for abuse victims not coming forward is that they fear they won't be believed.

 

Chuck in the fact that he was one if the country's biggest stars at the time then his question might well be answered.

 

That's fair comment. A young girl may have been very reluctant to say anything at the time simply because he was a "celebrity" and they may have thought no one would of believed them.

 

He's been out of the public eye for a long time though and given he apparently sued the sun in 2008 over various allegations he was involved in Child Abuse in Jersey you might think that they may have mentioned it then.

 

I'm not suggesting that these women are all liers or are at it. I'm merely saying Roberto's question about why they only appear after he is dead is a fair one.

[The Boofon]

 

 

 

:hysterical:

[Big Man]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-19822296

 

 

[Ke1t]

[zig-a-zig-ah]

http://m.direct.asda.com/on/demandware.store/Sites-ASDA-Site/default/Product-Show?pid=001873788

[Redstar]

That's fair comment. A young girl may have been very reluctant to say anything at the time simply because he was a "celebrity" and they may have thought no one would of believed them.

 

He's been out of the public eye for a long time though and given he apparently sued the sun in 2008 over various allegations he was involved in Child Abuse in Jersey you might think that they may have mentioned it then.

 

I'm not suggesting that these women are all liers or are at it. I'm merely saying Roberto's question about why they only appear after he is dead is a fair one.

I'd agree with this... it's pretty poor show that these alleged victims have only voiced their allegation's after Savile is in his box...it does smack of "compo Britain"...In the line of work Savile based his career on only an idiot would have been up to the nonsense he is accused of...if the complainers are found to be "at it" for a pay-out they should be given a similar sentence as Savile would have got if he had been found guilty

[dj_bollocks]

Who's watching the doc on STV then...

[360]

Recording it.

 

Watched the first bit but QI is on now.

[tommo1903]