No smoke without fire eh?
Of course sometimes one has to make the smoke.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
No smoke without fire?
last reply
110 replies
4.8k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Quote by star
I wonder if that is where the original idea about child line came from...her own guilt?
Well, she's now pushing buttons and briefing against Sir Jimmy big time.
Perhaps she's just pissed off she didn't make Baroness Esther..... only a lowly Commander of the British Empire.
Hell hath no fury etc etc....
Sexpert
There does seem to be a bit of smoke now, even with the inevitable jumping on the band wagon, it does look like there is also a fire.
Sex God
Quote by Robert400andKay
There does seem to be a bit of smoke now, even with the inevitable jumping on the band wagon, it does look like there is also a fire.
jimmy fawkes!! now thats an intersting thought shame the fuckers not alive to enjoy the bonfire
Quote by Lizaleanrob
There does seem to be a bit of smoke now, even with the inevitable jumping on the band wagon, it does look like there is also a fire.
jimmy fawkes!! now thats an intersting thought shame the fuckers not alive to enjoy the bonfire
The way this is going, I wouldn't doubt for a minute that they'll dig him up and burn him at the stake....
Sex God
Quote by flower411
After witnessing the media in all this, is there anyone who still thinks the media does not need more regulation?
I cannot remember the last time there was this kind of witch hunt from our media, certainty not this kind of utter downright nastiness.
But it`s only words !! They can`t do any harm .
garry glitter arrested!!! now there is a real suprise
Sex God
so saville walked into a hospital at 1 am in the morning ,asked for the keys to the ward where all the young girls was housed ,was handed the keys!!! and then left at 5am in the morning
and no one thought this was odd WTF!!!
and no one thought this was odd WTF!!!
And now...
Some woman comes forward and say she was molested on TV by Sir Jimmy when she was 18!
FFS why raise this now (if not for joining in the compensation culture)? Surely at 18, she was old enough to swing round and knee him in the nuts if she was so upset by it whether on camera or not :shock:
The footage being shown actually appears to show her enjoying it.
Some woman comes forward and say she was molested on TV by Sir Jimmy when she was 18!
FFS why raise this now (if not for joining in the compensation culture)? Surely at 18, she was old enough to swing round and knee him in the nuts if she was so upset by it whether on camera or not :shock:
The footage being shown actually appears to show her enjoying it.
Maybe worth resurrecting this thread now that Entwistle has fallen on his sword after only 54 days in the job as DG of the BBC after the awful revelations about the Newsnight debacle where they accused a high profile Tory of the Thatcher era of being a without a shred of evidence.
This feeding frenzy has to stop surely.
Did Newsnight have any real evidence about Sir Jimmy, or have they just created this from thin air with similar appalling journalism, creating a fire without smoke against someone who is unable to defend himself in the way that Baron McAlpine has been able to?
This feeding frenzy has to stop surely.
Did Newsnight have any real evidence about Sir Jimmy, or have they just created this from thin air with similar appalling journalism, creating a fire without smoke against someone who is unable to defend himself in the way that Baron McAlpine has been able to?
Quote by GnV
Maybe worth resurrecting this thread now that Entwistle has fallen on his sword after only 54 days in the job as DG of the BBC after the awful revelations about the Newsnight debacle where they accused a high profile Tory of the Thatcher era of being a without a shred of evidence.
This feeding frenzy has to stop surely.
Did Newsnight have any real evidence about Sir Jimmy, or have they just created this from thin air with similar appalling journalism, creating a fire without smoke against someone who is unable to defend himself in the way that Baron McAlpine has been able to?
But hasn't it been reported that the police let McAlpine's name out? so whilst the newsnight editor may have been remiss, surely some of the blame lies at the door of the police?
Sex God
looks like DLT has been put in the picture seems he really was the hairy Monster
Quote by Paddy
Former Radio 1 DJ Dave Lee Travis has been bailed after his arrest in connection with the Savile sex abuse inquiry.
I hope neither I or SH are libelled for my post
He was arrested. Charged? What with not a single thing? I wonder why.
In cases such as this it serves no purpose at all to name people of highish celebrity status or for that matter any person , without a single charge being made let alone convicted of anything.
Sexpert
He was bailed I did think that required a charge of some sort, otherwise the Police would just let you go. Can't find any reference to a charge although I am looking at the BBC web site 
Sex God
Quote by GnV
To me it seams totally pointless, no one to prosecute
Oh, but there may be Blue.
Not Sir Jimmy of course, but - and a big but - if the allegations hold true, those who were complicit and had a duty of care to safeguard the well being of vulnerable children and failed in that duty should be brought to book.
Yes indeed they should
Sex God
Quote by starlightcouple
Seems they set their sights on The late Sir Cyril Smith now....
What a scandal GnV.
A more gentle caring man you would be hard pressed to find. I feel for his family who are in a situation of how do we defend a man that is dead?
The 'rumours'/ allegations about Cyril Smith are neither new or without a certain amount of creedence ... his family it would appear have had no desire to defend him
The real scandal is that these people in places of fame and power, were able to get away with this for so long.
What a scandal GnV.
A more gentle caring man you would be hard pressed to find. I feel for his family who are in a situation of how do we defend a man that is dead?
Quote by starlightcouple
Seems they set their sights on The late Sir Cyril Smith now....
What a scandal GnV.
A more gentle caring man you would be hard pressed to find. I feel for his family who are in a situation of how do we defend a man that is dead?
Quote by deancannock
The real scandal is that these people in places of fame and power, were able to get away with this for so long.
Get away with what exactly Dean?
Have there been any charges? What not a single charge? Not even a sniff of a charge?
Enlighten me Dean as to what ' these people ' have got away with exactly? Also I would like you to provide me with some actual proof and not idle tittle tattle from the media.
I shall wait anxiously for your reply.
Quote by starlightcouple
The real scandal is that these people in places of fame and power, were able to get away with this for so long.
Get away with what exactly Dean?
Have there been any charges? What not a single charge? Not even a sniff of a charge?
Enlighten me Dean as to what ' these people ' have got away with exactly? Also I would like you to provide me with some actual proof and not idle tittle tattle from the media.
I shall wait anxiously for your reply.
so you call over 150 lines of enquiry being followed up by the Police idle tittle tattle. Lets be glad The police do bother to take this serious. They can't charge Jimmy Saville or Cyril Smith unfortunatly....but that is no reason not pursue the truth.
Charges will follow for those still alive. I just hope that the fact this is being pursued will warn others in power, that if they tread outside the law....it will come back to haunt them.
Quote by deancannock
The real scandal is that these people in places of fame and power, were able to get away with this for so long.
Get away with what exactly Dean?
Have there been any charges? What not a single charge? Not even a sniff of a charge?
Enlighten me Dean as to what ' these people ' have got away with exactly? Also I would like you to provide me with some actual proof and not idle tittle tattle from the media.
I shall wait anxiously for your reply.
so you call over 150 lines of enquiry being followed up by the Police idle tittle tattle. Lets be glad The police do bother to take this serious. They can't charge Jimmy Saville or Cyril Smith unfortunatly....but that is no reason not pursue the truth.
Charges will follow for those still alive. I just hope that the fact this is being pursued will warn others in power, that if they tread outside the law....it will come back to haunt them.
Well let us hope the police follow different lines of inquiry than they did when investigating Hillsborough eh?
Chickens....home............roost ?
Sex God
Quote by starlightcouple
Seems they set their sights on The late Sir Cyril Smith now....
What a scandal GnV.
A more gentle caring man you would be hard pressed to find. I feel for his family who are in a situation of how do we defend a man that is dead?
Well Star..... You are not often right - but it seems like you are wrong again with this one..............
"Both Greater Manchester Police (GMP) and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said if Smith had been accused today he would be charged and prosecuted.
A GMP spokesman said: "The Force is now publicly acknowledging that young boys were victims of physical and sexual abuse committed by Smith."
Well, I can't agree and I feel quite strongly about this.
This is a modern day witch hunt - complete with pond, ducking stool and dark characters with long flowing trench coats and a law unto themselves.
The DPP and the CPS declared at the time there was insufficient evidence on which to convict.
That is enough for me. There is no 'double jeopardy' when the accused is dead and unable to defend himself - and that is the position in both cases.
If the case of Sir Cyril was so well known at the time (as indeed, apparently, the case of Sir Jimmy) how come the body responsible for considering nominations for honours (at the highest possible Ministerial level) still went ahead and they were knighted?
It couldn't possibly be that there was no evidence, could it?
And if there's no smoke without fire, why weren't the nomination for these honours buried (as so many are)?
As I wrote earlier in the thread, if people now believe they were harmed in some way then they should be given what ever support is available but, as evidenced in the unfortunate mistaken identity case of Baron MacAlpine, people do get things wrong. How different might this story have been if the Noble Baron was in his box and unable to defend himself as indeed he did so, so eloquently.
This support should not include subscription to modern day witch hunts creating moral panic, mass hysteria and public lynchings the likes of which have not been seen since it was outlawed in 1735 in the UK with senior police officers wasting time pursuing the impossible and disrespecting the dead.
As the PM has said, if someone has evidence of child abuse, they should take that evidence to the Police. However, in the cases of Sir Jimmy and Sir Cyril, there is no new evidence on which to convict that has not been examined before, nor can they be subjected to a 'toe in the water' trial and they should be allowed to rest in peace with their good names preserved.
This is a modern day witch hunt - complete with pond, ducking stool and dark characters with long flowing trench coats and a law unto themselves.
The DPP and the CPS declared at the time there was insufficient evidence on which to convict.
That is enough for me. There is no 'double jeopardy' when the accused is dead and unable to defend himself - and that is the position in both cases.
If the case of Sir Cyril was so well known at the time (as indeed, apparently, the case of Sir Jimmy) how come the body responsible for considering nominations for honours (at the highest possible Ministerial level) still went ahead and they were knighted?
It couldn't possibly be that there was no evidence, could it?
And if there's no smoke without fire, why weren't the nomination for these honours buried (as so many are)?
As I wrote earlier in the thread, if people now believe they were harmed in some way then they should be given what ever support is available but, as evidenced in the unfortunate mistaken identity case of Baron MacAlpine, people do get things wrong. How different might this story have been if the Noble Baron was in his box and unable to defend himself as indeed he did so, so eloquently.
This support should not include subscription to modern day witch hunts creating moral panic, mass hysteria and public lynchings the likes of which have not been seen since it was outlawed in 1735 in the UK with senior police officers wasting time pursuing the impossible and disrespecting the dead.
As the PM has said, if someone has evidence of child abuse, they should take that evidence to the Police. However, in the cases of Sir Jimmy and Sir Cyril, there is no new evidence on which to convict that has not been examined before, nor can they be subjected to a 'toe in the water' trial and they should be allowed to rest in peace with their good names preserved.
Quote by GnV
Well, I can't agree and I feel quite strongly about this.
This is a modern day witch hunt - complete with pond, ducking stool and dark characters with long flowing trench coats and a law unto themselves.
The DPP and the CPS declared at the time there was insufficient evidence on which to convict.
That is enough for me. There is no 'double jeopardy' when the accused is dead and unable to defend himself - and that is the position in both cases.
If the case of Sir Cyril was so well known at the time (as indeed, apparently, the case of Sir Jimmy) how come the body responsible for considering nominations for honours (at the highest possible Ministerial level) still went ahead and they were knighted?
It couldn't possibly be that there was no evidence, could it?
And if there's no smoke without fire, why weren't the nomination for these honours buried (as so many are)?
As I wrote earlier in the thread, if people now believe they were harmed in some way then they should be given what ever support is available but, as evidenced in the unfortunate mistaken identity case of Baron MacAlpine, people do get things wrong. How different might this story have been if the Noble Baron was in his box and unable to defend himself as indeed he did so, so eloquently.
This support should not include subscription to modern day witch hunts creating moral panic, mass hysteria and public lynchings the likes of which have not been seen since 1735 in the UK with senior police officers wasting time pursuing the impossible and disrespecting the dead.
As the PM has said, if someone has evidence of child abuse, they should take that evidence to the Police. However, in the cases of Sir Jimmy and Sir Cyril, there is no new evidence on which to convict that has not been examined before, nor can they be subjected to a 'toe in the water' trial and they should be allowed to rest in peace with their good names preserved.
Quite agree that there should not be a witch hunt. but the police have said that the lines of evidence from the deceased could lead to prosecutions for the living. Surely those lines should be followed up?
What disturbs me the most about this is the media and public frenzy. It is very similar to a wild animal trapped in a snare biting at its body to free itself,
IMHO the Police have lost the plot.
Amongst other things, females appointed to very senior positions, not in my view, based entirely on merit but because it's PC (no pun intended) to do so.
And how ridiculous some of them look in uniform; tiny shoulders weighted down with oversized and too many badges of rank for their petit form and an absence of a peak on their headgear to contain all the egg yoke.
Whatever happened to the oath 'without fear or favour'?
These days, the powers that be in the Police seem to favour pursuing only those issues that allow them maximum exposure to follow the Police equivalent of the science of apologetics.
They seem no longer capable of taking an independent stance, a step back from exposure or a tendency to one view or another, which is a very necessary element of their efficiency in performing their duties effectively. They must remain independent and open-minded.
I can cite examples and some forumites might find my view unsurprising. I am particularly reminded of the tragic recent case of the little girl who went missing believed to have come to some harm at the hands of a 'monster' (still not found, I believe but a man is in custody). The popularity of this case was exampled with pink (or similar) lapel badges but why was it necessary for the police to show solidarity (if that is what it was) by wearing these tokens on their uniforms as well?
The Police should be entirely independent and above this type of tokenisation. I doubt any right thinking person would condemn them for not wearing these 'tokens'.
They may be trying to improve their sensitivity but its not going to work with the current approach being taken nor by the people being selected at a senior level to follow this ideology.
Amongst other things, females appointed to very senior positions, not in my view, based entirely on merit but because it's PC (no pun intended) to do so.
And how ridiculous some of them look in uniform; tiny shoulders weighted down with oversized and too many badges of rank for their petit form and an absence of a peak on their headgear to contain all the egg yoke.
Whatever happened to the oath 'without fear or favour'?
These days, the powers that be in the Police seem to favour pursuing only those issues that allow them maximum exposure to follow the Police equivalent of the science of apologetics.
They seem no longer capable of taking an independent stance, a step back from exposure or a tendency to one view or another, which is a very necessary element of their efficiency in performing their duties effectively. They must remain independent and open-minded.
I can cite examples and some forumites might find my view unsurprising. I am particularly reminded of the tragic recent case of the little girl who went missing believed to have come to some harm at the hands of a 'monster' (still not found, I believe but a man is in custody). The popularity of this case was exampled with pink (or similar) lapel badges but why was it necessary for the police to show solidarity (if that is what it was) by wearing these tokens on their uniforms as well?
The Police should be entirely independent and above this type of tokenisation. I doubt any right thinking person would condemn them for not wearing these 'tokens'.
They may be trying to improve their sensitivity but its not going to work with the current approach being taken nor by the people being selected at a senior level to follow this ideology.
