Is the BBC hiding paedophiles?

[klr]

OK then. Savile didn't do it.

Do you see a reason to conclude that he did?

The default position is that he didn't. Why? Because no under-age child has ever complained.

How the hell, do you abuse a kid, complete strangers, and they never tell anyone?
Especially young girls. Have teenage girls always been so tight lipped?

This is just a growing pile of bollocks. They're all after compensation, that's all.

Not so convinced about that. Look at the omerta that surrounded children being buggered by priests up and down these two islands for the last 100 years, and no doubt longer.

Yep. Not one or two offenders, but a small army of them. And officially, there was nothing at all untoward wrong.

[JimC]

Has anyone wondered why so many of the programmes on the BBC target kiddies.........

And then there was the program that started your little game...

"On the Buses"...

[mistermack]

OK then. Savile didn't do it.

Do you see a reason to conclude that he did?

The default position is that he didn't. Why? Because no under-age child has ever complained.

How the hell, do you abuse a kid, complete strangers, and they never tell anyone?
Especially young girls. Have teenage girls always been so tight lipped?

This is just a growing pile of bollocks. They're all after compensation, that's all.

Not so convinced about that. Look at the omerta that surrounded children being buggered by priests up and down these two islands for the last 100 years, and no doubt longer.

Yeh, but, the big difference is that those kids DID complain. And their complaints were handled efficiently by the church.

Savile didn't have quite the grip on his so-called "victims" that the catholic church had, nor the orgaisation for sweeping it under the carpet.
He could hardly get them to sign a pledge to keep quiet, on pain of excommunication.

Anyway, they are now even talking on the telly about girls who were over 16 as being victims, even though they were legally entitled to shag whoever they liked. And almost certainly were.
Send me some horny 16 year old girls wanting sex. Sure I'm going to say, "no, no, it's against my principles".

[klr]

Oh great, Rod Liddle is on the BBC Newsnight panel. Maybe he might talk some sense for oncer.

[Audley Strange]

Especially young girls. Have teenage girls always been so tight lipped?

This is just a growing pile of bollocks.

I see.

[Cormac]

OK then. Savile didn't do it.

Do you see a reason to conclude that he did?

The default position is that he didn't. Why? Because no under-age child has ever complained.

How the hell, do you abuse a kid, complete strangers, and they never tell anyone?
Especially young girls. Have teenage girls always been so tight lipped?

This is just a growing pile of bollocks. They're all after compensation, that's all.

Not so convinced about that. Look at the omerta that surrounded children being buggered by priests up and down these two islands for the last 100 years, and no doubt longer.

Yeh, but, the big difference is that those kids DID complain. And their complaints were handled efficiently by the church.

Savile didn't have quite the grip on his so-called "victims" that the catholic church had, nor the orgaisation for sweeping it under the carpet.
He could hardly get them to sign a pledge to keep quiet, on pain of excommunication.

Anyway, they are now even talking on the telly about girls who were over 16 as being victims, even though they were legally entitled to shag whoever they liked. And almost certainly were.
Send me some horny 16 year old girls wanting sex. Sure I'm going to say, "no, no, it's against my principles".

No - they didn't complain for the most part. They were frightened into silence, either because they were threatened by the abuser, or because the social structures were too intimidatingly powerful.

[mistermack]

No - they didn't complain for the most part. They were frightened into silence, either because they were threatened by the abuser, or because the social structures were too intimidatingly powerful.

You bet your ass.
If I had said to my dad that the priest was touching me up, he would have given me a thrashing. I can guarantee that.
If I'd told him Jimmy Savile had interfered with me, he would have tried to kill Jimmy Savile.

Sad, but true.

[Cormac]

No - they didn't complain for the most part. They were frightened into silence, either because they were threatened by the abuser, or because the social structures were too intimidatingly powerful.

You bet your ass.
If I had said to my dad that the priest was touching me up, he would have given me a thrashing. I can guarantee that.
If I'd told him Jimmy Savile had interfered with me, he would have tried to kill Jimmy Savile.

Sad, but true.

So there are circumstances in which people feel they cannot come forward. Also, often people feel it is their fault. Also, in some cases they may not realise that something was wrong until later. Teenagers are, of course, sexual. BUT, we know that they are not always capable of making decisions that are in their own best interests. I suppose this is part of why people feel it is their fault.

But, where a man in his 30s deliberately goes out to fuck 14 year old children, he is a criminal, and the child is a victim - no matter the circumstances, and no matter how precocious or "forward" a child is.

That people felt they could not come forward is credible to me. Whether or not their testimony stacks up is another question, but I suspect that in many cases they will.

[cronus]

Abuse causes structural brain and behavioral changes in the brains of adolescents & children so proof of would be via cat scans with a large enough population.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/ ... -of-abuse/

[Clinton Huxley]

Necrophilia allegations now.....what next?!?

[Rum]

His taste in music was very questionable..

[Clinton Huxley]

I bet he gets exposed as a republican in tomorrow's papers.

[Rum]

..and he was probably a Mason.

[cronus]

They should check neighboring graves? He could have built a network of tunnels in the time he's been down there.

[Santa_Claus]

Given that he was Knighted into the Catholic Church and the British Monarchy - I think both organisations have some questions to answer.

Or does Sir before someone's name now mean PAEDO?