Jim'l fix it

Numpty 28723 wrote:

Natasha Whittam wrote:Shut the fuck up you bunch of wankers. Jimmy Saville raised millions for charity, and now some desperate production company has decided to make this shite now that he's dead, purely because he can't defend himself or take legal action.

Shameful.

as he said

AD, Demis Roussos ?

AD, Don't tell me. I'll have a think.

AD, are you referring to this guy ?

Natasha Whittam wrote:Yes. If you'd seen the smiling faces of the disabled kids as they set off to Blackpool in a fleet of taxis you'd know all this is bullshit.

So why did the BBC tell the Panorama department to drop the exact same investigation, whilst he was still alive? Why were the BBC so quick into advising that they have never covered up (presumably been advised by the same people who advised South Yorkshire police during the 1980's)? Why did a national tabloid actually do the investgation with evidence but all of a sudden decided to drop it?



Too many coincidences for my liking.

Now then, now then.

bwfc71 wrote:
So why did the BBC tell the Panorama department to drop the exact same investigation, whilst he was still alive? Why were the BBC so quick into advising that they have never covered up (presumably been advised by the same people who advised South Yorkshire police during the 1980's)? Why did a national tabloid actually do the investgation with evidence but all of a sudden decided to drop it?

Too many coincidences for my liking.

Shut up you Dutch bellend. There is no proof or it would be in the public eye. Instead the production company have got a few "maybes" and put them together to create a tacky TV show.

It seems some of you want to believe everything you read.

Nat, its been one of those rumours that everyone has accepted as so, for years. Kiddy fiddling isn't nice, even if it does pay for a fleet of taxis. I remember Paul Merton (?), the comedian, had a rant about him a few years ago, saying that he abused kids. Nothing came of that, i.e no prosecutions, although I believ the BBC quietened him down fairly quickly.

Anyone can start a rumour, it can damage people forever.

Until you see proof, you should keep your mouth shut.

It wouldn't damage as much as being abused and then intimidated by knowing that you couldn't say anything until the perpetrator was gone.

gloswhite wrote:It wouldn't damage as much as being abused and then intimidated by knowing that you couldn't say anything until the perpetrator was gone.

It seems you've already decided he's guilty even though the police investigated and found no evidence.

No, I'm fairly open-minded about it. However, rumours have been doing the rounds for years, and lets be honest, its not one young girl (as was) who has come forward, but five. I think Esther Rantzen, as shown on TV last night, accepted his guilt, not just on their comments, but also on what seems to be her own knowledge/experience of him. However, we'll see, as I don't think this is over by a long chalk. The discussions will vary depending on whether you see him as possibly doing it, or as an icon who brought so much happiness to many.

gloswhite wrote:The discussions will vary depending on whether you see him as possibly doing it, or as an icon who brought so much happiness to many.

When I was a kid our school would line the playground to watch the disabled kids go past in the taxis. Every single one of them looked happy. What more proof do you need?

Come on Nat, you know better than that. Also, is it politically correct these days to all stand around a wave at the disabled kids ? Its all a matter of perspective.

gloswhite wrote:Come on Nat, you know better than that. Also, is it politically correct these days to all stand around a wave at the disabled kids ? Its all a matter of perspective.

Are you on drugs? Why can't I wave at disabled kids?

Natasha Whittam wrote:Anyone can start a rumour, it can damage people forever.

Until you see proof, you should keep your mouth shut.

Still waiting for proof for one or two of your stories.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

Still waiting for proof for one or two of your stories.

Which ones?

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

Still waiting for proof for one or two of your stories.

Which ones?

I'll go with "all of them"

There is no smoke without fire. Savile always struck me as a bit of a dodgy bastard. He stuck up for Gary Glitter in an interview in 2009 which I found very odd.