Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
I've already been asked by a colleague if this is acceptable. I say no.
Absolutely certain that the Saville fancy dress will be out in a weeks time. It's a bit too near the knuckle though
If so, please reconsider.
and every single one of them is an absolute douchebag.
doesn't actually mean anything though.
When the story first broke, he said he was aware the newspapers had wanted to run stories on Savile for 30 years, and now he's talking like he had first-hand knowledge of the situation (necrophilia accusations aside). Not a fan of Paul Gambaccini tbh.
If he knew things were happening why didn't he speak up at the time instead of just hand-wringing now? Prick
It would appear that this Saville guy was an utter deviant and apparently had some sort of forcefield around him stopping from anything happening. What I don't understand is how no-one connected the dots before if so many people had heard of the allegations?
they did. but they were either cowardly, or as the BBC put it yesterday, stopped from voicing their opinions by the 'culture at the time'. Bulletproof celebrities.
him spending Christmas with Margaret Thatcher for the best part of 10 years
when you have to investigate 'unaccompanied trips to the morgue', nothing is going to go okay.
and holocaust survivors
I first read this as mortals andhought it was funny.
I'm just not morally outraged at the notion of adults having sex with 15 year old. Don't condone it, but it doesn't fire me up either.
But doing it with people in hospitals and dead people- wow! Part of me wants it to go even crazier- that he was a Jeffrey Dahmer type figure.
He's started the month as merely a creepy molester and now he's a necro-super-ultra-mega paedo.
the press have dropped an L for comedy purposes.
Does he or any of the others who had an idea that something was wrong have any guilt about not speaking up? I know there would have been pressures not to say anything but can Saville's power over everybody really have been that strong?
know as Maconie syndrome, which meant he can only commentate on cultural history for clip shows and rock biography documentaries.
He tried speaking out about Savillllle in 2004, but was only able to talk about the early 1970s edition od Top of the Pops that Saville hosted because of his condition.
but is the reason these accusations are coming up BECAUSE he's dead, or is he just really lucky he died before it all started coming out?
Don't pretend any of you weren't.
I think it's highly, highly unlikely that he is, but as someone above pointed out, it does seem a bit far-fetched that he fiddled with half of Yorkshire and it didn't get out just becausde he raised a couple of million quid for charity.
i doubt he was that rich.
he wasn't a national treasure, really.
i think he probably was guilty of *some* of the things he's being accused of.
i'll leave it there, because inevitably we'll just go back and forth for a couple of hours, you'll end up getting all Emily Davison on my ass, the shemales will wade in and milk you and then ists and isms will start getting bandied about again.
otherwise, what an unremittingly grim story this still is.
or is that article pure speculation?
Everyone had heard of these rumours, but that's all anyone can say - they were rumours. No one came out and said that they knew of the abuse and the only people, it seems, who could have done, were the victims, who for various reasons were unable to at the time.
Obviously everything has to be investigated, and it needs to be established whether there was some kind of cover up, but I do think it's pretty underhanded for the likes of Esther Rantzen to throw around accusations based on what amounts to little more than hearsay.
I think that there's also an interesting aspect to do with how the BBC are treating the story. Like with the Russell Brand/Andrew Sachs thing, they're so keen to be seen to be impartial and avoiding a cover up that they're self-flagellating over the story (making it the lead news item for day after day when it probably doesn't really justify it), to the extent that they are driving its status as a major news story. It's interesting to see this approach compared with that of the News International stable in the wake of the hacking scandal, especially as the Sun are using Jimmy Savile as a means to an end to attck the BBC.
I think the majority of Joe Public are indifferent to the alleged-cover-up story and more interested in the creation of a New Monster.
Its pretty galling hearing them take the moral highground on anything
It's payback time following all the hacking/Leveson stuff.
You'd have thought that they weak coverage of the NHS reforms might have wiped the slate clean, but apparently not.
The Jimmy Saville case is a good thought experiment for teaching first year students about utilitarianism.
Arguably the greater good is served by allowing a few corpses to be defiled, if the defiler is giving millions of pounds to a chronically underfunded hospital/children's home etc.
(the views above are not those of the author)
It's always "oh he killed 250 people".
We need some new news. Someone marry a goat or something.
Yesterday there was news about a talking whale.
It was talking about jimmy Saville.
Inappropriate behaviour they called it...
this was a reference to the League of Gentlemen sketch about the mortician btw.
and his day-to-day aim was to have sex with underage girls. The Jimmy Savile character he created was a smokescreen.
to sort this mes out before it even began:
And make sure he's not allowed on the radio, TV or in print ever ever again. If we could stitch up Paul Morley at the same time that would be FAB.
He's starting to sound like an accessory. And a prick.