bigvern1:
Muckaway:
I think Saville may have abused my Dad!
Well, he was on Top of the Pops!And you were the result. That explains a lot.
ooooh now then
now then now then guys and gals 
Did you know…?
keebs26uk:
Forgive me if any of what I’m saying has been said already, but I couldn’t be [zb] to read through all the ■■■■■■■■ it was boring me.Anyway I was abit wary about Saville being guilty but was listening to that women called June on the Radio today about how she witnessed him kiss a young brain damaged girl…and then touch her and the rest etc.
Hearing her on the radio I found that story very disturbing.
Made me really think why would she lie ? What has she to gain ?
Of course he done it, hes a sicko, and probably only done so much for charity to gain easy access to defenceless kids.
He even looks like a weirdo as well.
I think you may well be right. I’m just a lil upset as I used to love watching Jim will fix it when I was a kid I feel I was wasting my time watching a ■■■■ as a kid.
Yes it does all make sense the charity work and working nights in hospitals. Why nights ? Less people around ?
Why didn’t people speak out ? Because he was a millionaire and money talks, proberly told people, if you say one word who will the public believe ? Me a rich famous celebrity with lots of money or you ?
I wonder how those with more money than sense that bought stuff off his estate feel now?
There must be a lot of so called famous people still alive that are bricking it !!!
yup. Were gonna hear some more famous names connected to this soon…
FarnboroughBoy11:
Carryfast:
FarnboroughBoy11:
Carryfast:
FarnboroughBoy11:
Carryfast:
FarnboroughBoy11:
Can’t believe this thread is still going.
I gave up on about page 3 I think when Carryfast protested that it was ok if a 40 year old geezer passionately kisses a 15 year old girl.This is not a age gap thing it’s a sick peado thing.
It’s no different to a 15 year old bloke kissing that 15 year old bird and the clue is no one has ever been prosecuted for kissing a girl under the age of consent for a ■■■■■■ relationship because there’s big difference between the two.
I can’t believe what I’m reading.
There is a massive difference!!! They are both 15 therefor both kids, if a fella is 40 years old and kissing a 15 year old that is not right.
I don’t care if anyone has never been prosecuted for kissing a 15 year old it’s not right.
Your just picking and trying to find loopholes in the law to boast your views about age consent but morally its not right.Oh and for the record, if I was 30 I would happily mac daddy a bird of 19!!
Who gives a zb what you think is ‘morally’ right or not.The fact is if you’re right Joe Philpot and at least two other blokes who I know of personally,who dated mid teens girls,and then married them would have gone to jail.The fact is they didn’t so get over it.It’s a free country,so far,and it’s about time that the younger blokes these days realised that an older bloke has got just as much right to compete with them for the available women within the law as they have.Which is what the issue is really about in reserving the single birds for themselves and removing the competition.
What are you actually saying? If the law of consensual ■■■ was reduced to say 13, you would go for a 13 year old girl if she looked “developed”■■
It seems to me you go about your ways with regards to relationships/■■■ etc at the laws discretion, not what is human instinctively right or wrong.
Your just missing the point entirely, age gaps in relationships shouldn’t matter, but they do matter if its a kid for Christ sake!!What I’m saying is that the age of consent is,as always,the law and 16 is about right although if they must raise it to 18 so be it.If anyone breaks that law a bloke should rightly be charged as a zb ■■■■■■■■■■,regardless of age.Likewise if that law is adhered to then no law has been broken and no one is charged as being a ■■■■■■■■■■ regardless of age.Anyone who sees the law different to that is either zb ageist or a zb ■■■■■■■■■■.
In just the same way that if I had a 13 year old daughter who was involved in a ■■■■■■ relationship with a 13 year old bloke I’d regard the zb as just as much a ■■■■■■■■■■ as if the zb had been over 30.
Whereas if I had a 16 year old daughter who said she was in love with a 40 + year old bloke and wanted to marry him I’d give the permission for it rather than force her into a same age marriage with a bloke she doesn’t love.Do you get it yet.
Your ideas have been screwed up by loads of pc bs brainwashing.
How can a 13 year old boy be a ■■■■■■■■■ if the girl is also 13… Arnt they both as bad as each other? What if she was 3 months older than him, does that make her a peado and not him??
So you really think that a female can be guilty of what is effectively statutory ■■■■.I think that comes under the heading of the law needing to be applied using common sense.Which there obviously isn’t much of out there.The fact that many of those on here could be called up for jury service is frightening.
keebs26uk:
Forgive me if any of what I’m saying has been said already, but I couldn’t be [zb] to read through all the ■■■■■■■■ it was boring me.Anyway I was abit wary about Saville being guilty but was listening to that women called June on the Radio today about how she witnessed him kiss a young brain damaged girl…and then touch her and the rest etc.
Hearing her on the radio I found that story very disturbing.
Made me really think why would she lie ? What has she to gain ?
But why the zb didn’t she just go to the police at the time,considering that like many of the others,she would have been a credible witness to a crime.Where she would have found that the law weren’t exactly known for their tolerance of this type of zb going on on their manors at the time in question and then probably would have done something about it on the basis not being a case of no smoke without fire. 
Unless he was being protected at a higher level than the local police authorities and those witnesses and the police knew it.It seems strange why enquiries concerning complaints involving credible sources,such as from witnesses and girls in the care of authority care homes were dropped,and the reasons provided in the police records for that unless,of course that the instructions,to not proceed with the complaints,by not charging the zb,were not made in writing and without any written records to trace where the instructions came from.
But the time to be wary of wether he and/or others who are still able to face questioning were guilty or not was finished some pages back from this one just based on the amounts and all the different types of witness statements in the news.The whole thing would probably have been easy for the law to have sorted if enough of the witnesses had come forward at the time instead of leaving it until now.There are still plenty of questions remaining as to why those witnesses didn’t choose to do so.
billybigrig:
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
But I’m sure that the views of anyone who agrees with two blokes trying to procreate a family.Sorry, final comment, couldn’t let this one go! You dont know much about ■■■ do you? You are actually a virgin aren’t you?
Let’s just say that there’s not much point in two blokes trying to get each other pregnant which is basically what the act of procreation is,should be,all about fore and foremost.
In that was the case the whole human race would have been extinct by now.That maybe the case ‘after’ producing the family that’s wanted which is the aim of any decent relationship and marriage at the beginning while the wife is younger.
Which is one of the the differences between pervert’s like Savile’s idea of a large age gap ‘relationship’ compared to those like Joe Philpot amongst others.
That’s because Savile never had any intention of looking for a young wife because being a ■■■■ he didn’t actually like women at all.
jimmy was dyslectic, he thought it was called stroke mandeville
If as CF insists saville was a ‘■■■■’ why have no men in the forties/fifties came forward and said they were groped, or buggered or whatever by js? surely young boys would have been in vulnerable places as well ?
If he didn’t like women at all how come so many have come forward and stated that he did (allegedly the younger the better) by molesting them and worse?
raymundo:
If as CF insists saville was a ‘■■■■’ why have no men in the forties/fifties came forward and said they were groped, or buggered or whatever by js? surely young boys would have been in vulnerable places as well ?If he didn’t like women at all how come so many have come forward and stated that he did (allegedly the younger the better) by molesting them and worse?
One bloke has come forward which is all that’s needed.Molesting women and treating them like zb isn’t what any bloke who likes women does to them at all.As I’ve said if he wasn’t a ■■■■ why would he have any interest whatsoever in any bloke and if there’s one there’s probably plenty more who wouldn’t have wanted the embarassment of reporting being got at by a ■■■■.Not forgetting that others would probably have actually been poofs themselves who actually wanted his perverted attentions.
The fact is if he really liked women how do you explain the difference between a proper,decent,large age gap relationship between a middle aged bloke and a mid teens girl,such as the one between Joe and Nicola Philpot, compared to what Savile was looking for 
.
It’s those questions which provide the answers to what Savile was all about and it wasn’t anything to do with a heterosexual bloke falling in love with a teenage girl who loves him then marrying her and having a family with her as any normal bloke who really likes women would want to do.
youtube.com/watch?v=jHS8LAqH … re=related
Does that sound like what that zb pervert Savile was looking for . Answer No.
Are you sure your not gay and just can’t accept it. You are showing lots of traits of that kind of person.
Carryfast:
One bloke has come forward which is all that’s needed.:
Carryfast, one of the finest legal minds of his generation…
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
One bloke has come forward which is all that’s needed.:Carryfast, one of the finest legal minds of his generation…
Carry fast, one strange twisted moral views wierdo…
Maybe I’m a thick f.cker. But are folk calling Carryfast a ■■■■■ or not? 
Carryfast:
FarnboroughBoy11:
Carryfast:
FarnboroughBoy11:
Carryfast:
FarnboroughBoy11:
Carryfast:
FarnboroughBoy11:
Can’t believe this thread is still going.
I gave up on about page 3 I think when Carryfast protested that it was ok if a 40 year old geezer passionately kisses a 15 year old girl.This is not a age gap thing it’s a sick peado thing.
It’s no different to a 15 year old bloke kissing that 15 year old bird and the clue is no one has ever been prosecuted for kissing a girl under the age of consent for a ■■■■■■ relationship because there’s big difference between the two.
I can’t believe what I’m reading.
There is a massive difference!!! They are both 15 therefor both kids, if a fella is 40 years old and kissing a 15 year old that is not right.
I don’t care if anyone has never been prosecuted for kissing a 15 year old it’s not right.
Your just picking and trying to find loopholes in the law to boast your views about age consent but morally its not right.Oh and for the record, if I was 30 I would happily mac daddy a bird of 19!!
Who gives a zb what you think is ‘morally’ right or not.The fact is if you’re right Joe Philpot and at least two other blokes who I know of personally,who dated mid teens girls,and then married them would have gone to jail.The fact is they didn’t so get over it.It’s a free country,so far,and it’s about time that the younger blokes these days realised that an older bloke has got just as much right to compete with them for the available women within the law as they have.Which is what the issue is really about in reserving the single birds for themselves and removing the competition.
What are you actually saying? If the law of consensual ■■■ was reduced to say 13, you would go for a 13 year old girl if she looked “developed”■■
It seems to me you go about your ways with regards to relationships/■■■ etc at the laws discretion, not what is human instinctively right or wrong.
Your just missing the point entirely, age gaps in relationships shouldn’t matter, but they do matter if its a kid for Christ sake!!What I’m saying is that the age of consent is,as always,the law and 16 is about right although if they must raise it to 18 so be it.If anyone breaks that law a bloke should rightly be charged as a zb ■■■■■■■■■■,regardless of age.Likewise if that law is adhered to then no law has been broken and no one is charged as being a ■■■■■■■■■■ regardless of age.Anyone who sees the law different to that is either zb ageist or a zb ■■■■■■■■■■.
In just the same way that if I had a 13 year old daughter who was involved in a ■■■■■■ relationship with a 13 year old bloke I’d regard the zb as just as much a ■■■■■■■■■■ as if the zb had been over 30.
Whereas if I had a 16 year old daughter who said she was in love with a 40 + year old bloke and wanted to marry him I’d give the permission for it rather than force her into a same age marriage with a bloke she doesn’t love.Do you get it yet.
Your ideas have been screwed up by loads of pc bs brainwashing.
How can a 13 year old boy be a ■■■■■■■■■ if the girl is also 13… Arnt they both as bad as each other? What if she was 3 months older than him, does that make her a peado and not him??
So you really think that a female can be guilty of what is effectively statutory ■■■■.I think that comes under the heading of the law needing to be applied using common sense.Which there obviously isn’t much of out there.The fact that many of those on here could be called up for jury service is frightening.
Who’s talking about ■■■■■■?
You said a 13 year old boy having a relationship with a 13 year old girl is the same as a 40 year old bloke having a relationship with a 13 year old girl when it clearly isn’t!!!
Are you so stupid that you think a 13 year old boy has the same intentions and same responsibility of that of a 40 year old man?
bigvern1:
Maybe I’m a thick f.cker. But are folk calling Carryfast a ■■■■■ or not?
Im not sure but something ain’t right!!! I think if we lived in a post apocalyptic world with no laws he would be rubbing his hands together. He’s coming across as someone who is dictated by the law when it comes to age and not human nature and what’s morally right or wrong.