You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > GB News, the irony of Sky
May 26 2022 2.43pm

GB News, the irony of Sky

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 15 of 19 < 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 >

 

View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 02 Apr 22 8.22am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

That implies that had they not been effectively forced into it that whoever employed these men would have let their crimes go unrecognised.

You are doing what I feared would happen, and are playing the blame game again. The BBC's failings have been examined, admitted and lessons learned. They have led the way in repairing the underlying culture.

This was a much wider problem than just the BBC. Prime Ministers were cosy with Savile. These guys were given gongs by the Queen in recognition of their services to the country. People knew there were questions over their behaviour, but they were blanked out by the culture of the day, which idolised celebratory men and saw women as pawns. That has changed, and the reasons why are explored.

Watch the documentary.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Flag 02 Apr 22 8.34am Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

You are doing what I feared would happen, and are playing the blame game again. The BBC's failings have been examined, admitted and lessons learned. They have led the way in repairing the underlying culture.

This was a much wider problem than just the BBC. Prime Ministers were cosy with Savile. These guys were given gongs by the Queen in recognition of their services to the country. People knew there were questions over their behaviour, but they were blanked out by the culture of the day, which idolised celebratory men and saw women as pawns. That has changed, and the reasons why are explored.

Watch the documentary.

Not exactly, which is why I said “whoever employed them” rather than specifying any one organisation. The culture of the day was still completely against their behaviour which is why it was hushed up by those with financial interest in their careeers.
There will be other examples still happening which will only come to light once it becomes impossible to keep them covered up.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 02 Apr 22 8.51am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Not exactly, which is why I said “whoever employed them” rather than specifying any one organisation. The culture of the day was still completely against their behaviour which is why it was hushed up by those with financial interest in their careeers.
There will be other examples still happening which will only come to light once it becomes impossible to keep them covered up.

I don't think that's true. The culture of the day tolerated men being more powerful than women, and that's what underlay this. Paedophilia wasn't tolerated, but the existence of that wasn't known until later.

Anyone using their celebratory status to force themselves on others these days faces much bigger problems than these guys did. Women in particular are ready to reveal and complain, and we are ready to listen.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Flag 02 Apr 22 9.42am Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I don't think that's true. The culture of the day tolerated men being more powerful than women, and that's what underlay this. Paedophilia wasn't tolerated, but the existence of that wasn't known until later.

Anyone using their celebratory status to force themselves on others these days faces much bigger problems than these guys did. Women in particular are ready to reveal and complain, and we are ready to listen.

Yes, it’s true that women are more likely to speak out and, just as importantly, be listened to and believed but in the cases named the victims were underage which, in living memory anyway, has never been remotely acceptable.
My point is that the activities of these men were known about and tacitly accepted by their employers until it became impossible to ignore.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 02 Apr 22 10.11am Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

We're not discussing your opinion of my attitudes, which I am perfectly capable of explaining. I do so very frequently here.

We are discussing your attitudes to the kind of things I listed, which I described as being thought odious by others.

In seeking to divert, you are doing nothing to convince anyone otherwise.

By the way. Every one of those statements about me is a lie. Except the BBC, which isn't biased. The only bias involving the BBC is from those who think it's biased.

It's laughable that you have a problem with my attitude when you dismiss anything you disagree with as a conspiracy theory.

My attitude is that of someone who is not fooled by the old tosh posted by people like you.
You take a position on something and then deny it when challenged.

I'm still waiting for a specific example of 'my attitude'.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 02 Apr 22 10.38am Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I don't think that's true. The culture of the day tolerated men being more powerful than women, and that's what underlay this. Paedophilia wasn't tolerated, but the existence of that wasn't known until later.

Anyone using their celebratory status to force themselves on others these days faces much bigger problems than these guys did. Women in particular are ready to reveal and complain, and we are ready to listen.

It's a combination of factors.

Britain has become more puritanical in recent years after the relative permissive excesses of the 60s to 80s. It was not remarkable for underage girls to be having sex, and it seemed to be more acceptable for powerful or desirable men to sleep with much younger girls or boys.
In that kind of environment, it is clear that a certain minority of individuals with power thought it acceptable to indulge in sexual activity that most of us would consider heinous.
I suppose that kind of perversion is nothing new, but probably never acceptable to the majority.

Then you had a conspiracy theory that some MPs and others ranking individuals were or had been paedophiles. All of a sudden, there was this big effort by the police to collar every 70s pop star, DJ or anyone else well known who could be prosecuted for being a nonce.
Now, a cynic like me is suspicious that this was all a smokescreen to hide the truth about certain elevated individuals and give the pitchfork brigade something to distract them.

That's not to say that these celebrities weren't guilty, but it is clear to me that their activities must have well known to many a long time before they were investigated. Especially Saville.


 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 02 Apr 22 11.03am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Yes, it’s true that women are more likely to speak out and, just as importantly, be listened to and believed but in the cases named the victims were underage which, in living memory anyway, has never been remotely acceptable.
My point is that the activities of these men were known about and tacitly accepted by their employers until it became impossible to ignore.

Of course, it's never been acceptable, but although some were underage, by no means most were. They were mostly young women whose innocent obsessions were taken advantage of. The paedophilia went largely under the radar. There was a culture back then that whilst sex with pre-pubescent children was unacceptable, that once puberty was passed things changed, sometimes with a parent's knowledge and tacit approval.

So we largely agree. I was in my 20s and 30s when this was all going on, and know how my own attitudes have changed over the years.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 02 Apr 22 4.05pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

It's laughable that you have a problem with my attitude when you dismiss anything you disagree with as a conspiracy theory.

My attitude is that of someone who is not fooled by the old tosh posted by people like you.
You take a position on something and then deny it when challenged.

I'm still waiting for a specific example of 'my attitude'.

That's all untrue. I only dismiss conspiracy theories as conspiracy theories. For instance, what you wrote above isn't one. I disagree because it isn't true.

You can think my opinions to be "old tosh" all you wish. That's just your opinion of me.

What I addressed are your attitudes, some of which I specified a few posts ago. Another is what you have just done above, which is to misrepresent another person's approach. Ana, lying.

Unless you expect me to repeat all your long and tedious justifications for these attitudes, which I doubt anyone would welcome, and I have no interest in doing, you are going to have to work out for yourself why your views on things are considered odious. I am sure you can manage it.

I'll just give you a starter. You effectively categorise all illegal immigrants as unwelcome scumbags and think they should all, without exception, be returned forthwith to their places of origin. Refugees, in your eyes, are just opportunistic chancers.

I, and many others, disagree with that and find that attitude lacking the compassion we are proud of showing in the UK. Such an attitude is odious.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View becky's Profile becky Flag over the moon 02 Apr 22 5.09pm Send a Private Message to becky Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add becky as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

It's a combination of factors.

Britain has become more puritanical in recent years after the relative permissive excesses of the 60s to 80s. It was not remarkable for underage girls to be having sex, and it seemed to be more acceptable for powerful or desirable men to sleep with much younger girls or boys.
In that kind of environment, it is clear that a certain minority of individuals with power thought it acceptable to indulge in sexual activity that most of us would consider heinous.
I suppose that kind of perversion is nothing new, but probably never acceptable to the majority.

Then you had a conspiracy theory that some MPs and others ranking individuals were or had been paedophiles. All of a sudden, there was this big effort by the police to collar every 70s pop star, DJ or anyone else well known who could be prosecuted for being a nonce.
Now, a cynic like me is suspicious that this was all a smokescreen to hide the truth about certain elevated individuals and give the pitchfork brigade something to distract them.

That's not to say that these celebrities weren't guilty, but it is clear to me that their activities must have well known to many a long time before they were investigated. Especially Saville.


I would imagine that money came into it too - how many tens of millions did Saville raise for charities that would have gone by the board if word got out?
Seen as a great humanitarian, working for free in his local hospital, cheering people up as he went - who would have actually believed another lowly porter telling hideous tales of what went on in the night or the mortuary?

Stuart Hall & Rolf Harris with massive viewing figures -national favourites at the time... how could you ever replace those if it got out? Damn, Harris even painted a portrait of the Queen! so the knowledge or rumours were obviously not known in general, outside of a smaller or localised group, otherwise he would never have got near her.

 


A stairway to Heaven and a Highway to Hell give some indication of expected traffic numbers

Alert Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 02 Apr 22 5.58pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by becky

I would imagine that money came into it too - how many tens of millions did Saville raise for charities that would have gone by the board if word got out?
Seen as a great humanitarian, working for free in his local hospital, cheering people up as he went - who would have actually believed another lowly porter telling hideous tales of what went on in the night or the mortuary?

Stuart Hall & Rolf Harris with massive viewing figures -national favourites at the time... how could you ever replace those if it got out? Damn, Harris even painted a portrait of the Queen! so the knowledge or rumours were obviously not known in general, outside of a smaller or localised group, otherwise he would never have got near her.

Yes, money is the answer to most things, and the great and 'good' tend to be believed.

I have also wondered if the relationships some of these people had with those in high positions was one of the reasons why they were collared. Maybe they knew too much.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View palace_in_frogland's Profile palace_in_frogland Flag In a broken dream 02 Apr 22 6.30pm Send a Private Message to palace_in_frogland Add palace_in_frogland as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

That's all untrue. I only dismiss conspiracy theories as conspiracy theories. For instance, what you wrote above isn't one. I disagree because it isn't true.

You can think my opinions to be "old tosh" all you wish. That's just your opinion of me.

What I addressed are your attitudes, some of which I specified a few posts ago. Another is what you have just done above, which is to misrepresent another person's approach. Ana, lying.

Unless you expect me to repeat all your long and tedious justifications for these attitudes, which I doubt anyone would welcome, and I have no interest in doing, you are going to have to work out for yourself why your views on things are considered odious. I am sure you can manage it.

I'll just give you a starter. You effectively categorise all illegal immigrants as unwelcome scumbags and think they should all, without exception, be returned forthwith to their places of origin. Refugees, in your eyes, are just opportunistic chancers.

I, and many others, disagree with that and find that attitude lacking the compassion we are proud of showing in the UK. Such an attitude is odious.

Just out of interest, what percentage of illegal immigrants do you think we should be welcoming?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 02 Apr 22 6.37pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

That's all untrue. I only dismiss conspiracy theories as conspiracy theories. For instance, what you wrote above isn't one. I disagree because it isn't true.

You can think my opinions to be "old tosh" all you wish. That's just your opinion of me.

What I addressed are your attitudes, some of which I specified a few posts ago. Another is what you have just done above, which is to misrepresent another person's approach. Ana, lying.

Unless you expect me to repeat all your long and tedious justifications for these attitudes, which I doubt anyone would welcome, and I have no interest in doing, you are going to have to work out for yourself why your views on things are considered odious. I am sure you can manage it.

I'll just give you a starter. You effectively categorise all illegal immigrants as unwelcome scumbags and think they should all, without exception, be returned forthwith to their places of origin. Refugees, in your eyes, are just opportunistic chancers.

I, and many others, disagree with that and find that attitude lacking the compassion we are proud of showing in the UK. Such an attitude is odious.

They are here illegally. That is all you need to know.

If you want to live in Britain, then apply through the proper channels.

You advocate breaking the law now?

Not all refugees are opportunists. Some are fleeing peril.

That doesn't mean that we can take keep taking them. We have an existing population to look after, many of whom are struggling to pay taxes already, while illegals, travellers and the like pay none and cost us all.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (02 Apr 2022 6.38pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 15 of 19 < 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > GB News, the irony of Sky