Jump to content

Should Jimmy Savile's knighthood be removed?


tara_dad

Should Jimmy Savile's knighthood be removed?  

16 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Jimmy Savile's knighthood be removed?

  2. 2. should we have a public inquiry into all not just savile



Recommended Posts

Wouldn't receipt of money, imply some form of delayed prostitution? :wink:

Really? I mean really, this is how low you and your winking smilies can stoop? What a complete <REMOVED !!> you are obs, not that anyone who has been on here any length of time could doubt it, but this takes the biscuit.

Edited by Dizzy
  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

God was not on your side tonight PJ :P

 

Fatshaft... while clearly Obs comment rattled you (and I am not saying it shouldn't have) I'm sorry but as you well know language like that is not acceptable on the forum so I have removed it from your post

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have said this before but here goes again, I'm a relative 'newbie' and this forum took a lot of getting used to, there are some forum members who's topics or replies are intended to impress or offend and with the odd exception I have learned to either ignore or tolerate them, obviously in this instance obs has posted something that has offended or annoyed Fatshaft resulting in his angry and emotional response, personally I don't find obs's latest remarks much different than the rest of the drivel that has been posted on this particular topic that has as usual descended into a tirade of slanging and point scoring, the whole meaning of the original post has been completely lost in the fracas, for goodness sake get a grip on yourselves. :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God was not on your side tonight PJ :P

 

Fatshaft... while clearly Obs comment rattled you (and I am not saying it shouldn't have) I'm sorry but as you well know language like that is not acceptable on the forum so I have removed it from your post

Ddin't rattle me at all actually Dizzy. What my comments attempted to relay were my complete and utter astonishment that he can actually be as big an <??>hole as he appears to be from his 32,000 posts on here.

 

The two posts quoted, especially the first, seem to confirm it. There's no doubt now, either he is a not right, or does it for sh**s and giggles, either way, surely despite the value he adds to your site through google rankings, enough is enough, and he simply has to be extinguished?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to admit though Algy that Obs' post was offensive and pig ignorant.

 

Asp I haven't a clue as I haven't generally been following the topic as I became bored with the repetitive replies a while back, I was just scrolling through before hitting the sack and spotted Fatshafts reply, what I said is what I feel so good night all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God was not on your side tonight PJ :P

 

Fatshaft... while clearly Obs comment rattled you (and I am not saying it shouldn't have) I'm sorry but as you well know language like that is not acceptable on the forum so I have removed it from your post

oh yes, I know "language" like that isn't acceptable, opinions like observer's appear to be fine though? I think that says an awful lot more about you than it does about me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately we have to accept that Observer is regarded as a star of the forum and is therefore a protected species, he is persistent and consistent with his disgusting take on life yet survives unmolested while others who take him to task get their replies butchered.

 

Can we hire a moderator, just one will do, who will have the guts to treat him as he deserves to be treated; if this doesn't happen then this forum will end up as a barren wasteland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Observer is not protected and the ones that have recently taken him to task only got their replies 'butchered' (as you put it) because of using FOUL and offensive language and emoticons which is against forum rules... like you well know :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had missed obs's controversial post regarding the victims expected compensation, I think it must have been removed, however I did read the quote posted on fatshafts reply and I think obs's statement was to say the least silly and misguided, any victim awarded any recompense or compensation would have been rendered for the physical and mental anguish, assault and trauma experienced/suffered at the hands of this creature who used his influence and position to prey on the young and disabled, under no circumstances could the monies rewarded be construed as payment for services rendered, and to intimate as such is disgusting and certainly not to be made light of, obs I think you have made an idiot of yourself with this one and overstepped the mark of moral decency. :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't/cant delete his comment Eagle as so many people posted after it (and about it) that I'd have had to remove the majority of other people's posts too which would mean I'd pretty much denied everyone their 'voice' and opinion and that would not have gone down well would it !

 

Now is there any chance that this topic can now go back to what it is about rather than what you perceive to be my failings as a moderator. Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see a bit more was disclosed on the key gate as I call it to Broadmoor and old boy net work as in you do something for me I will do something for you .

As too Leeds General Infirmary, Stoke Mandeville makes interesting reading. How can genuine good people who want to help in things like this now go about wanting to help knowing that everyone will be looking at the facts on why do you want to help do you have other motives

 

read the story here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't/cant delete his comment Eagle as so many people posted after it (and about it) that I'd have had to remove the majority of other people's posts too which would mean I'd pretty much denied everyone their 'voice' and opinion and that would not have gone down well would it !

 

Now is there any chance that this topic can now go back to what it is about rather than what you perceive to be my failings as a moderator. Thanks

 

 

No ban then, warning or quiet word? Thought not. :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Came upon this what do you all think I did not know this till research it

 

 

There is no legal obligation to pass on reports of abuse - even a head teacher can know that s pupil has been sexual assaulted in any way or from even by a member of staff or anybody and he or she has no legal obligation to report anything to anybody. And this can be in any professional job dealing with children in authoritie

 

On doing the research I found this got it from page 3 of the NSPCC fact sheet

An introduction to child protection legislation in the UK,

 

which states the following.Whilst local authorities have a mandatory duty to investigate if they are informed a child may be at risk, there are no specific mandatory child abuse reporting laws in the UK that require professionals to report their suspicions to the authorities.

 

sould this be closed or left open you deeside or debate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...