Butch Willykins
Well-known member
Now I know the code is fairly impenetrable, but has anyone any idea on who F might be?
The Fonz I reckon.
Now I know the code is fairly impenetrable, but has anyone any idea on who F might be?
The bloody red-tops are going to carry on naming-by-association-with-the-70s-entertainers, because they don't want this to go away, it's circulation gold. Of COURSE Freddie Starr has nothing to do with all this - we're talking about raping teenage girls ffs, which the tabloids seem to want us to think was part and parcel of being a tv celeb 40 years ago.
But this is what you get when powerful people can intimidate the press with outdated libel laws, and neutering the media on privacy grounds is only going to make it worse I'm afraid.
I'm no body language expert but in that 83 seconds of footage he looks away 23 times, shakes his head and blinks repeatedly. Normally if you're telling the truth you'd blink less and keep better, focused eye contact with your interrogator. Very dodgy.
Freddie Starr and his fiancee...
I don't understand what you're saying. Should the 'bloody red-tops' (and clearly it isn't just those papers) just sweep it back under the carpet then? Sounds a bit morally dubious, and I don't see how you can be so certain about Starr. The truth is, none uf us really know.
This is out there now, women have come forward, and there are questions to be asked and answered. Not only about the individuals, but about the culture and BBC organisation itself. I find it impossible to believe this was going on without people knowing and covering it up. And those people may be in positions of real power now.
If there is a criticism of the 'red-tops' (and it is a big one, albeit fairly ironic against the current backdrop of getting slaughtered by Leveson) it's that they didn't wade in bigger and sooner at the time on the many rumours.
But this is what you get when powerful people can intimidate the press with outdated libel laws, and neutering the media on privacy grounds is only going to make it worse I'm afraid.
Can you read minds through the computer then?
Is it not possible that he was shown a picture of a young looking girl, and that's what he meant.
Freddie Starr and his fiancee...
How about the mass media leave it to the authorities investigate any allegations and don't go around just naming names who were performing with saville at the time in the hope that they'll sell a few more papers or fill a few more minutes on their 24hours a day broadcast.
If there's evidence to suggest that Freddie Starr is involved then the police should investigate it and take the appropriate action. It's not right to throw a load of shit at a load of people and hope some of it sticks, because some of it will end up sticking to innocent people.
You've obviously decided that he did it, you might even have inside info that he did, but it's wrong to just start labelling people because they look and sound the part. Freddie Starr is an easy target because he isn't a media luvvie, he's a shit comedian and sounds like a right pikey.
How about the mass media leave it to the authorities investigate any allegations and don't go around just naming names who were performing with saville at the time in the hope that they'll sell a few more papers or fill a few more minutes on their 24hours a day broadcast.
If there's evidence to suggest that Freddie Starr is involved then the police should investigate it and take the appropriate action. It's not right to throw a load of shit at a load of people and hope some of it sticks, because some of it will end up sticking to innocent people.
You've obviously decided that he did it, you might even have inside info that he did, but it's wrong to just start labelling people because they look and sound the part. Freddie Starr is an easy target because he isn't a media luvvie, he's a shit comedian and sounds like a right pikey.
I'm sorry, but that is bollocks. A woman came forward and named the bloke. Nobody plucked his name out of thin air. It doesn't mean he did it, but it does mean he needs to defend himself
You're just making stuff up. Even on this thread has anyone said he's definitely q paedo? No.
But still, don't let it worry you and just blindky regurgitate the sort of anti press line peddled by Coogan and Grant. If they get their way, the press will be 100 times less likely to be able to expose this kind of thing. And why? So they can shag around and do drugs while appearing on tv as paragons of virtue
I don't understand what you're saying. Should the 'bloody red-tops' (and clearly it isn't just those papers) just sweep it back under the carpet then? Sounds a bit morally dubious, and I don't see how you can be so certain about Starr. The truth is, none uf us really know.
This is out there now, women have come forward, and there are questions to be asked and answered. Not only about the individuals, but about the culture and BBC organisation itself. I find it impossible to believe this was going on without people knowing and covering it up. And those people may be in positions of real power now.
If there is a criticism of the 'red-tops' (and it is a big one, albeit fairly ironic against the current backdrop of getting slaughtered by Leveson) it's that they didn't wade in bigger and sooner at the time on the many rumours.
But this is what you get when powerful people can intimidate the press with outdated libel laws, and neutering the media on privacy grounds is only going to make it worse I'm afraid.