I can't wait till this gets out of proportion tabloid heaven as much as I don't read them anymore I know people who will look in disgust I think it's funny. JK did his time paid his debt to society and is now a free man so the The Mail don't have to publish the story.

JK2006 wrote:
Indeed - delighted and hope it may boost sales of the Kindle No1 E-Book and the views for Vile Pervert and Me Me Me.

Paedophile? Someone who finds children sexually attractive? Not me - either in fact or in the law. A child is defined as "a person under the age of 14" by the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (never repealed).

Warren Mitchell tells a story that the head of comedy at the time of the BBC (Denis Main Wilson) used to come up to him at rehearsals for Till Death Us Do Part and say "another complaint from Mary Whitehouse, another 500,000 viewers next week, keep it up"!

Innocent Accused wrote:
If it wasn't for the headline the article would have been ok.
It does show that we're being monitored here by the press.....

Probably on a PC with two screens. One screen they are looking at this forum, the other screen they are looking at some hardcore Swedish pornography. Or worse.

Journos are the biggest hypocrites in the universe.

Next to Politicians.

steveimp wrote:
Innocent Accused wrote:
If it wasn't for the headline the article would have been ok.
It does show that we're being monitored here by the press.....

Probably on a PC with two screens. One screen they are looking at this forum, the other screen they are looking at some hardcore Swedish pornography. Or worse.

Journos are the biggest hypocrites in the universe.

Next to Politicians.

Hardcore porn? Don't tell Veritas!

A very nice E-Mail (one of many)...

Dear Jonathan,

I am a humble music fan of some five decades; I feel compelled to write to congratulate you on your outright humiliation of the BBC on their 'Stalinist Revisionist' policy on the TOTP re-runs.

I note the record industry has not renamed your renaming of The Brits... too embarrassing for these monstrosities.

I have followed your case, Gary Glitter's case, and the case of Cardiff City manager Dave Jones.

My first reaction way back in 2001, was disappointment, then as further light was shed on the plight of yourself, Gary Glitter's and then Dave Jones I began to feel very angry... I now know you are not the only three who have suffered.

Justice has been completely disfigured; the cops where I used to work didn't have time to deal with an unknown drug dealer with one hundred ecstacy tablets on him, the security men who called them were bordering on distraught.

Disbelief, bemusement and then outright anger.

Dave Jones in his autobiography shines a light on the disgusting abuse of our trust, where accusers can not only not be named but are paid to accuse. He states in his book that his accusers were known criminals and the cops had targets to meet, hence the very wide net.

I am deeply shamed that I voted for Blair in both 1997 and 2001, that I didn't understand how many lies they could tell, I believed they would renationalise the railways.

Since then I have concluded that the Labour government in 1997 launched an across the board attack on all British heritage simultaneously opening the borders to all dependents as what can only be seem as a co-ordinated 'Stalinist' policy to prepare the way for far worse. (Jack Straw referred to himself as Stalinist).

I am writing as one of the plebs to let you know you have never been forgotten and I am sure there are many like me who have tried to make sense of the overwhelming strangeness of everything and come to similar conclusions over your plight and that of Dave Jones.

It has become my strengthening belief that Treason has been committed by the Labour government of 1997 to 2010 and the cultural heroes of the 70s were in their targets.

We have been brow beaten with examples of how unworthy we are, culminating I think in Blair's cringe-making apology for the slavery of 200 years ago, completely out of context. Thank you Mr Blair, we now know there's increasing evidence of people trafficking and slavery within the UK today due primarily to Labour policy.

Anyway, to conclude, thank you for the enjoyment you have given us all in those halcyon days of the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s ... I've got your eight CD set, and I was listening to 'When I Was A Star' just the other day.

Long may you reign... and rein them in!!!

someone wrote:
Dave Jones in his autobiography shines a light on the disgusting abuse of our trust, where accusers can not only not be named but are paid to accuse. He states in his book that his accusers were known criminals and the cops had targets to meet, hence the very wide net.

I actually know of a case where the accuser had a history of such cases, but where, in the case I refer to, the accused was acquitted (after 3 days at Crown Court) in record time.

That did not stop the accuser receiving 5K from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board (a bit strange as the Court case made it quite clear that there were NO injuries at all !) It was not - allegedly - the first time that such compensation had been paid out (to the same accuser).

I actually know the accused ... and was astonished to hear that his Defence insisted (the Judge was not too keen) on his entire police interview - all 4 hours - being played in Court (so the Jury could hear his immediate reaction to any suggestions made by the police). His Defence team thought he had defended himself so well, that the Jury should hear it all.

The accuser tried it on one time to many ... and is now in jail (for a life sentence) for arson and murder.

How do the cops sleep at night ?

presumably they sleep soundly as it doesn't bother them.

Compensation is even paid to those when the case isn't 'proved'.

I do have an ex-friend who claimed he had been 'abused' by a Catholic priest already on charges. When I challenged him about it he said ..as the man was probably going down anyway one more makes no difference and he needed the cash.

It's the way of the world now

ps : glad to see someone else picked up on Blair's blatant lies about re-nationalising the railways !!!

So much for ITK's "loony left"..nothing left wing about them sadly and certainly not 'loony'..just corrupt and money scrounging like the rest.

Reckon they might do a question on it in Have I Got News For You? I shall, of course, be mercilessly teased.

steveimp wrote:
JK2006 wrote:
Indeed - delighted and hope it may boost sales of the Kindle No1 E-Book and the views for Vile Pervert and Me Me Me.

Paedophile? Someone who finds children sexually attractive? Not me - either in fact or in the law. A child is defined as "a person under the age of 14" by the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (never repealed).

Warren Mitchell tells a story that the head of comedy at the time of the BBC (Denis Main Wilson) used to come up to him at rehearsals for Till Death Us Do Part and say "another complaint from Mary Whitehouse, another 500,000 viewers next week, keep it up"!

Frank Muir was Head of Comedy at the time - Dennis was deemed far too much of a maverick for the post - but you're right about the story. Dennis was producer of Till Death, and used to collude with Johnny Speight to infuriate Mary Whitehouse. Their masterstroke was to get Alf Garnett to start reading her books on screen, praising her to the skies whilst flouting her pronouncements.

Innocent Accused wrote:
steveimp wrote:
Innocent Accused wrote:
If it wasn't for the headline the article would have been ok.
It does show that we're being monitored here by the press.....

Probably on a PC with two screens. One screen they are looking at this forum, the other screen they are looking at some hardcore Swedish pornography. Or worse.

Journos are the biggest hypocrites in the universe.

Next to Politicians.

Hardcore porn? Don't tell Veritas!

I find most hacks are either absolute cynics or more credulous than the general public

..and I.m sure consume as much porn as most teenagers do

JK2006 wrote:
Indeed - delighted and hope it may boost sales of the Kindle No1 E-Book and the views for Vile Pervert and Me Me Me.

Paedophile? Someone who finds children sexually attractive? Not me - either in fact or in the law. A child is defined as "a person under the age of 14" by the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (never repealed).

Well said JK. It is upsetting when moronic sub-creatures abuse the English language and accuse others of being paedophiles, simply for an admission that young people over the age of 14 can be sexually attractive, or might be capable of consenting to sex. But we live in uncivilised times and there is no limit to the depths to which people are prepared to exploit real paedophilia and real child abuse in order to deal with their own disturbing inner demons.

I've finally received a response to the complaint I made to the BBC back in July:

Thanks for contacting us regarding BBC Four’s ‘Top of the Pops: 1976’ on 27 July. Please accept our apologies for the long delay in replying. We know our correspondents appreciate a quick response and are sorry you've had to wait on this occasion.

I understand you were concerned Jonathan King was edited out of this programme.

We can advise that the Director General has since replied to Jonathan King and the BBC doesn’t think it should be rewriting history so we will be showing these programmes in their entirety.

I hope this information is helpful and thanks again for taking the time to contact us.

Kind Regards

Stuart Webb

BBC Complaints

www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

Andy wrote:
I've finally received a response to the complaint I made to the BBC back in July:

Thanks for contacting us regarding BBC Four’s ‘Top of the Pops: 1976’ on 27 July. Please accept our apologies for the long delay in replying. We know our correspondents appreciate a quick response and are sorry you've had to wait on this occasion.

I understand you were concerned Jonathan King was edited out of this programme.

We can advise that the Director General has since replied to Jonathan King and the BBC doesn’t think it should be rewriting history so we will be showing these programmes in their entirety.

I hope this information is helpful and thanks again for taking the time to contact us.

Kind Regards

Stuart Webb

BBC Complaints

www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

Well done you!

steveimp wrote:
JK2006 wrote:
Indeed - delighted and hope it may boost sales of the Kindle No1 E-Book and the views for Vile Pervert and Me Me Me.

Paedophile? Someone who finds children sexually attractive? Not me - either in fact or in the law. A child is defined as "a person under the age of 14" by the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (never repealed).

Warren Mitchell tells a story that the head of comedy at the time of the BBC (Denis Main Wilson) used to come up to him at rehearsals for Till Death Us Do Part and say "another complaint from Mary Whitehouse, another 500,000 viewers next week, keep it up"!

In The Know has stolen Warren Mitchell's act.