from the Torygraph

The Savile 'controversy' is giving many nitwits the opportunity for valuable airtime to make total fools of themselves including Vine's prepostrous claim that:
"Jimmy Savile could be 'one of the most serious predatory paedophiles in criminal history'

Then again perhaps he is right in the context of British tabloids but a few other names spring to mind ie:

Sergey Golovik who murdered 11 young boys in Moscow or perhaps closer to home Denis Neilson who stuffed the drains with body parts or maybe even Fred & Rosemary West who turned young girls into a patio after fiddling with them, let alone in the US John Wayne Gacy who kept 33 boy's bodies in his garage or perhaps amateur chef Jeffrey Dahmer who the local police helpfully delived one of his victims, a naked 14 year old boy who had escaped, back to Dahmer's flat and his fate.

Esther Ranzten may hold onto her job as the head of the charity but she is a busted flush from hereon.

This is a beauty though nicked from David Walliams auto-biog a piece that was basically about Brian Blessed now transformed into :
David Walliams had a lucky escape from Jimmy Savile
which means I guess every kid who actually went on Jim'll Fix It is now a victim.

One of the sanest pieces:

www.theopinionsite.org/

Every time people mention Fred West in connection to crime point that he died before he any trial and so, technically, he died an innocent man. That usually starts a very interesting debate.

true..and I liked the telemovie about him. Not sure how to explain the bodies in the back garden tho.

Pumpkinhead wrote:
Every time people mention Fred West in connection to crime point that he died before he any trial and so, technically, he died an innocent man. That usually starts a very interesting debate.

... and I dont think any of the victims was "under age" so the paedophile analagy does not apply either !

Nor in the Denis Neillson case.

In The Know wrote:
Pumpkinhead wrote:
Every time people mention Fred West in connection to crime point that he died before he any trial and so, technically, he died an innocent man. That usually starts a very interesting debate.

... and I dont think any of the victims was "under age" so the paedophile analagy does not apply either !

Nor in the Denis Neillson case.

But neither were any of Savile's alleged victims pre-pubescent yet he is repeatedly referred to as a peodophile which he is not on evidence presented so far.

It is a very important distinction and one lost on the tabloids and even so-called serious newspapers and those who should respect the British language as once we pervert the use of words there can bs serious consequences.

I've noticed the publicity about the Australian PM's attack on her opposite as a "misognynist" has given rise to endless debates about the term as to whether she was confusing sexism with misogyny.

I don;t see why the great public should be forced to accept tabloid writer's re-interpretation of our language when it can have serious consequences, especially under law : laws must be so exact when written as thousands of court cases have demonstrated.

We have the ex-copper who presented the TV show about Savile claiming to be a self appointed child safety expert yet he is mistakenly calling Savile a peodophile as well.

This is really serious stuff : we have a man who for financial reasons ( and he is not the only one) claiming to be an expert on children and the mass media simply accepts it because he said it.

If people cannot see the very real danger in that then all is lost !

(on edit : there is the claim a 9 year old scout was assaulted) However my premise remains the same : pervert and contort the use of language and we end up in wars.