Its All Glitter at Suvanarbhumi

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

"faked" a heart attack ??

The compliant he had is a genuine medical condition and is often confused for a heart attack in the first instance even by doctors. Given the tawdry media beat-up on Glitter I don't blame him for demanding to go to hospital for a check-up and an ignoring an idiotic British embassy official who is assisting the British government in it's woeful campaign to make an example of Glitter based on the lies of NGO's who continue to claim he is responsible for all sorts of crimes yet have no evidence or proof.

Meanwhile-T.Blair responsible for the deaths of a million Iraqis, walks the earth free !

[Marsilius]

I was staggered to see filmed TV reports in which the airline that was flying him Business Class allowed photographers to shove cameras into his face during the flight. The lenses were literally no more than a few inches away from his face. Not a way to treat paying passengers, whoever they may be...

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

Whatever his medical condition may be, he was convicted in Vietnam of molesting children. He was convicted in the UK of having child porn.

ahh if life were only so simple. The Vietnam conviction is highly suspect given no Asian court finds people "innocent". The porn charge sticks as he owned up to it.

As he has served his time for both I don't see the need for the disgraceful ugly media campaign being conducted by NoTW which is deep in the gutter as far as it can go.

NGO's in Britain are already screeching about him going back there-even though he is a British citizen. Both have a campaign screaming about the fact that he may access the British health system-both say they don't want him in the Uk but both say he shoudln't have a passport to travel. Can't win either way.

Sheer utter lunacy. Tawdry, appaling and political and utterely unjust and one of the most disgraceful witch hunts being conducted against as sole person because he happened to be famous-and given tacit approval by all those who don't speak up.

And absolutely nothing to do with saving children.

[Brad the Impala]

Whatever his medical condition may be, he was convicted in Vietnam of molesting children. He was convicted in the UK of having child porn.

ahh if life were only so simple. The Vietnam conviction is highly suspect given no Asian court finds people "innocent".


I didn't read your comments further after reading this drivel.

maybe Thailand should detain GG and do a swap for Taksin

[quote="Lunchtime O'Booze":34jee5o4]ahh if life were only so simple. The Vietnam conviction is highly suspect given no Asian court finds people "innocent". I didn't read your comments further after reading this drivel.[/quote:34jee5o4]I'd have thought it's common knowledge that "innocent until proven guilty" is not a feature of the criminal justice system in Asia. Findings of innocence are so extraordinarily rare, corrupt judges apart, that Lunchtime O'Booze's comment, while marginally hyperbolic, can hardly be described as "drivel". There has been a lot of publicity recently, for example, on the shortcomings of the Japanese criminal system in this regard, let alone countries riven by corruption such as Vietnam, Indonesia or Thailand where the case has to be particularly notorious for anyone with enough money not to be able to bribe their way out. The rest are always found guilty

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

[quote=fattman]Whatever his medical condition may be, he was convicted in Vietnam of molesting children. He was convicted in the UK of having child porn.

ahh if life were only so simple. The Vietnam conviction is highly suspect given no Asian court finds people "innocent".


I didn't read your comments further after reading this drivel.[/quote:2owgdm94]

rubbish !..I know you read every single word !

the only drivel is the fact that people blindly jump on the bandwagon of a gutter UK tabloid that clearly tried to pervert the course of law..everyone has forgtten that Glitter was originally charged with having sex with an underage girl in the UK where the infamous Murdoch rag promised the girl 100,000 pounds if Glitter was found guilty (in addition to the government compo so popular in these "abuse" cases )...Glitter was found innocent. They have responded by a nasty campaign tracking him down around the world printing outrageous lies.

They did it to science fiction writer Arthur C.Clarke-they did it to TV presenter Mathew Kelly.

On the scale of crimes his are miniscule and way out of proportion to the publicity..leave the man in peace for God's sake.

As to Vietnam's courts-AP claim Glitter "evaded" more serious charges that would have resulted in a firing squad because he paid compensation to the 2 girls in question ( odd how cash soothes a troubled soul in every case)..concrete proof of an appaling legal system. Either he did the crime or he didn't..can't have it both ways.

They have responded by a nasty campaign tracking him down around the world printing outrageous lies.

Presumably you also claim that these nasty tabloid press people planted the 4000-odd images of hardcore child porn and abuse that were found on his computer (he incidentally pleaded guilty to 54 individual offenses relating to that).

To even attempt to excuse his conduct and to try to shift the blame onto others just because he is a high profile celebrity who believed his fame would mean he could get away with despicable acts against children (very much like Jonathan King) makes as you just as perverted as he is!

He is a serial paedophile and I hope that he is deported directly back to the UK, has his passport withdrawn and is made to suffer the restrictions, rigours and indignities of being on the Sexual Offenders Register for the rest of his life.

[Smiles]

" ... They did it to science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke ... "
What did 'they' do to Clarke?
This story I've never heard of, though I understand he spent most of the last 40 years or so (before dying there) in Sri Lanka. But I've never heard (or read), a word about being hounded by the press about 'something-or-other'.

Can anyone fill this blank in?

Cheers ...

[Khor tose]

" ... They did it to science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke ... "
What did 'they' do to Clarke?
This story I've never heard of, though I understand he spent most of the last 40 years or so (before dying there) in Sri Lanka. But I've never heard (or read), a word about being hounded by the press about 'something-or-other'.

Can anyone fill this blank in?

Cheers ...
Just Google his name Arthur C. Clarke or start here. The press was way out of line on this man, and he did receive an apology but the damage was done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_C._Clarke

News reports today tell the story that Mr G. Glitter arrived in LOS from Vietnam together with a Brit detective, due for a plane change to the UK. He faked a heart attack but immigration refused him entry, and GG refused to board the plane, so he apparently is stuck like Tom Hanks in no man's land.

Surely, all mention on this gay board of this appalling man is off topic. I understand that all the offences of which he has either been convicted or accused have concerned young girls. IтАЩm sure we all are revolted that any man should do this sort of thing to anyone but I do not feel we should discuss it as it does not come under the heading of тАШGay ThailandтАЩ. LetтАЩs bring this to an end.

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

They have responded by a nasty campaign tracking him down around the world printing outrageous lies.

Presumably you also claim that these nasty tabloid press people planted the 4000-odd images of hardcore child porn and abuse that were found on his computer (he incidentally pleaded guilty to 54 individual offenses relating to that).

To even attempt to excuse his conduct and to try to shift the blame onto others just because he is a high profile celebrity who believed his fame would mean he could get away with despicable acts against children (very much like Jonathan King) makes as you just as perverted as he is!

He is a serial pedophile and I hope that he is deported directly back to the UK, has his passport withdrawn and is made to suffer the restrictions, rigours and indignities of being on the Sexual Offenders Register for the rest of his life.

and if you stopped foaming at the mouth Snowkat and re-read my post you will clearly see I wrote : quote : "The porn charge sticks as he owned up to it. " unquote..you great blithering dingbat of moral outrage and yet another wallowing in "pedophile pornography " as presented in the UK media.

As for accuracy-on what possible proof do you claim he is a "serial pedophile"..you are simply another sack of shit who believes your Judea Christian moral outrage allows you to do and say anything about anyone, exaggerate and accuse (as you have me), when all I say is that when a person has done their penance they are free and should be allowed to live in peace.

You are the lowest of all scum as you attack the messanger.

And in reply Smiles: the Snowkats of the world are a perfect example of when charges like this are hurled about that the lowest orders of mankind will revel in others misery and exaggerate in their own minds false accusations as presented to them by the now laughable media..particularly that owned by the revolting Rupert Murdoch who sung from the war sheets and whose support George Bush needed to murder a million Iraqi innocents..all for profit !

Arthur C.Clarke..as the truth can now be told exclusively on Sawatdee by one who knew him : was accused of being a pedophile by a UK newspaper-at which point several NGOs ( possibly Snowkat being one) proclaimed that they had"known of his activities for years". Yet what none of these evil people knew was that Arthur C.Clarke had largely been confined to a wheel chair for over 35 years and was virtually paralyzed from the waist down.

He had no sexual feelings whatsoever..and as the 2 boys who made the claim that he abused them ( born 20 years after Clarke was reduced to his wheelchair)..later admitted they had been paid by that newspaper to make the claim. But for the Snowkats of the world-this is never enough as they revel in this sort of pedophile pornography and in true Victorian form , tut tut about it and take the high moral ground-accusing those asking for rational debate..but lap up every word of it.

Clarke was vindicated and still had multi-million dollar libel suits standing against his accusers at his time of death. The poor man's life deteriorated after the false accusations and his life was never the same.

And yes Snowkat you fool-I do know Jonathon King and he never had a history of underage sex but certainly had sex with boys who were under the age of 21..illegal at the time.

And if you followed his case closely you would know that most of the charges were thrown out when his hideous now middle aged accusers told of his "white front door" as proof of being in his house whereupon a London painter gave evidence of having painted the door white from it's shocking blue ( which gave us all headaches) in 2000..when these "lads" were all in their late 40's. !

And yes I was there to support King and witnessed the infamous quote from one of the arresting detectives who said "we hate this garbage Mr King but the commander is demanding arrests".

And King will be found innocent in the European Court when his case is finally heard as he has definitive proof that he was in New York at the time of the allegations supposedly "proved".

You aren't the the middle aged man are you Snowkat-who turned up at a Surrey police station during King's trial and said he had been given a lift on the motorway in King's Rolls Royce 10 years earlier and could he apply for compensation because of it..are you ?

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

News reports today tell the story that Mr G. Glitter arrived in LOS from Vietnam together with a Brit detective, due for a plane change to the UK. He faked a heart attack but immigration refused him entry, and GG refused to board the plane, so he apparently is stuck like Tom Hanks in no man's land.

Surely, all mention on this gay board of this appalling man is off topic. I understand that all the offences of which he has either been convicted or accused have concerned young girls. IтАЩm sure we all are revolted that any man should do this sort of thing to anyone but I do not feel we should discuss it as it does not come under the heading of тАШGay ThailandтАЩ. LetтАЩs bring this to an end.

you are perfectly correct but the punters lap up this pornograophy produced by cheap tabloids..and if they are going to they need to hear the truth. And it's always good to see their reactions..

All very interesting, seeing as the Americans seem to be the favored punching bag here for being prone to pedo-hysteria. Sounds like the Brits are even worse.

[Brad the Impala]

[Arthur C.Clarke..as the truth can now be told exclusively on Sawatdee by one who knew him : was accused of being a pedophile by a UK newspaper-at which point several NGOs ( possibly Snowkat being one) proclaimed that they had"known of his activities for years". Yet what none of these evil people knew was that Arthur C.Clarke had largely been confined to a wheel chair for over 35 years and was virtually paralyzed from the waist down.


Thank you for this "exclusive". Although I do find it surprising that over 35 years no one else noticed that he was in a wheelchair.

How does being in a wheelchair prevent you from enjoying a suck on a little boy penis, or a munch on a little boy ass?

As for accuracy-on what possible proof do you claim he is a "serial pedophile............

........And yes Snowkat you fool-I do know Jonathon King and he never had a history of underage sex but certainly had sex with boys who were under the age of 21..illegal at the time.

More than one conviction for child pornography and sexual abuse of minors makes him so!

As for Jonathan King, the boys involved in the serious sexual abuse for which he was convicted were 14 and 15 yrs old at the time - (which incidentally is still illegal in the UK - is that why you are residing in Thailand ?) .

You can abuse and call me all the names you want - it just makes your defence of paedophiles even more ridiculous.

If you were there supporting King that just speaks volumes for your attitude to paedophilia.

Carry on fuming at the mouth Earwig (Oh, sorry O'Booze) - your protestations weaken your argument every time you deign to bore us with your ramblings.

I find myself agreeing with Doris O' Booze, the tabloids infuriate me, look at this Another pedo (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7570951.stm) Do you think this has received any publicity? hardly any, the tabloids are hounding Gary Glitter because of who he was not who he is.

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

oh why oh why do I deal with fools ?

I don't know Glitter from Adam, Snowkat : it is the hideous and tawdry media campaigns I object to.

I am proud of my friendship with Jonathon King-he is one of the kindest and most generous souls I have been privileged to meet..presumably you believe his other chums like Paul McCartney and Terry Wogan who support him are similar ?..

I marvel at your intricate knowledge of Kings and Glitter's cases..perhaps you have been salivating over them for years..you certainly know more than I do..but isn't it always the way of those who take the high moral ground and soak up this peephole pedo porn ?

you are right Chao Na: being in a wheelchair would not "prevent you from enjoying a suck on a little boy penis, or a munch on a little boy ass? " although this isn't the first thing that springs to my mind (is it a Freudian Slip on your part ?) but as the original allegation was that he anally raped 2 boys it's bleeding obvious that it was an impossible act if he was frigging paralyzed..or do you intend to present numerous possible scenarios ?

But perhaps you know better than the entire British establishment who felt at ease allowing Prince Charles to finally present Sir Arthur with his knighthood.

and oh Brad the Impala..still reading every word despite your bogus claim you didn't. !! You naughty thing.

and prey tell..when was the last time you saw Sir Arthur Clarke walking ?..or do you claim Sri Lanka's most respected doctors lie?

Whatever his medical condition may be, he was convicted in Vietnam of molesting children. He was convicted in the UK of having child porn.

And has served his sentence for both convictions.

All very interesting, seeing as the Americans seem to be the favored punching bag here for being prone to pedo-hysteria. Sounds like the Brits are even worse.

The Brits ARE worse - they are reduced to hysteria by ANY kind of sexual activity whatsoever.

Having sex on a Tuesday with the lights on is regarded as a perversion in the UK.

oh why oh why do I deal with fools ?You don't have too many options if you want to continue active membership of this Board. I distinguish between the ones I have on {Ignore} (Aunty, Chao Na, Gone Fishing and Wesley are my top four at the moment) and the ones who are not only fools but a joke whose answers feed my sense of smug superiority (WhiteDesire, Dek Wat and Soi 10 Tom are top of that list at the moment, but it's an ever-changing one)

I marvel at your intricate knowledge of Kings and Glitter's casesThe love that dare not speak its name? People give away their most secret fears about themselves by what and how they write on certain topics. We all know guys who've been rabidly anti-homosexual in their public utterances who've turned out eventually to admit to the homosexuality they've been denying in themselves (and through their hate-filled speech to others). While I have no interest in pre-pubertal boys (and females of any age), I always assume the same principle applies to those who are so vehement against paedophiles. The same is true of those who attack users of drugs such as heroin (less addictive than nicotine) or cocaine (while knocking back several alcoholic drinks a night, usually)

What people say is almost always far, far less interesting than why they are saying it (although I am the exception to that rule)

...Who the Hel..... Heck is Gary Glitter?

And who the double-heck is Jonathon King???

I know who Michael Jackson is. :idea:

He served time for (I think) a child porn related offence (offense), and later wrote a musical about his experiences.Oliver?

[Khor tose]

I dont know the whole story, but this is a great video. I read where he was convicted due to the press coverage,, like Arthur C. Clarke, but then received a pardon. True????

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qd_eCmZnBI

[allieb]

King's musical is called "VILE PERVERT: THE MUSICAL".

For those of you who don't know Jonathan King. He Is a singer from the 70's like Garry Glitter. He was conivicted of buggery with a minor and called a vile pervert by the judge. The tabloids had a field day . The truth is that this man whome I met in the early 70's did pick up teenage boys and he was just a few years older himslef. The teenager he was convicted of buggering brought charges some 25 or 30 years later. Quite clearly for financial gain in my opinion.

I was in fact invited to Kings house having met a friend of his at the BBC top of the pops studios in the 70's. It was quite clear he fancied me. I was underage at the time ( 21 was the age of consent) but did nothing to force me into sex. I left intact as I didn't fancy him. We are talking about a man in his early 20's having boys of 16,17 and 18 which is not a crime in the UK now but was then. I do not agree with underage sex by any means but I think his conviction was unsafe and the only pervert was the Uk justice system in his case.

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

good Heaven's allieb that is extraordinary !!

The UK Age Of Consent does show how trends can dictate these "moral panic" movements. I along with tens of thousands committed illegal acts in the UK.when I was a youth, with other youths (also criminals). Oddly there was absolutely no paranoia about it.

How a person can be described as a "pedophile" one day..beacuse they go with a 17 year old..but then as the UK law was equalised in 2002 to 16..meaning that person was no longer considered a pedohphile, is a concept of thinking that I am unable to grasp.

But it is the lack of rational debate I find bizarre.

For instance a gay German youth of 16 who whilst living in London could have sex with a 15 year old and could be hauled up into court..and basically have his whole future traumatised beyond belief ( I use this as an example being a case I know of)..yet back home his status would be perfecly legal as the age is 14.

In the days of Mary Whitehouse these scares were seen as an amusement ( with poor Mary having to discover one of her own sons was gay)..but at times in history it becomes frighteningly serious and damage is done..as Oscar Wilde discovered being the first high profile victim and example of "moral panic" in Victorian times.

Then Lord Montague became a victim of a re-newed 1950's moral panic and was targeted because of a failed police prosecutuion over some boy scouts.

This fortunately led to the Wolfenden Report which finally recomended legalising gay sex..whereupon gays who were until then.."vile perverts" became normal law abiding citizens overnight.

The common talk at the time was that Lord Wolfenden advised his son to please desist from wearing make-up and to tone down his effeminite movements whilst his father was conducting the review.

Jonathon King-the writer of incredibly corny music and the mastermind behind the Eurovision Song Contest refuses to do as the tabloids demand..slink off and hide. That is why he named his film "Vile Pervert" and premiered it by driving up and down the Croisette at last year's Canne Film Festival in his red rolls royce with a huge banner atop proclaiming.."Vile Pervert :The Musical".

And he regularly write to newspapers to please run the banner headline..'vile pervert'.. as he says it result in sales of around another 3-500 copies of his records. But then he always did know how to use the media.

And as the truth filters out about G.Glitter's extra-ordinary flights from here and there..we discover that it is a self-appointed child "advocate" causing the problem..as she is insisting upon sitting next to him on whichever flight he is on. Personally I would have thought she could consider donating the cost of her flights to the children of Vietnam.
************

No Khor tose-King would never recive a "pardon" in the UK but he has been granted an appeal is to be heard in the European Court. This is considered a positive move as they don't take cases lightly.

So where is he now?
He was finally deported from Thailand after 24 hours at the airport; being declared as persona non grata and then put on a plane to Hong Kong where he was refused entry.
Is he still in Hong Kong or in the air again?

Times article (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4573311.ece)

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

no..he was flown back to Thailand..the circus is back in town.

We all know guys who've been rabidly anti-homosexual in their public utterances who've turned out eventually to admit to the homosexuality they've been denying in themselves (and through their hate-filled speech to others). While I have no interest in pre-pubertal boys (and females of any age), I always assume the same principle applies to those who are so vehement against paedophiles.
You may be right in some cases. However, instead of making false assumptions and accusations to suit this particular agenda, just stop and consider for a moment that those who are so vehemently against paedophiles may well have been the subject of unwanted and forced sexual abuse as a child and have had to live with the memory for the rest of their lives. Could that be the reason they are so anti-pedo and are not in fact closet paedophiles themselves as you suggest/surmise?

I don't generally sympathise with paedophiles but I note the following.

On arrival in the UK, he was to have been met by a New Labour Minister announcing tighter controls. In other words he was to be paraded as the caged tiger in a three ring press circus. Perhaps he has made a fortune as a circus act but he has a right to privacy as the rest of us. The government's intentions on this occasion were poorly judged and I'm glad they have been disrupted.

He has paid his dues for his crimes and I don't think his current predicament shows my country in a good light. We gave up bear baiting some time ago and we will be more civilised when we give up celebrity baiting too.

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

We all know guys who've been rabidly anti-homosexual in their public utterances who've turned out eventually to admit to the homosexuality they've been denying in themselves (and through their hate-filled speech to others). While I have no interest in pre-pubertal boys (and females of any age), I always assume the same principle applies to those who are so vehement against paedophiles.
You may be right in some cases. However, instead of making false assumptions and accusations to suit this particular agenda, just stop and consider for a moment that those who are so vehemently against paedophiles may well have been the subject of unwanted and forced sexual abuse as a child and have had to live with the memory for the rest of their lives. Could that be the reason they are so anti-pedo and are not in fact closet paedophiles themselves as you suggest/surmise?

I think you are the one accusing others of being peadophiles.

Besides..what the hell has that got to do with GG or anyone else ?.

Each person is an individual and should be treated as such and is entitled to the protection of the law and should not be the subject of arbitrary controls merely because you or anyone else doesn't like the cut of their gib !.

555 "On arrival in the UK, he was to have been met by a New Labour Minister announcing tighter controls. In other words he was to be paraded as the caged tiger in a three ring press circus. Perhaps he has made a fortune as a circus act but he has a right to privacy as the rest of us. The government's intentions on this occasion were poorly judged and I'm glad they have been disrupted. "

of course this is what is happening and is the desperate act of a desperate government plunging in the polls. It's uniquely despicable ( no matter what one thinks of Glitter) because it unfairly targets one person.

Again-these provisions would be struck down by the European Court and the whole "sex offendor" status is already to be a target of a case to be heard.
The precedent set that is to be used-the forcing of Jews, Romany Gypsies, political prisoner and homosexuals to wear various coloured stars depicting their status and publicly identifying them in Germany.

I think you are the one accusing others of being peadophiles.Clearly Snowkat hasn't yet realised that he is one of my long-time {Ignore} family members - that group whom generally I wouldn't fart in their mouth if they were dying for lack of air

On arrival in the UK, he was to have been met by a New Labour Minister
Frankly I can't think of anything worse, I have never encountered such a bunch of ne'er do wells as New Labour Ministers and Home Secretary Jaqui Smith is an even bigger joke than John Prescott. How tough they are on GG, he's getting harsher treatment than Robert Mugabe.

you are right Chao Na: being in a wheelchair would not "prevent you from enjoying a suck on a little boy penis, or a munch on a little boy ass? " although this isn't the first thing that springs to my mind (is it a Freudian Slip on your part ?) but as the original allegation was that he anally raped 2 boys it's bleeding obvious that it was an impossible act if he was frigging paralyzed..or do you intend to present numerous possible scenarios ?


You postulated that it was impossible for ACC to engage in acts of pedophilia because he was in a wheelchair. I simply pointed out the fallacy of that assertion.

The "you hate pedos so you must be one" argument is always the first lame thing out of pedo-defenders' mouths. In addition to child abusers, I also detest terrorists and the Christian right. By your logic, I must be a closet suicide-bomber and avid Church-goer.

How a person can be described as a "pedophile" one day..beacuse they go with a 17 year old..but then as the UK law was equalised in 2002 to 16..meaning that person was no longer considered a pedohphile, is a concept of thinking that I am unable to grasp.

In which case you are unable to grasp the concept that any law should ever be changed - or the concept that one day you may have been liable for military conscription but the next day you would not; that one day a gay couple would have no rights, the next day they could have a Civil Partnership; that one day you could drive as fast as your car would go, the next day the limit was 75; that one day Homi was a Corporal, the next day he was a Colonel; etc, etc.

Times change - sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. Surely it is not that hard a concept to grasp?


The "you hate pedos so you must be one" argument is always the first lame thing out of pedo-defenders' mouths. In addition to child abusers, I also detest terrorists and the Christian right. By your logic, I must be a closet suicide-bomber and avid Church-goer.

"logic"? What logic? Maybe the same logic used by those who claim that "I can't be a pedo, my boyfriend's 30" - Ted Bundy's long term girlfriend was a former policewoman, that did not stop him being a serial killer!

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

[quote="Lunchtime O'Booze":m50d75z7]
you are right Chao Na: being in a wheelchair would not "prevent you from enjoying a suck on a little boy penis, or a munch on a little boy ass? " although this isn't the first thing that springs to my mind (is it a Freudian Slip on your part ?) but as the original allegation was that he anally raped 2 boys it's bleeding obvious that it was an impossible act if he was frigging paralyzed..or do you intend to present numerous possible scenarios ?


You postulated that it was impossible for ACC to engage in acts of pedophilia because he was in a wheelchair. I simply pointed out the fallacy of that assertion.

The "you hate pedos so you must be one" argument is always the first lame thing out of pedo-defenders' mouths. In addition to child abusers, I also detest terrorists and the Christian right. By your logic, I must be a closet suicide-bomber and avid Church-goer.[/quote:m50d75z7]

Incorrect : I don't "postulate" these days..I simply wrote the truth..that it was impossible for Sir Arthur Clarke-an innocently maligned man-because I know the truth.

the "you hate pedos so you must be one" argument ..etc" is not my postulation- which I don't do-it's Homiterns..but I don't think it's postulation ( or if Homi postulates) but rather a general Freudian type analysis.

But I'm not sure I do Freud these days either after reading Richard Webster's excellent Why Freud Was Wrong: Sin, Science and Psychoanalysis,


Gone Fishing : "In which case you are unable to grasp the concept that any law should ever be changed - or the concept that one day you may have been liable for military conscription but the next day you would not; that one day a gay couple would have no rights, the next day they could have a Civil Partnership; that one day you could drive as fast as your car would go, the next day the limit was 75; that one day Homi was a Corporal, the next day he was a Colonel; etc, etc."

Times change - sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. Surely it is not that hard a concept to grasp? "

you are missing the point (as usual)..mine is more a comment on the capacity of the ruling elite ( politicians, the media, "morals" camapigners) to drive crusades at various points of time while the general public laps up this unhealthy peephole type porn that demonstartes a startling capacity to live vicariously , or as the great philospher Dame Edna Everage puts it to succinctly : "laugh at other's troubles as it helps to bear your own"

[Smiles]

" ... [and as for Gone Fishing] you are missing the point (as usual) ... "
Yes, yes, that works for me. Yes.

Cheers ...

Mr Gadd is now back in the UK which is where he should remain. He can whine all he likes about the justice system in Vietnam but only a fool would believe he is innocent. The man is a piece of trash, though he is British so he's our trash and therefore we should be duty bound to stop him from going around Asia or anywhere else pestering children. To that end he should remain forever in his home country.
Strangely enough I dont think our kids are in any danger from him, he's simply too much of a public figure to get away with it here. The worst he can get up to is scouring the internet for a cheap thrill.

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

"should remain" ? is this another who believes the law should be a floating concept and applied according to their whims and prejudices ?

My whole fascination with this episode is that , having once trained for the law ( and failed)-I still retain a healthy respect for it but believe politicians have now surrended policy making to media outlets ( despite their plunging circulations)..on Iraq..on this and numerous other subjects and Nu Labour is the main offendor.

Despite the increasing hysteria surrouding GG and the shifting facts as accusations abound..isn't it odd that the poor old NoTW ( who began their extraordinary campaign of harrassment when GG was in Cuba..implying he was "suspected" of child assaults..thence onwards to Cambodia..Vietnam and all points East...)..they haven't produced a single other complainant despite having teams scouring the countyside for 10 years. Not in Cambodia-not in the UK-not in Cuba.

The "young girl" they ranted about in Cuba turned out to be a 27 year old woman ( now 35) who has an 8 year old son by GG. This needless to say-led to vicious accounts of how GG stopped fianacially supporting that son when he went into jail...despite him being prevented mail in or out.

They have ranted that GG's own British son, the unfortunately named Paul Gadd has disowned his father-despite the Mr Gadd repeatedly stating this isn't true.

Copyright restrictions prevent me from posting copies of my ongoing correspondent with a wild-eyed Independant journalist whose wrath I incurred by saying she was imitating NoTW standards in her copy.

She castigated me for quoting an incorrect figure ( which I had and on here as well)..it was 25000 pounds the NoTW promised his first complainant ( not 100K) upon GG's conviction. She didn't seem to think that approaching a newspaper with her complaint first was rather odd..I would have thought the police should have been the first port of call. The lass then stated that if GG had accepted help for his "problem" then no future case would have occured..."but he was found innocent" I claimed to deaf ears.

Carol Sarler on the Times shows some insight : " Paedophiles may be mad or bad. But not both"
"http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article4575628.ece?Submitted=true

And the funniest report must go to The Standard which said as GG was being shuffled through Heathrow and being hounded by throngs of reporters and photographeers ( odd that anyone claiming to be a journalist can access normally forbidden areas in these days of terrorism)..most other passengers looking on said "who is that ?".

Finally I concur with those charged with implementing the law , such as Chief Constable Terry Grange of Dyfed-Powys, the child protection spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers, who says " the government had тАШsurrenderedтАЩ policy on child sex offenders to tabloid newspapers. тАШIt is impossible to work consistently, coherently when every month or every six months there is a policy change or reaction brought about by pressure from the mediaтАж. The only people with any real strategic intent and understanding of where they want to go and the will to be ruthless in getting there is the News of the World.тАЩ

[allieb]

Lunchtime O Booze

I agree completely with what you have said. My own belief is that GG was probably doing the mum of the two girls in Vietnam. When she found out who he was, she set him up to make some money. Anybody commiting a crime whatever it may be usually covers their tracks, ie no finger prints witnesses etc. He seemed to have no problem mingling with the woman and her kids publicly.

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

thank you allieb.

I'm not sure what to believe about GG.

My primary concern isn't really GG but the circus surrounding him which I believe is the end result of an unhealthy obsession and deliberate "paedophile panic' campaigns by self-appointed moralisers, politicians bereft of ideas and the media which will exploit this.

We have the paediatrician Sir Roy Meadow currently facing charges of gross professional misconduct for his false evidence against a number of parents wrongfully convicted of killing their children. Who could possibly forget the tragic case of Sally Clark-who died shortly after her release from jail after being wrongfully accused of kiling her 2 sons on Meadow's evidence. Even the coroner said "she probably died of a broken heart"

Meadows has given dozens of "expert" opinions in cases of child abuse and was partly responsible for the discredited "satanic child abuse" epidemic of the 80's where dozens of innocent people had their lives ruined. His mantra was-that unless evidence was found to the contrary, persons accused should automatically be considered guilty.

The Bryn Estin boys home where hundreds of child workers were arrested-the vast majority subsequently released as innocent with a number later commiting suicide

Or perhaps the bogus Magdalene Sisters case where an Irish home for orphan girls was sudenly cast as a hotbed of vicious nuns raping and physically abusing girls-despite their former charges saying they had only found kindness from the Sisters ..until one dutifully came out of the woodwork in 2005 , Kathy O'Beirne & her grim bestseller memoir "Kathy's Story" except for one hitch-as the meticulously kept records showed-she was never there. It was a bogus and utterley discredited book which made a fortune for the writer on the back of "pedophile panic".

There are a dozen similar cases were hundreds of innocent social & home workers charged, released but lives destroyed. Is it any wonder few people are now choosing to not work with children. The idea promoted that there is a paedophile on every corner waiting to pounce just isn't true-particularly when the vast majority of abuse cases happen within the home and are perpetuated by a relative.

Meanwhile-the sister publication of the NoTW , The Sun brings us a page 3 scoop- 15 year old Nathalie Banus with the words "She'll be 16 in two days's time, then we'll show you her nipples" !!!

Now in the UK teachers, social workers and even foster parents are not allowed to touch children at all - touch as in giving them a hug when they're sad, or comforting them if they've fallen over and grazed their knee.

They did the same experiment in the US on baby monkeys. However, they dicontinued it after a matter of weeks. It was considered too cruel.

[Marsilius]

Meanwhile-the sister publication of the NoTW , The Sun brings us a page 3 scoop- 15 year old Nathalie Banus with the words "She'll be 16 in two days's time, then we'll show you her nipples" !!!

I doubt very much whether they will...

To publish a picture on the very day of Nathalie's 16th birthday would mean, by definition, that the photograph would have had to have been taken before that - i.e. when she was just 15.

Even under the terms of the original Protection of Children Act (1978), taking a photograph of a child below the age of 16 was a criminal offence. BUT the 1978 Act was subsequently amended by the Sexual Offences Act (2003) that raised the legal age of nude photography to 18.

Perhaps we can look forward to seeing Rupert Murdoch - and, if there is any justice, Nathalie's stupid mother - in court!

[For more, see the Wikipedia entry "Protection of Children Act 1978".]

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

good point Marsillus but I don't know if they ever did publish the pics.

Newspapers are of course, entirely exempt from many laws such as ones we must obey. For instance if you and I promised a witness in a case a huge sum of money should they help secure a guilty verdict on a person charged-we would be hauled into court and charged with perverting the course of justice...

The NoTW does it regularly yet no government minister has the guts to take them on..after all R.Murdoch can make or break them-or so they believe.

It was only by pure chance that the NoTW's 3 year utterley illegal bugging of Prince's Harry & William's mobile phones was uncovered but the Royal correspondent took the rap for that-the editor seemingly oblivious to the quarter million pounds worth of cheques he personally signed over to a private eye who controlled the plot. And this in a publication whose owner demands accountability for every penny spent-. Now that private dick and the correspondent have served their jail terms, they have both been re-employed by the NoTW on lovely new fat sallaries and it would churlish to suggest that was in lieu of them keeping their traps shut. :cheers:

It's highly fitting that the dopey Home Officer Minister Jacqui Smith , who has completely bungled her master plan to use GG as an example will be shown the door quicker than the physically and mentally blind David Blunckett and the ever so tough talking John Reid-both on the fiddle whilst vowing to clamp down on everyone and his grandmother..whilst Britain's youth run rampant-binge drinking, dropping drugs galore ( and another poor youth off a building the other day) with everyday yet another report of one bunch of kids knifing another, or now , actually shooting them dead. Crime is completey out of control in the UK, police under resourced, the government hasn't a clue what to do about it and at the same time are decimating huge sections of inner city living-adding to the problem..so"pedo panic" comes in handy.

Oddly enough the one person who I guarantee won't be much affected by any of the thundering news reports, is GG himself.