William Hit Harry (The Guardian)

varian

Savile was a puzzle to me. He always came across to me as sleazy, and rather repulsive, yet so many people couldn't seem to see through him.

Yes, even as a child I thought he seemed strange- and yet I wanted to go on Jimm'll fix it so badly. I wrote to him and he never answered. I was disappointed at the time, but relieved now.

Sorry I have no idea what you're on about. Please point to the words where I said only poor unfortunates can be good people?

Yes thank goodness we have safeguarding these days to protect people.

WellsRose

Germanshepherdsmum

Whatever makes you think I have no idea of the secrecy that is the shield and sword of the paedophile I have no idea WR.

I repeat. John Lydon tried to talk about Saville in the late 70s. It was released after Saville's death so if he knew about it, it doesn't take much of guess that quite a few people knew. The BBC have been criticised for protecting him. It wasn't that much of a secret. Now Charles might not have known the rumours but he has all these advisors, surely they would know. If not they were not very good.

John Lydon saw something that others did not, or was more able to speak his mind- but even he was shut up. The people who were abused probably thought no one would believe them. Maybe others that knew thought the same. He had friends in high places and seemed untouchable.

Maybe KC did not know. Maybe he was quite naive and thought the best of people? In fact I doubt he would take advice from JS if he did. Sometimes we judge others on our own standards (and its often a huge mistake)

Its likely that KC has had such a sheltered life that he failed to pick anything up, whereas John Lydon may have encountered "that type" before. When you know one abuser, you kind of know when there's another. You know them. You know the type. If you know what I mean.

I wouldn't have expected Charles to pick anything up (he is a bit thick- money in plastic bags being a standard example). However he has a huge security team, as did the Queen. It seems very strange that they didn't pick up any of the rumours about Saville, particularly when he got his honour. But then possibly they did and they were ignored.

WellsRose

Sorry I have no idea what you're on about. Please point to the words where I said only poor unfortunates can be good people?

I took your quote to mean they deserve nothing because - in your opinion - they’re terrible people. In my experience everyone has the capacity to be pretty terrible when judged by others.

Nope I said '**even if' they're terrible people. We were very lucky to have the Queen as she seemed like a decent person and did a great job but that was luck because she could have been awful.

As an aside I come from a village called Iver where Coppins is. My dad worked there whilst it was the home of the Duke and Duchess of Kent. I know the Duke is way down the line of succession now but I think he was 11th at the time. Both of them were supposed to be lovely people who treated their staff with respect. In fact Lady Helen got married not long after my dad died and I went to Windsor to see it. So I'm aware that there some lovely people (hopefully the majority) within the Nobility.

Amazing the people that were sucked in! Personally I always uncomfortable with him and felt he was slimy but I wouldn't say I was convinced he was a paedo. I don't believe they all knew what he was and ignored it.

I know Jimmy Saville pulled the wool over a lot of people's eyes, but John Lydon grew up in an impoverished area with a high crime rate. (No sheltered, protected middle class upbringing for him). No doubt he had seen some things in his hard life that made him see through the facade of Jimmy Saville.

Mrs Thatcher was warned by the security services about Seville’s sexual offending. She insisted on giving him a knighthood.
I find it impossible to believe the security services didn’t ensure the RF knew of the information they had.
It’s to be hoped that people, including members of the RF are more aware now that sex offenders live amongst us.

Iam64

Mrs Thatcher was warned by the security services about Seville’s sexual offending. She insisted on giving him a knighthood.
I find it impossible to believe the security services didn’t ensure the RF knew of the information they had.
It’s to be hoped that people, including members of the RF are more aware now that sex offenders live amongst us.

It's all so corrupt but at least the Harry outrage is shining and a light on it x

Iam64

Mrs Thatcher was warned by the security services about Seville’s sexual offending. She insisted on giving him a knighthood.
I find it impossible to believe the security services didn’t ensure the RF knew of the information they had.
It’s to be hoped that people, including members of the RF are more aware now that sex offenders live amongst us.

Maybe the politicians were more concerned about the publicity value of associating or rewarding him - it looks "right on" and "with it." They always have an eye to the electorate/subjects.

16:56WellsRose

ronib

Prince Harry isn’t doing too well on the 9th commandment either You shall not bear false witness.

His father is worse. He made vows to God 1981 in front of millions of people saying he'd forsake all others with his mistress in the congregation.
Herein endeth the lesson

faye17

16:56WellsRose

ronib

Prince Harry isn’t doing too well on the 9th commandment either You shall not bear false witness.

His father is worse. He made vows to God 1981 in front of millions of people saying he'd forsake all others with his mistress in the congregation.
Herein endeth the lesson

I'm sure that's the least of their worries...

Re: Jimmy Saville / historical abuse: It's not Harry shining a light on it. It has been in the news over the years. Here is just one example www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57984924

There have been books written about the historical child abuse suffered in some children's homes in the 1960's which talk about this.
They have not actually named the politicians and high ranking people who were involved in the paedophile ring, probably for legal reasons in case of being sued for libel as not actually being able to prove it even though they know it to be true.

OnwardandUpward

Re: Jimmy Saville / historical abuse: It's not Harry shining a light on it. It has been in the news over the years. Here is just one example www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57984924

There have been books written about the historical child abuse suffered in some children's homes in the 1960's which talk about this.
They have not actually named the politicians and high ranking people who were involved in the paedophile ring, probably for legal reasons in case of being sued for libel as not actually being able to prove it even though they know it to be true.

No he hasn't but most of the reporting of the Royal Family is from their gushing supporters like Gyles Brandeth and Harry has given the other side. I know it upsets people who have them on a pedestal but if you keep them shrouded in mystery, then you risk corruptian.

Harry isn't shining a light on Saville and or historical abuse, he's shining a light on his own issues. It's very sad but that for me doesn't make it acceptable.

Its true.

The victims of those paedophile rings from London in the 1960's have been "shining a light" on their abuse for years

I agree that Harry only cares about shining a light on Harry.

OnwardandUpward

Its true.

The victims of those paedophile rings from London in the 1960's have been "shining a light" on their abuse for years

I agree that Harry only cares about shining a light on Harry.

Well yes they're all out for themselves. It suits Charles and Andrew to keep quiet and Harry to blab.

You mean the victims of abuse are out for themselves? Or H&C?

Harry is just a poor little rich boy who, although he has had some heartbreaks and hardships , really has no idea of what some people have to endure.

Just listen to that again OnwardandUpward.

Harry is just a poor little rich boy who, although he has had some heartbreaks and hardships , really has no idea of what some people have to endure.

Do you really think that he should just put up and shut up because there are people who have it harder than him? That's up there with "Pull yourself together, what have you got to be depressed about?"

No I didn't mean that. I meant in the context of the Historical abuse cases and people saying that Harry had shone a light on those.

I am sure he has a lot of trauma but I also think there are appropriate channels for dealing with those and don't think that any of the royals should have written a book.

OnwardandUpward -- (I) don't think that any of the royals should have written a book. Oh my goodness.

Why? Information in books can be questioned, surely can be written.

OnwardandUpward

You mean the victims of abuse are out for themselves? Or H&C?

Harry is just a poor little rich boy who, although he has had some heartbreaks and hardships , really has no idea of what some people have to endure.

I meant the Royal family as a whole including Harry. It suits Harry to speak and the Royal Family to keep quiet.

OnwardandUpward

No I didn't mean that. I meant in the context of the Historical abuse cases and people saying that Harry had shone a light on those.

I am sure he has a lot of trauma but I also think there are appropriate channels for dealing with those and don't think that any of the royals should have written a book.

No I didn't say Harry sheds light on the abuse cases.