Still In The Dark

[poliphilo]

Leonard Rossiter was a nasty piece of work. Yes, that's not wholly surprising. But the Mail knows and we know that the Jimmy Savile affair is about something much bigger and more distressing than the unpleasant sexual behaviours of dead or superannuated entertainers. BBC's Newsnight came within a whisker of dropping a big political name last night, then got cold feet. How much longer are we going to beat about the bush? When is a media outfit with lawyers to spare going to break the real story?

Comments

[ooxc.livejournal.com]

But don't you also feel discomfort at the idea of these people who waited until people were dead before producing this righteous indignation against them? I do

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

The victims are afraid of the libel laws. Savile was untouchable in his lifetime. So it seems are some of the big political names the mainstream media won't go after.

[ooxc.livejournal.com]

I don't agree that he was untouchable. There was plenty of uneasiness about him and others - but young people had mor more freedom and more money than had ever been known - and parents were abrogating responsibility

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

A lot of people knew what was going on and even more people found him unsavoury, but the fact is he remained untouched.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Another point. Savile was connected. He had political friends and he had friends in low life- like the Krays.
He once told an Irish reporter that he could set the IRA on anyone who displeased him. This may have been bravado but if I had been that reporter I think I'd have given him the benefit of the doubt.

[ideealisme.livejournal.com]

I am beginning to think that libel laws are a joke and an instrument only of bullying by the malign powers. Then I think of that bloke who the Daily Mail more or less accused of murdering his lodger when it was the guy next door. The man was completely innocent and sued them.

But anyway. Looked up the newsnight guy on the internet. Had never heard of him, but anyway.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

If the papers were less wicked the issue would be clearer.

The Newsnight guy was a behind-the-scenes man, very important but not a household name.

[michaleen.livejournal.com]

Do you really think the real story will break? I fear the increasing focus on the BBC may tell us how this is shaping up. Private media in particular have much to gain by doing as much damage to the BBC as possible.

[ooxc.livejournal.com]

I don't believe that we'll ever know. I remember only too vividly the indignation at the time, when some of us tried to prevent our 16 - 18 yearolds workforce from leaping into the TOTPs bandwagon - we were "narrowminded, spoilsport, not in tune with modern culture" - not hearing much about that now,are we?

[michaleen.livejournal.com]

I certainly have difficulty imagining the whole truth coming out. The tentacles of something like this must necessarily extend far indeed.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I don't know. The "real" story is out there on the Internet - albeit in chaotic shape. Newsnight came close to breaking it last night. I think the decision to back down was made at the last minute.

[michaleen.livejournal.com]

At last I understand how the reptilians come in.

Well, it really is a bombshell, isn't it? And how I long to see this one explode, too.

The Fifth of November would be nice.

Re: Internet.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Yup. :) And now I'm going to delete your comment because my ownership oif this blog is far too easy to trace.

Sorry, but if the BBC doesn't have the resources to fight a libel action I certainly don't.

Heigh-ho.

Re: Internet.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din.

Re: Internet.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Lovely tune, that.