Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

l'angelo mysterioso

THE JIMMY SAVILLE THREAD

324 posts in this topic

"The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones."

Is Savile's charity work undone? Lance Armstrong's? Wilfred Bramble? BLT? John Peel? I am sure there are other examples,too Knowing what we know now, we have been better off without them.

However, I must have had a pretty boring school, college and working life as I have never imposed, suffered or witnessed an initiation ceremony, male or female sexual harassment and never been groped or touched up unwillingly or groped or touched anyone up uninvited, Of course I heard lots of stories - friends of friends -as it were but noe of then were ever substantiated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lettuce consider that for a moment in the hope I can save my bacon before I move on to matoes more important

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Told today that Savile was photographed with Frank Bruno and Peter Sutcliffe. WTF?

Anyhoo, given that he also had an 'understanding' with Gary Glitter, we came up with this:

A5f_AFCCYAAPb1O.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

was he driven to do all the good things he did out of good old fashioned catholic guilt, acknowledging deep down to himself that he wa a bad person?

Could be. Or it could be that like everyone he was a mixture of darkness and light. It is perfectly possible that he did all his fundraising and gave the money he gave out of a genuine care for those he championed while at the same time indulging his darkness by exploiting those very same people. I don't think human beings ever really fit into the 'either/or' scenario. Or at least probably only sociopaths do.

It also begs the question, in the light of what we know now what do we make of all his efforts for charity, do we dismiss them? Are they now unimportant?

I don't think we can dismiss them really can we? He gave loads of his own money and raised loads of money from other people. He did an amazing job, especially for Stoke Mandeville. I feel sorry for the staff at that hospital actually because his name is very closely associated with their workplace and he had his own office there. The hospital also still has a sizeable chunk of trust fund money left from Savile's work which they say they are going to donate to work with those suffering from abuse but while that is obviously an extremely worthy cause I think they should keep it and use it for their spinal injuries work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it goes back the indulgencies they had in pre reformation times,where wealthy noblemen and land owners would build churches and donate land for monastries to be built,in order to buy grace fr themselves to get to heaven?

and before

remembeer the pardoner's tale?

The RC Church built a alot of its wealth on selling forgiveness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and before

remembeer the pardoner's tale?

The RC Church built a alot of its wealth on selling forgiveness.

Yes of course,I think they called them indulgences

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and before

remembeer the pardoner's tale?

The RC Church built a alot of its wealth on selling forgiveness.

Yes of course,I think they called them indulgences

Strictly speaking indulgences come after repentance and forgiveness. An indulgence does not represent forgiveness in the sacrament of confession, rather it is extra-sacramental and is related to the temporal punishments, or penances, that follow confession and forgiveness. They became an alternative to the tough punishments associated with the church.

Chaucer comments quite cynically on the abuse of indulgences. These abuses were one of the grievances against the church that Luther et al listed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strictly speaking indulgences come after repentance and forgiveness. An indulgence does not represent forgiveness in the sacrament of confession, rather it is extra-sacramental and is related to the temporal punishments, or penances, that follow confession and forgiveness. They became an alternative to the tough punishments associated with the church.

Chaucer comments quite cynically on the abuse of indulgences. These abuses were one of the grievances against the church that Luther et al listed.

aye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't exactly funny, but yes a pretty good analysis of the situation. Good on them for not shying away from the issue.

wrong place wrong time. I don't think it worked.

one or two things fell flat on last week's show

but as you say good on them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, agree with the above. Some good comments on the actions and bogus wise hindsight from some sections of the yellow press.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wrong place wrong time. I don't think it worked.

one or two things fell flat on last week's show

but as you say good on them

I tend to agree, I don't think it worked as well as it could have, but it wasn't a complete failure. The fact that the fake script had been flying about had to be addressed and I'm glad they did mention it, unlike all the other topical BBC comedy shows. It set up a really odd tone, that the rest of the show failed to recover from even though on paper the lineup was quite good.

I'm guessing they didn't expect as much of the discussion on the night to get into the final show, but the rest of the show was under a bit of a shadow after that so I guess they left it in for a fair reflection. Hopefully tonight's will be a little different as it hasn't dominated the headlines as much.

That said, as you would expect Private Eye this week has a lot more indepth coverage on this issue and the hypocracy of the press.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, Lost in Showbiz is designed to take to task the showbiz stories of the week, it isn't a headline from the news part of the paper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, Lost in Showbiz is designed to take to task the showbiz stories of the week, it isn't a headline from the news part of the paper.

True, the story still lowers my already rock bottom opinion of Kerry Katona and OK magazine even further though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chaucer comments quite cynically on the abuse of indulgences. These abuses were one of the grievances against the church that Luther et al listed.

There were a fair few grievances too, if memory serves from my days of RE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were a fair few grievances too, if memory serves from my days of RE.

Verily my child.

Pax vobiscum. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wrong place wrong time. I don't think it worked.

one or two things fell flat on last week's show

but as you say good on them

I think they had an issue to address and may have chosen to sacrifice the one show to make sure that it was well and truly made clear what the situation was. They certainly didn't shy away from tricky topics even if it killed the usual humour of the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they had an issue to address and may have chosen to sacrifice the one show to make sure that it was well and truly made clear what the situation was. They certainly didn't shy away from tricky topics even if it killed the usual humour of the show.

I'll go with that

but there was also a joke about crashing planes into tall buildings which grated with the audience as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go with that

but there was also a joke about crashing planes into tall buildings which grated with the audience as well.

I think that was a badly judged attempt to get the show back on track, at least they had the balls not to cut it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NSPCC have branded Jimmy Savile the worst predatory paedophile ever. If this is the case how was he able to get away with it for so long? OK he was a big star. He was a powerful man. But so was Jonathan King, so was Gary Glitter. I just don't get why someone somewhere didn't blow the whistle

Maybe they did and no one heard it? Or some one deliberately supressed the facts? If such a man can get away with such acts for so long, you have to ask how many more are there?

I must admit I never paid much attention to him in recent years. My kids used to watch Jim'll Fix It, and TBH I thought that got pretty boring. The last time I remember really listening to him was on Savile's Travels on Sundays in the seventies, and he did come across as something of a sexist. But then many people did in those days. Puzzling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017