'Operation Yewtree' - the McCarthyism of our times??

[amateur51]

Okay then, millions of us if you insist on a much greater degree of accuracy. I was being my usual modest self.

Have you actually anything of particular worth to contribute to this discussion, amsey ... ? :winkeye:

I knew I was in trouble when they mentioned making you Contribution Quality Manager as a sop to your vanity.

The contribution you're mithering about seems just about fine to me, thanks. Ahem.

[amateur51]

I think that in societies where alcohol is banned, there are almost no cases of rape whatsoever. We need to get smart about social policy and look outside European thinking and permissiveness.

Fascinating insight, Oxo. Any chance of some supporting evidence?

[MrGongGong]

And as for Mr.GG's point -(which I only saw in your quote since I thankfully have him on ignore)- I do not think that you can equate euthanasia to end prolonged suffering, with the consent of all parties involved, with the deliberate murder of patients. "More or less?" Nothing like.

This isn't a debate about that
but you are simply wrong

But nice to see you true to form peester (and what kind of IGNORE allows you to respond when you choose ? stick to your childish behaviour or join the grown ups !)

[MrGongGong]

I think that in societies where alcohol is banned, there are almost no cases of rape whatsoever. We need to get smart about social policy and look outside European thinking and permissiveness.

India ?
(I don't know but that seems to be "received wisdom" ? you might be right though ?)

I see that there are no car accidents in Saudi Arabia caused by women drivers .........

[aeolium]

MyCarthyism was hardly a struggle between differing ideologies. If it had been recognised as such, it is unlikely public opinion would have turned against it so as it did. If there really had been a communist conspiracy in the US does anyone believe Hollywood would have been where they lit the fuse?

But my point was to distinguish between the manufactured hysteria of the McCarthyite witch-hunt about supposed communist infiltration and investigations into allegations of real crimes, against a background where there is incontrovertible evidence that widespread child and other sex abuse took place in a number of institutions - this evidence having been built up over decades.

Twice, the term 'the UK entertainment industry' is applied and suggesting it is the subject of some industry-wide investigation, whereas a specific point of mine is that only one company has been subject to any scrutiny, ie. the BBC.

Later there are references to non-specific examples of institutional abuse with the added clause, 'especially the BBC'. Why especially the BBC, I'm wondering, no more than say Sainsbury's, ICI, the IOD, the IPPR, etc, etc.

But other figures have been investigated who were not simply BBC figures, people like Gary Glitter (who had previously been convicted twice for child sex abuse) and others like Freddie Starr and Rolf Harris. And the original basis for the police investigation, Operation Yewtree, was precisely because of the Savile case - and he was associated for a long time with the BBC. Yet even here the focus was not solely on the BBC but on other organisations with which Savile had been associated, including NHS hospitals. The investigations surrounded Savile's own activities as well as those of others he worked with. There is a report, Giving Victims a Voice into the whole Savile episode and related investigations. It shows that Yewtree has sparked a number of other investigations into organisations other than the BBC for instance North Wales children's homes.

Some of us in this House, so to speak, were employees of the Beeb and worked with, or in close proximity to some of the persons against whom allegations have been made. Or we might just have been around, such as myself, when accompanying my dad on studio visits to Television Centre, but this is a picture I don't recognise at all. The BBC for all its faults is a very public and open body. By virtue of its Charter it has few places to hide, not like, say the closed worlds of the Vatican, or in Ireland, the order of the Magdalene Sisters, or the Roman Catholic church in Ireland itself. The BBC has never had the option to control and manipulate its reputation to the extent that is imputed.

But in that case how do you account for the extensive protection from investigation and prosecution that Savile enjoyed during his long association with the BBC, when it was clear that a number of those who worked there knew of his predilections and activities - even to the point where a Newsnight investigation into those activities was stopped from being broadcast very recently? That is the culture that is rightly under investigation. I don't by any means think that it was unique to the BBC - police forces, for instance, seem to have been affected, as the recent revelations about Cyril Smith suggest.

.... and here it is where we come to the nub of the problem and what I feel is my justification for suggesting there's a casual conspiracy at play. Let me re-run part of the quote above: "Yet given the evidence amassed relating to Savile I don't think it should come as a surprise if there were others in the entertainment industry who also offended."

Well, that's as if to say, and posit as fact, the accusation 'Well, they were probably all at it, weren't they?'. How about us replacing the name of Savile with 'Shipman, Harold', the GP who despatched some 250 patients to a premature demise. I don't recall any clamour of concern at the time that the 'medical industry' was riddled with mass murderers.

It is accepted that Harold Shipman was a complete one-off, how is it not possible that Jimmy Savile was a complete one-off?

How is it in these ongoing enquiries there's an implication of an unseen iceberg of abuse at the BBC with Savile at its peak?

Savile was an active and participatory ambassador for who knows how many charities and institutions. He was a regular Christmas guest at Chequers. He was an apparent confidante to the Prince of Wales; and yet only the BBC gets it in the neck every time.

Take Stoke Mandeville Hospital at which Savile had a shocking level of access for a non-medical associate, and with little shortage of innuendo and suggestion about his conduct there. Has it been the subject of of any police investigation? Could there not have been some ring of compliance there?

Well, there may well have been but it seems the police are much busy knocking on the doors of former BBC stars (only) while it could be suggested they have half the phone book to work off?

I did not suggest that this was the tip of an iceberg, but that it would be much more surprising if Savile had been the lone offender, given that there have already been convictions of others in the entertainment world - Jonathan King, Gary Glitter, Robert King - and given what we know of abuse in other institutions. Stoke Mandeville, and other hospitals like Broadmoor and Leeds General, where Savile was involved, have indeed been investigated and reports issued.

I really don't think there is an intention to 'get at' the BBC in these investigations - except from its usual enemies in the press. I think it's absolutely right that the Savile episode should be thoroughly investigated to identify the failings not just in the BBC but in other institutions. Savile's victims deserve it.

[Mr Pee]

Have you actually anything of particular worth to contribute to this discussion, amsey ... ? :winkeye:

It doesn't look like it, does it? Just the usual snide remarks and juvenile personal insults.....

[amateur51]

It doesn't look like it, does it? Just the usual snide remarks and juvenile personal insults.....

Ah the gang's all here, it must be Sunday.

[Mr Pee]

Ah the gang's all here, it must be Sunday.

Thank you for so neatly illustrating my point.

I must leave this stimulating discussion for a while now, I am afraid. Nearly time for the AbuDhabi GP, live only on Sky Sports F1 HD!!

Go Seb!!

[jean]

I think that in societies where alcohol is banned, there are almost no cases of rape whatsoever.

An extraordinary claim.

[jean]

I don't think one other case constitutes a pattern.

... I do not think that you can equate euthanasia to end prolonged suffering, with the consent of all parties involved, with the deliberate murder of patients. "More or less?" Nothing like.

I think Mr Pee is quite correct here.

[teamsaint]

I think Mr Pee is quite correct here.

About what? patterns or what constitutes murder?

[jean]

Both.

[Beef Oven!]

An extraordinary claim.

Claim?

[MrGongGong]

I think Mr Pee is quite correct here.

I don't think he is at all
The lovely mr Shipman was seeking to prevent the suffering of his elderly patients by offering them an alternative.
The fact that he didn't ask their opinion seems to be the sticking point ? But i'm sure that's a small matter as people change their minds don't they ? So I guess if (as happens in some places) one of them said that they were "tired of life" then it wouldn't be murder but an act of "great humanity"......

[teamsaint]

Both.

so when does a pattern become a pattern ? and when should we suspect one.?If half of what Saville is said to have done really took place, and there are strong suspicions that similar things were going on elsewhere, that starts to look like a pattern to me.

if one doctor is murdering hundreds of patients, and another is dangerously over prescribing to many dozens (at least) of patients , it looks like a pattern to me. I would be unhappy if those in authority didn't treat it as a potential pattern of behaviour.

( I don't think Mr Pee and MrGongGongs comments about euthanasia are referring to the Barton case that I mentioned.)