Just make sure you don't attack any paediatricians next time The Sun lead you into a rage about paedophiles.

Am I embarrassed about some of the things I've done on rlfans? Yes. One example specifically I was completely out of order about. I can admit when I'm wrong.

But you should be embarrassed as a professional journalist by reading that story and coming to that conclusion.

There was at least 4 paedophiles in thatchers government, 1 is still very much politically active.

Name them then. Put in a complaint to the police if you know the facts.

Or are you one of the people who are protecting these paedophiles? What are you getting by protecting these people?

She regularly makes misleading posts yet is the first one to cry foul when newspapers do it.

Yes name them, lets see if you have the minerals?

After all if it's true you have nothing to fear....

And you, Sir, have no room to talk.

You're all trousers and no balls.

You run away the moment someone asks you a direct question – presumably because you're not bright enough to think beyond soundbites and then formulate something like a response that involves more than just a bit of kneejerkery. After all, you claim to use other people's opinions (polls) as evidence to back up any soundbite opinion of yours – and have been shown up time and again for this poor tactic.

And while we're at it, here's a little challenge: feel free to quote some of these "regularly ... misleading posts". If they're 'regular', they'll be easy to find. And then you can explain what is "misleading" about them.

a) I can't imagine what you're "professional" in, then, if it is presumed that one carries one's working life into this little realm of cyberspace. After all, if you presume that this and the work for which I am paid are connected (why?) then it is logical to assume that the work that everyone does is also connected to what they do in cyberspace in a non-work capacity.

b) At present, much of my work involves dealing with a b*****d of a piece of software in a team that is building a massive new website. Since the software itself is now 'officially' known not as 'XXXXXXXXXXXXX', but as "F**cking XXXXXXXXXXXXX", and we're working on a painfully slow server, creating taxonomies, uncovering snafus and inconsistencies that have been created by an external provider that is only slowly making code releases, trying to get a vast number of other people to use bloody house style at the same time etc etc, it's a wonder I don't spend all (personal) online time throwing metaphorical bricks through metaphorical f*****g windows.

c) Since the likes of Liz Jones and Samantha Brick can apparently makes oodles of dosh writing execrable bølløcks; while the likes of John Inverdale can do the same in a TV sense, I'm streets in front in the journalism stakes, darling.

d) Did you struggle to understand my second, rather more detailed post on this thread? If so, what did you not understand about it?

The skills of carpentry, driving a truck, being a cashier etc don't really transfer to web forums.

The skills of reading and comprehension do.

To read THAT story and come to THAT conclusion??? Were you watching TV at the same time and mixed up the TV show and the article? Maybe you outsourced the writing of your post to an Indian with only a few weeks of learning the English language?



I understood it. It was "Blah, blah, blah, evade the point, make pathetic half excuses BS, blah blah blah."

But seeing as you feel it's worthy of response, I'll respond to it.



Well your doubts were wrong. The cited newspaper articles in The Sun which were mainly about picking up women at marathons. There was a media report about Saville being some kind of gangster as well.

Your statement was that "someone at the top of the tree knew about him". The inference that they knew he was a paedo but still chose to push for him receiving a knighthood. There was no evidence whatsoever that the people at the top knew Saville was abusing kids.



So someone at the top knew Saville was a pedo and didn't bother telling Thatcher, who was at Chequers with her ****ing family? Or did they tell Thatcher and she wasn't bothered?

But more likely the security services held rudimentary background checks and nothing came up. Once he'd been checked once, and stayed at Chequers with no incident, they probably never even bothered checking again.



"Abusing his position"??? He was a TV and radio presenter. He managed ballrooms.

I suppose you think that all the PL football players are "abusing their position" because they get loads more sex than they would if they weren't footballers? Of course not. This is pretty much 180 degrees away from your actual position on the matter.



If someone knew Saville was fiddling with kids and they did nothing then they should be in jail.

But thinking that Saville is a creepy weirdo and being jealous that he gets loads of women isn't *knowing*.

Pretty much the whole of Great Britain *knows* that John Terry had an affair with Wayne Bridge's wife.

Now, the problems with that are: 1. She wasn't Bridge's wife, she was his ex gf. 2 Both Terry and VP vehemently deny that they ever had sex. 3. There's no actual evidence from anyone else that they were having an affair. The only evidence was Terry visiting her house.

But because the whole country knows that JT screwed Bridge's wife, Terry loses the England captaincy, Capello loses his job as England manager and Terry receives years of vile abuse.



The culture around workplace harassment has changed massively. The culture of policing has changed massively. But somehow I don't think fiddling with children was any more acceptable then than it is now.



The BBC has received a kicking. The rest of the media happily multiply that kicking. If there are many people who knew that Saville was abusing children THEY DESERVE THAT KICKING.



Knowing that Saville is "complex" means precisely F**K ALL. Knowing that he is "complex" could mean that he's a faggot, that he's weird, strange, that he disgracefully gets tonnes of women that I don't get, that he likes to visit West End dungeons and get whipped.

None of that "complexity" was worth doing anything about.

If someone suspected that part of his complexity was that he fiddled with kids then they should have alerted the police. But that is "complex" because an allegation of sexually abusing children can ruin lives.

If someone knew that Saville was abusing kids and did nothing then I wish there was a hell that they could burn in.



Widespread knowledge = puerile gossip. I neither know, nor care, about either of their sex lives.



Suggest it all you want. The documents don't back you up at all. It doesn't work for IDS, and it clearly doesn't work for you.

...and they're off...

Now then, now then....