Breaking News...edward Heath Was Investigated For Possible Child Abuse

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-33755726

"In a statement, Wiltshire Police said: "Sir Edward Heath has been named in relation to offences concerning children"

[andy-hughes]

jno - //I believe it was to Russell Harty on TV, andy-hughes. Who it was aimed at I couldn't say; nonetheless, Harty asked him if he liked sex and BG gave the cup of tea reply, hence my post. //

That does ring a bell - and the reasoning is similar.

George had an image as a cuddly, but slightly odd pop star that mums and grans liked, so it was politic not to mention is extra-curricular activities which would upset them.

Russell Harty would have completely understood where he was coming from!!

[Peter Pedant]

Just wait a minute....
one of us is guilty of wonky reasoning innit ?

Boy Geo wasnt a child molester ... innit

"Boy George was today sentenced to 15 months in jail for falsely imprisoning a male escort by handcuffing him to a wall and beating him with a metal chain."

I dont think we call rent-boys - - - underage "male escorts" do we ?


there you were sanctimoniously rebuking dear old AOG for deliberately confusing paedophilia and being gay ....

[but I cd be wrong: I frequently am]

[ummmm]

Don't start all that again, PP!!!

[sandyRoe]

Would he have had shackles on the wall to secure the handcuffs? Must live in a funny old gaff.

[mikey4444]

Naomi.... ( 09:26)..."But it appears that no 'victims' complained until the police asked for people to come forward"

Wrong.

Tom Watson has referred 2 complaints about Heath to the Police since 2012.

If you keep sticking your head in the sand Naomi, all you will get it a gob full of grit.

[naomi24]

Mikey, how coarse you are. I’m not sticking my head in the sand. I simply find witch-hunts distasteful. Tom Watson has made allegations – he is not a ‘victim’. Edward Heath was not a man I admired but it’s very wrong to besmirch anyone’s name without strong evidence to support the allegations. Unlike you, I haven’t pre-judged him, and I don’t slaver over the prospect of anyone's reputation being reduced to tatters for no good reason. I try to be fair. If any genuine ‘victims’ complain to the police we’ll find out whether he’s guilty or not.

[andy-hughes]

Peter Pedant - //Just wait a minute....
one of us is guilty of wonky reasoning innit ?

Boy Geo wasnt a child molester ... innit

"Boy George was today sentenced to 15 months in jail for falsely imprisoning a male escort by handcuffing him to a wall and beating him with a metal chain."

I dont think we call rent-boys - - - underage "male escorts" do we ?


there you were sanctimoniously rebuking dear old AOG for deliberately confusing paedophilia and being gay ....

[but I cd be wrong: I frequently am] //

I am unsure if your post is directed at me - ?

If it is, I don't understand the point you are making - could you please repost in English so I can see what you are getting at? Thanks.

[Peter Pedant]

What you do is..... - read the post Andy

No it is not directed at you - "Andy" does not feature in my post.

it is directed at those who have confused ( durrr ) a conviction for imprisoning a prostitute ( Boy George ) with a conviction for paedophilia ( others )

and I am saying they are different [ but being a decent chap I admitted the possibility of mistake ] No wonder you couldnt understand it: some of these concepts are Very Difficult Indeed.

as for
// Five Police forces investigating this case. " i find it quite chilling".//

think of waste of money
and now think of waste of money five times over.

[ Note to Andy: no, that was not aimed at you either - NB five times table needed to understand comment ]

[andy-hughes]

Peter Pedant - //What you do is..... - read the post Andy //

I did read the post - how else could I have failed to understand it.

//No it is not directed at you - "Andy" does not feature in my post. //

But since it followed on from my post, I think I made a reasonable assumption - you failed to make clear who the other 'one of us ...' was.

//it is directed at those who have confused ( durrr ) a conviction for imprisoning a prostitute ( Boy George ) with a conviction for paedophilia ( others ) //

Again I do not understand the point you are making - what is the relevance of BG's conviction in this context?

// Note to Andy: no, that was not aimed at you either - NB five times table needed to understand comment ] //

If you continue to post in your own idiosyncratic way, and continue to be misunderstood by myself and others, then the responsibility for that is yours.

The standard when someone queries a post is to offer the explanation requested - that is good manners.

Sarcasm is not required.