Sir Cliff Richard's home searched by police

page: 6
15
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 06:39 AM
link   
a reply to: CJCrawley

You could say pretty much the same about Saville.

You forget that these men had their heyday in the 1970's when women had little say and kids none. Its the terrific change around that has brought men like Kitty to the fore and you have to ask yourself why does he have so little in the way of assets in this country and chosen to loose a British Passport for a Barbadian one? He knew he was vulnerable becaue these paedophile rings group like natured men together.

His problem will be staying alive were he to let wellknown names of the others in his ring out. I suspect the royals downwards aren't sleeping too well as he is still alive and high profile. It actually makes me sick to think the Police knew about his visits to Elm Grove and exactly what he was getting up to. He is probably the greatest threat to the Establishment. I am please we are slowly, very slowly getting these preditors out into the open its those who protected them that need to be exposed to.

Its the only way to keep our less fortunate kids safe - and whats more important, the embarrassment and prison for perverts or the welfare less fortunate kids can rely on that the establishment, which we tax payers pay for, provides for these men?




posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 06:50 AM
link   
a reply to: twfau

I think the issue of celebrity here is a blind to hide the fact that many of our politicians and heads of Social Services, police etc, all people with responsible jobs affecting public life and great priviledge, are involved as members of these paedophile rings.

Its the blackmail that this perversion leaves a man open to that is the real issue here. not what celebrity - celebs don't make policies or have huge budgets of public money. They are merely a smoke screen. However frivolous though their lifestyles, they still, as icons have a responsibility to their fans and the law.

Kitty and his mate the singer of cherry pie, also given a title were involved in a ring that was recorded by MI5 going into a house to have sex with underage boys, in social care that mysteriously has disappeared. He was listed along with MP.s a Minister (if my memory is right) heads of various institutes etc and a member of the royal household. These people are far more important than celebs like Diana Dors etc and the question is, should we allow them to be above the law that each and everyh one of us has to observe?



posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 07:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: sayzaar
I find it odd that the police would search the home of someone accused of committing a crime some thirty odd years ago. What on earth were they searching FOR ? a pair of moldy rotting pants from the victim ?


I don't think it's odd they are seacrhing his home. Just because it's an historical allegation, doesn't mean there wouldn't be any evidence whatsoever from that time, such as Video, Photos, or Letters. The guy making the allegation could have said to the police; 'He took loads of photos and videoed me'. for all we know.

Also there may be further evidence of more crimes commited past and current in the form of photos, videos, trophies, dodgy computer activity etc.




Just as odd is how the media knew about the search before it even happened. It could only be that the police themselves tipped off the media. But why would they do that ? All a part of the filthy plan i think.


This is odd to me and highly unprofessional. This type of foolish action can end up scuppering the whole entire investigation. But perhaps that's been the plan all along.


I thought Sir Cliff had already come out as gay ?


No, he's never officially come out. Him coming out would ruin the clean, pure, celibate image he's built up throughout his entire career. Him coming out would also lose him all of his most devout fans.



If he attended the guest house parties at the same times as other kown offenders were having sex with children then even if he was not involved he would have known what was going on.


If this is found to be true. I can't see how he wouldn't know this was going on.



Again, a link between a possible sex offender and the royal family. There is a very real pattern emerging.


It doesn't look good for the Royal Family does it. Lots of fraternizing with possible perverts, lots of Knight Hoods.

In terms of Savile. I don't see how the Royal Family could not of known about his activities. I would imagine anyone coming in such close contatct with the Royals and being Knighted to boot would have had their whole lives scrutinised by Security Services. The same applies for Saviles visits to Chequers.


To the poster who said Nick Ross has publicly stated that he wants to be able to watch child porn. How do you know this ? Is there video evidence of him saying it ? Seems very odd indeed.




“We’re all inquisitive,” he said. “I had never seen, until I started working on Crimewatch, child pornography.

“I think if someone came to me and said: 'Would you like to see what all the fuss is about?’, I’m sorry, I probably would say yes.”

Ross referred to a study in which internet users clicked on links to extreme pornography even if they had not searched for it.

He said: “Does this tell us that we’re all awful? I think not.”


Nick Ross

edit on 17-8-2014 by skitzspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 07:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: skitzspiricy...he's never officially come out. Him coming out would ruin the clean, pure, celibate image he's built up throughout his entire career. Him coming out would also lose him all of his most devout fans.


i'm not so sure. People care less than they used to and even if he did, he's made his money and had his career. This issue aside, I think he's lived his life as one thing and could be embarrassed to have to come out now, after so long.
edit on 17-8-2014 by BasementWarriorKryptonite because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 07:15 AM
link   
a reply to: BasementWarriorKryptonite

I was referring to his most devout Evangelical Christian fanbase.


edit on 17-8-2014 by skitzspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 08:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: BasementWarriorKryptonite

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: Whereismypassword
He's religious and I expect many gay Christians like him are in the same situation

Wouldn't surprise me if his manager has said "cliff,if you come out as gay your fan base will crumble"


Being gay is an abomination in God's eyes. Even a man wearing woman's attire is an abomination in God's eyes


I wonder where god draws the line on that - does he count flares and bell bottoms and culottes?

What about women wearing men's clothing? Good grief, we are all damned.
There is nothing in the Bible specifically about women wearing mens clothing



posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: CJCrawley


Describe that "kind of relationship".

I thought you'd already done that. Never mind, I'll oblige you: a commercial, mediated relationship between two parties that is delusively regarded, or at any rate treated, as personal and emotional by one of the parties, who then may or may not be cynically exploited by the other.


So now you're defending the disgusting Jonathan King and advocating sex with minors?

To blazes with your lynch-mobsterish accusations.

edit on 17/8/14 by Astyanax because: I mean, who the devil do these people think they are?



posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: blupblup

You mean the DI megathread i assume.... it was a stunning read as it developed and a remarkable collaborative piece of detective work and info sharing. I'm often a cynic and sceptic at heart but so much there seemed really well evidenced and the veracity of much of it is being demonstrated before our eyes.

I cant remember if i read it in that thread or elsewhere, but i recall that CR was one of the last people JD visited before her death - it's been speculated that she was seeking some advice on her investigations into establishment paedophilia as parts of CR's circle were implicated.

I really would not be surprised if CR turned out to have been involved in some petty dark stuff. Still miffed about Rolf though, pah.



posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: skitzspiricy


I thought Sir Cliff had already come out as gay ?


No, he's never officially come out. Him coming out would ruin the clean, pure, celibate image he's built up throughout his entire career. Him coming out would also lose him all of his most devout fans.




originally posted by: skitzspiricy
a reply to: BasementWarriorKryptonite

I was referring to his most devout Evangelical Christian fanbase.




I also meant to say A lot rather than All


edit on 17-8-2014 by skitzspiricy because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   
I can't help feeling a bit uncomfortable about this one.

Whilst it's certainly true that there was some large scale abuse going on - and abuse likely to be organised in some way as well - it's striking that there is (seemingly) just one complaint against Richard. In the case of Savile, Smith, Harris, King, Glitter etc there's multiple complaints. That's not to say that complaint isn't genuine, of course, but it just seems to mark Richard's case as different compared to the established pattern. People might come forward, but it's not as is tittle tattle about him hasn't been going on since all this started.

I appreciate Richard is implicated in the Elm House thing, but at this point I don't see much actual evidence linking him to it - other than that 'guest list'. Perhaps the Police are privy to more than us.

I'm no fan of Cliff - he's irrelevant to me personally - but all this furore this week has smacked of the press getting revenge over him refusing to give them the story about his sexuality. Lets face it, it's likely he's gay - and that would have been / would be a big story. It all smacks a little of homophobia to me.

I could be completely wrong, of course - it's just my hunch.



posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   
The whole story of the police raid has become a bit of a shambles, I can't quite believe the logic of the BBC (you'd think they were highly professional in their work) releasing information of the raid, and even worse the Police not letting Cliff Richard know they were going to do it. All of that just allows the press to perceive Cliff Richard as the victim in this when their should be no judgement either way until facts are known, I can't help consider whether that was the intention - a clever distraction.



posted on Aug, 17 2014 @ 07:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: BasementWarriorKryptonite

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: Whereismypassword
He's religious and I expect many gay Christians like him are in the same situation

Wouldn't surprise me if his manager has said "cliff,if you come out as gay your fan base will crumble"


Being gay is an abomination in God's eyes. Even a man wearing woman's attire is an abomination in God's eyes


I wonder where god draws the line on that - does he count flares and bell bottoms and culottes?

What about women wearing men's clothing? Good grief, we are all damned.
There is nothing in the Bible specifically about women wearing mens clothing


Oh, OK. So, god is cool with women wearing pants, but if men wear pants that don't have an inseam they are sinning?

And people wonder why church attendance isn't slipping, but skidding into the mud.



posted on Aug, 18 2014 @ 02:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Whereismypassword
Age of consent is 16 in the uk but I'm sure the age was higher for gay sexual relationship in the 60's or early 70's and lowered to 16


I don't believe it was lowered until very recently, during Blair's tenure at the top. I may be wrong, but I do remember discussion about it when I was about 17-18 years old, so that would make it around 2000



posted on Aug, 18 2014 @ 07:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: gort51

Jonathan King was notorious in the industry back in the day. People used to be warned not to go up to his flat or get caught alone in the studio with him. But you know, I find it very hard to get all worked up about queer men who like teenage boys. I mean, what do teenage boys like? Much of the time, the answer is 'sex'. And if someone wants badly enough to be a star that they will sleep with a record producer to attain that goal, surely that's a private matter between the parties concerned?

While on the subject of pop music and rent-boys, have you ever reflected on the meaning of the lyrics of Goodbye Yellow Brick Road?

I'm not a present for your friends to open;
This boy's too young to be singing the blues.


Amazing what you miss if you don't pay attention.



I cannot believe I have had numerous off topic posts deleted (and no doubt this one will too) when you are allowed to post.

Teenage boys like sex....Jonathon King

Cant be arsed with you but every teenager I knew when I was one didnt expect their back doors to be kicked in.



posted on Aug, 19 2014 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: blupblup

You mean the DI megathread i assume.... it was a stunning read as it developed and a remarkable collaborative piece of detective work and info sharing. I'm often a cynic and sceptic at heart but so much there seemed really well evidenced and the veracity of much of it is being demonstrated before our eyes.

I cant remember if i read it in that thread or elsewhere, but i recall that CR was one of the last people JD visited before her death - it's been speculated that she was seeking some advice on her investigations into establishment paedophilia as parts of CR's circle were implicated.

I really would not be surprised if CR turned out to have been involved in some petty dark stuff. Still miffed about Rolf though, pah.




I do indeed mean that thread mate, fantastic thread and some great posters and spectacular work done.
I think a lot of things like JD and others are linked and there are many more revelations to come.
edit on 19/8/14 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2014 @ 11:35 AM
link   
Ugh, seems this conspiracy is going on for decades, with the tragic shooting of JD
a reply to: blupblup



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 06:58 PM
link   
I do believe that people should be seen to be innocent until proved, ect.

As skitzspiricy wrote above, it is strange how the police search of Cliff Richards apartment was 'blown' so publicly.

In my personal opinion, and obviously without definite proof, I reckon that Cliff was a minor player in the scheme of things, and has been dangled as bait for the media to savage. This will contaminate any future court case brought against him, and of course he would sue for millions. Along with the other failed, high profile cases against comedians or DJ's, I think it takes the spotlight off those higher up the pyramid.

These people must be scared silly of being brought into the light, as we have not had a revolution in the UK for a while,
and I think that the masses are getting fed up with all of the lies and corruption.



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 04:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: CJCrawley


Describe that "kind of relationship".

I thought you'd already done that.


Nope. It's just the normal dialogue that takes place between a pop star and his/her/their fan base, and always has done. I didn't describe, or even indicate, anything more intimate or sinister.

I don't know what you're getting your knickers in a twist about.



So now you're defending the disgusting Jonathan King and advocating sex with minors?

To blazes with your lynch-mobsterish accusations.



Were you, or were you not, defending Jonathan King's sexual exploitation of young men and boys?

Were you, or were you not, defending sex with minors as long as the minors were teenage boys?

How is my highlighting that "lynch-mobsterish"?
edit on 21.8.2014 by CJCrawley because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2014 @ 04:59 AM
link   
double post
edit on 21.8.2014 by CJCrawley because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2014 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
I don't believe it was lowered until very recently, during Blair's tenure at the top. I may be wrong, but I do remember discussion about it when I was about 17-18 years old, so that would make it around 2000


2001 according to wikipedia en.wikipedia.org... the age of consent was 'equalised' I presume that to mean it was brought into line with the hetrosexual age of consent, I do remember a friend that came out as gay before that date and lost his virginity at about 17, he was floored when we told him technically it was statutory rape (although no one in our group had any serious concerns about that).





top topics
 
15
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join