Figures
of the gravity of Peter Wilby, Charles Moore and Peter Hitchens have all cast grave doubts on
the whole Jimmy Savile business.
When the Police investigated Savile and found nothing, it was not in the 1970s. It was in 2007, when hundreds of people had been convicted of child abuse decades earlier.
The only arrest has been of Britain's best-known child sex abuser, who has already done time for it on two continents. And even he has been released on bail.
One really does have to wonder.
Someone, probably someone broadsheet and therefore unused to this sort of thing, will go too far in print, most obviously about Freddie Starr, and be sued into the ground. And then what?
Still, it's an ill wind, and all that. This is an opportunity to point out the seamlessness between the 1960s and the 1980s. This is an opportunity to point out the true character of the Sexual Revolution. This is an opportunity to point out the true character of Margaret Thatcher.
And this is an opportunity to make it a criminal offence for any person to engage in any sexual act with or upon anyone under the age of 18 who is more than two (or possibly three) years younger than himself, or to incite any such person to commit any such act with or upon him or any third party anywhere in the world.
The maximum sentence would be imprisonment for twice the difference in age, or for life where that difference was five years or more.
Ed Miliband, over to you.
When the Police investigated Savile and found nothing, it was not in the 1970s. It was in 2007, when hundreds of people had been convicted of child abuse decades earlier.
The only arrest has been of Britain's best-known child sex abuser, who has already done time for it on two continents. And even he has been released on bail.
One really does have to wonder.
Someone, probably someone broadsheet and therefore unused to this sort of thing, will go too far in print, most obviously about Freddie Starr, and be sued into the ground. And then what?
Still, it's an ill wind, and all that. This is an opportunity to point out the seamlessness between the 1960s and the 1980s. This is an opportunity to point out the true character of the Sexual Revolution. This is an opportunity to point out the true character of Margaret Thatcher.
And this is an opportunity to make it a criminal offence for any person to engage in any sexual act with or upon anyone under the age of 18 who is more than two (or possibly three) years younger than himself, or to incite any such person to commit any such act with or upon him or any third party anywhere in the world.
The maximum sentence would be imprisonment for twice the difference in age, or for life where that difference was five years or more.
Ed Miliband, over to you.
After the homosexual lobby have only just won the right to sodomise 16 year olds? Never.
ReplyDeleteIt's hardly "only just".
ReplyDeleteI had never thought of that 2007 point but you are right. He would have been far and away their biggest scalp ever, even bigger than Gary Glitter. But they couldn't find anything. Definitely makes you think.
ReplyDeleteGood points about 60s/80s, sexual revolution, Thatcherism, age of consent. Especially like the last one. Very good idea.
Did Iain Dale say on today's Daily Politics that Ed Miliband was planning to whip Labour's vote if - okay, when - the gay 'marriage' propoals come before Parliament?
ReplyDeleteIain Dale became a Labour Whip when, exactly?
ReplyDeleteOn topic, please.
@00:37 was on topic in a very special way. He obviously sees raising the age of consent as incompatible with the thankfully dead cause of same-sex "marriage". What does that tell you?
ReplyDeleteHow would raising the age of consent be incompatible with same sex marriage?
ReplyDeleteI imagine the majority of Gay couples who wish to marry are already above the age of 18.
And isn't it rather contradictory of you to make such a big deal out of Thatcher's connection with Saville and then start discussing how people are casting doubt on the whole thing. Either you believe he's guilty or you don't. If he isn't, then the Thatcher connection isn't really worth bringing up is it David?
"And this is an opportunity to make it a criminal offence for any person to engage in any sexual act with or upon anyone under the age of 18 who is more than two (or possibly three) years younger than himself"
So the age of consent is 16, but in your world we'd bang up a 19 year old if they have sex with a 17 year old even though they're both above the age of consent?
Not really joined up thinking. Either the age of consent is 16 or it isn't. You can't start locking people up just because of a difference in age if they're both above that. You don't want under 18 year old's having sex? Make the age of consent 18.