Gary Glitter on TV
Brian Watson
When the clown put his PC in to PC World to have it fixed I thought he was
just stupid and was prepared to assume him innocent but very silly.
Last night's program revealed a history of abusing going back years.
Bloody tragic that someone like that gets a job where access to the young
and impressionable becomes so easy.
I thought the repeating motif of the eyes was a bit OTT, and his former
chauffeur seemed a bit of a creep.
Other than that I thought it dealt with the subject very well.
--
Brian
"Stuck down a hole, in the fog, in the middle of the night, with an owl."
Schwingvey Waynesteen
Watson" <br...@spheroid.demon.co.uk> of spake unto us:
Yes, a bit of sensationalist editing, and I always have a problem when
someone is found Not Guilty and they still wheel out the "victims" to
cry for the camera...but he got what he deserved, in the end. Not just
as a perv, but as an idiot. A pity; I was always a Gary Glitter fan
growing up.
----------------------------------------------
www.angelfire.com/electronic/electrovomit (ELECTROVOMIT - my music project)
SCHWINGVEY WAYNESTEEN... nice nym, shame about the post
Dom Robinson
br...@spheroid.demon.co.uk says...
> When the clown put his PC in to PC World to have it fixed I thought he was
> just stupid and was prepared to assume him innocent but very silly.
>
> Last night's program revealed a history of abusing going back years.
>
--
Dom Robinson
Editor, DVDfever.co.uk; Contributor, City Life (citylife.co.uk)
d...@dvdfever.co.uk http://dvdfever.co.uk/bigbro3.shtml
/* http://DVDfever.co.uk
/* 788 DVDs, 206 games, 33 videos, 40 cinema films, 32 CDs, laserdiscs & news
/* burnout, natalie imbruglia, resident evil, royal tenenbaums, john q, spyhunt
/* Reviews + TiVo, ITV Digital, DVD, WS VHS lists & release schedules online
Will
"Dom Robinson" <d...@dvdfever.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.17b2233e7...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> In article <1028103095.14084....@news.demon.co.uk>,
> br...@spheroid.demon.co.uk says...
> > When the clown put his PC in to PC World to have it fixed I thought
he was
> > just stupid and was prepared to assume him innocent but very silly.
> >
> > Last night's program revealed a history of abusing going back years.
> >
> One wonders if he had all those images on his PC, why take it into a
shop?
To get it fixed?
Edward Cowling London UK
<Ma...@acks.com> writes
>
>Yes, a bit of sensationalist editing, and I always have a problem when
>someone is found Not Guilty and they still wheel out the "victims" to
>cry for the camera...
Don't worry if Blunkett gets his way the police will have another 999
chances to cock it up :-)
>but he got what he deserved, in the end. Not just
>as a perv, but as an idiot. A pity; I was always a Gary Glitter fan
>growing up.
>
True ! The guy who said 'the public will never forgive this' just about
summed it up.
--
Edward Cowling London UK
Nick Humphries
>In article <1028103095.14084....@news.demon.co.uk>,
>br...@spheroid.demon.co.uk says...
>> When the clown put his PC in to PC World to have it fixed I thought he was
>> just stupid and was prepared to assume him innocent but very silly.
>>
>> Last night's program revealed a history of abusing going back years.
>>
>One wonders if he had all those images on his PC, why take it into a shop?
And how were they discovered? Should PC repairers root around your files when
all they should do is fix your PC?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Nick Humphries ni...@egyptus.co.uk |
| The Your Sinclair Rock'n'Roll Years: http://www.ysrnry.co.uk/ |
| The Tipshop: http://www.the-tipshop.co.uk/ |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think THAT's bad, it's only 147 days until Christmas...
Dom Robinson
ni...@egyptusWIBBLE.co.uk says...
> On Wed, 31 Jul 2002 17:40:08 +0100, Dom Robinson <d...@dvdfever.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >In article <1028103095.14084....@news.demon.co.uk>,
> >br...@spheroid.demon.co.uk says...
> >> When the clown put his PC in to PC World to have it fixed I thought he was
> >> just stupid and was prepared to assume him innocent but very silly.
> >>
> >> Last night's program revealed a history of abusing going back years.
> >>
> >One wonders if he had all those images on his PC, why take it into a shop?
>
> And how were they discovered? Should PC repairers root around your files when
> all they should do is fix your PC?
>
that, so we don't know if they were deleted and the PC World bod had run a
super-dooper scan program on it, or whether they were in a C drive folder
marked "Filthy porn - do not look"
My point was that either way, surely he must've known someone who could take a
look at it, given he knew what was on it.
As an aside, a friend of mine took their PC to a similar shop (might be the
same one) for some kind of 40quid 'spring clean', but how exactly do you do
that to a PC? I bet they'd just spend five minutes emptying the Temporary
Internet Files folder and running defrag.
than...@blueremoveyonder.co.uk
wrote:
>"Dom Robinson" <d...@dvdfever.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:MPG.17b2233e7...@news.cis.dfn.de...
>>
>> One wonders if he had all those images on his PC, why take it into a
>>shop?
>
>To get it fixed?
I bet he's now wishing he'd just chucked it and bought another one.
(But of course, he'd have lost his kiddie porn collection then.)
Hugo Nebula
wrote:
>"Dom Robinson" <d...@dvdfever.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:MPG.17b2233e7...@news.cis.dfn.de...
>> One wonders if he had all those images on his PC, why take it into a
>shop?
>
>To get it fixed?
>
He took it to PC World. I imagine he thought that they wouldn't know
what a hard disk was.
--
Hugo Nebula
"You know, I'd rather see this on TV,
Tones it down" - Laurie Anderson
Hugo Nebula
<ni...@egyptusWIBBLE.co.uk> wrote:
>And how were they discovered? Should PC repairers root around your files when
>all they should do is fix your PC?
"Should" and "do" are two entirely different concepts. I would have
thought, for a PC World operative, rooting around on people's hard
disks is the only enjoyment they get from their job.
than...@blueremoveyonder.co.uk
wrote:
>Was it ever reported how they appeared on the PC? I don't recall hearing about
>that, so we don't know if they were deleted and the PC World bod had run a
>super-dooper scan program on it, or whether they were in a C drive folder
>marked "Filthy porn - do not look"
I'm surprised his lawyers didn't try to argue that he never gave PC
World permission to snoop around his hard drive. (Even the police
can't do that unless they had good reason to suspect something illegal
is on there.) Or maybe he *did* give them permission. Is such
permission implicit in taking your PC into PC World or somewhere
similar?
>My point was that either way, surely he must've known someone who could take a
>look at it, given he knew what was on it.
Maybe he didn't know anyone computer-literate enough.
>As an aside, a friend of mine took their PC to a similar shop (might be the
>same one) for some kind of 40quid 'spring clean', but how exactly do you do
>that to a PC?
You'd be amazed at how much dust gets sucked inside by the fan. :-)
>I bet they'd just spend five minutes emptying the Temporary
>Internet Files folder and running defrag.
Don't they also "advise" you that you might consider a new 3D video
card, that a 20Gb hard drive really isn't that big these days (what
with all the new games taking up so much space), that they make 250x
DVD-RAM drives now that could replace your old 6x CD-ROM, etc.
And, of course, PC World stock all of these items at highly
infla...uh, I mean very competitive prices. ;-)
Sam Maughan
> On Wed, 31 Jul 2002 17:56:25 +0100, "Will" <skell...@clara.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >"Dom Robinson" <d...@dvdfever.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:MPG.17b2233e7...@news.cis.dfn.de...
>
> >> One wonders if he had all those images on his PC, why take it into a
> >shop?
> >
> >To get it fixed?
> >
> He took it to PC World. I imagine he thought that they wouldn't know
> what a hard disk was.
So why take it there to get fixed?
Sam.
David Freeman
<than...@blueREMOVEyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3d48255...@news-text.blueyonder.co.uk...
I'd say it's a fair bet he doesn't have access to it now anyway.
Dave
Gordon Davie
news:io9gku4v3aa7b12gt...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 31 Jul 2002 17:40:08 +0100, Dom Robinson <d...@dvdfever.co.uk>
wrote:
>
> >In article <1028103095.14084....@news.demon.co.uk>,
> >br...@spheroid.demon.co.uk says...
> >> When the clown put his PC in to PC World to have it fixed I thought he
was
> >> just stupid and was prepared to assume him innocent but very silly.
> >>
> >> Last night's program revealed a history of abusing going back years.
> >>
> >One wonders if he had all those images on his PC, why take it into a
shop?
>
> And how were they discovered? Should PC repairers root around your files
when
> all they should do is fix your PC?
Depends. If the images were stored in a folder called 'My Pictures of Naked
Kids' then it might have aroused some suspicions...
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland
"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God"
Brian Watson
"Sam Maughan" <s...@gubbyink.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:m3ofcna...@gubbyink.local...
> Hugo Nebula <sp...@doswell.clara.co.uk> writes:
> > He took it to PC World. I imagine he thought that they wouldn't know
> > what a hard disk was.
>
> So why take it there to get fixed?
Just raise your arm while I apply this feather, will you?
I want to see if you are *entirely* without the ability to laugh.
--
Brian
"You don't stop laughing because you grow old. You grow old because you stop
laughing."
Lee J. Moore
>
[..]
> I'm surprised his lawyers didn't try to argue that he never
> gave PC World permission to snoop around his hard drive.
> (Even the police can't do that unless they had good reason to
> suspect something illegal is on there.) Or maybe he *did*
> give them permission. Is such permission implicit in taking
> your PC into PC World or somewhere similar?
I don't know about that but I remember there were other
allegations about PC World snooping around users PC's. It has
been alleged (in a courtroom related to a totally different
case I think) that they had an arrangement with the Police to
routinely check for indecent and obscene material whenever a
computer enters their repair shops.
A quick google will probably reveal something on this.
[..]
>>As an aside, a friend of mine took their PC to a similar shop
>>(might be the same one) for some kind of 40quid 'spring
>>clean', but how exactly do you do that to a PC?
>
> You'd be amazed at how much dust gets sucked inside by the
> fan. :-)
A £7 (intake) front case fan and a £10 pound exhaust for the
back would solve that problem. Although you do end up with a
lot of shit up the wall behind the computer. ;)
[..]
--
Lee J. Moore
http://www.leej.dsl.pipex.com
----------------------------------
Powered by Gentoo (Portage 2.0.22)
Dom Robinson
dfre...@REMOVETOREPLYwoodhill.co.uk says...
Isn't he living it up somewhere abroad where he can get the real thing on tap
anyway? That's how it was reported in one paper.
Dom Robinson
that long to diagnose a fault, after losing it first.
Dom Robinson
> >>(might be the same one) for some kind of 40quid 'spring
> >>clean', but how exactly do you do that to a PC?
> >
> > You'd be amazed at how much dust gets sucked inside by the
> > fan. :-)
Add an extra two minutes to the job then.
> A £7 (intake) front case fan and a £10 pound exhaust for the
> back would solve that problem. Although you do end up with a
> lot of shit up the wall behind the computer. ;)
Is that what your PC does if you look at German porn sites?
Mathew Hendry
wrote:
>Isn't he living it up somewhere abroad where he can get the real thing on tap
>anyway?
Yep - Cambodia, and then maybe Vietnam, but the press don't have
anything on him since early June.
-- Mat.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
>Hello than...@blueREMOVEyonder.co.uk, in uk.media.tv.misc recently, you wrote:
>>
>[..]
>> I'm surprised his lawyers didn't try to argue that he never
>> gave PC World permission to snoop around his hard drive.
>> (Even the police can't do that unless they had good reason to
>> suspect something illegal is on there.) Or maybe he *did*
>> give them permission. Is such permission implicit in taking
>> your PC into PC World or somewhere similar?
>
>I don't know about that but I remember there were other
>allegations about PC World snooping around users PC's. It has
>been alleged (in a courtroom related to a totally different
>case I think) that they had an arrangement with the Police to
>routinely check for indecent and obscene material whenever a
>computer enters their repair shops.
>
>A quick google will probably reveal something on this.
>
How are you supposed to fix a PC if you can't have access to it? Maybe
that is true, but the chances are they were fucking about in Windows
trying to fix something or other and found something dodgy. It's not
that inconceivable. If you don't secure your stuff on your PC and then
send it off to someone you're asking for it. Especially with peadophile
stuff, they're not going to let that go. Anyway proving someone was
snooping rather than just doing there job (ie which would involve
rooting about the PC OS trying to fix it) would be pretty much
impossible. He only has himself to blame.
>[..]
>>>As an aside, a friend of mine took their PC to a similar shop
>>>(might be the same one) for some kind of 40quid 'spring
>>>clean', but how exactly do you do that to a PC?
>>
>> You'd be amazed at how much dust gets sucked inside by the
>> fan. :-)
>
>A £7 (intake) front case fan and a £10 pound exhaust for the
>back would solve that problem. Although you do end up with a
>lot of shit up the wall behind the computer. ;)
>
>[..]
I worked briefly at PC World and I wouldn't go there for anything other
than mebbe printer paper. They're actually more expensive than Dixons,
you know, the people who own them. I certainly wouldn't take it in there
for a repair (apart from the fact I could do it myself) you'd be better
off at your local little computer store where the guy who runs it
probably has a clue. Plus that spring clean is a joke, all they did
AFAIK was defrag it, run a virus scan etc. All stuff you could do at
home by clicking an icon or three and all free. I doubt they even
touched the hardware.
--
Izo
I went into a sweet shop the other day
I said I want some Cadburys chocolate
Some crispy cereal,some chewy nougat,
up there.
And a Persian rug.
He said gerrout you, gerrout me sweet shop!
airds
>In article <io9gku4v3aa7b12gt...@4ax.com>,
>ni...@egyptusWIBBLE.co.uk says...
>> On Wed, 31 Jul 2002 17:40:08 +0100, Dom Robinson <d...@dvdfever.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <1028103095.14084....@news.demon.co.uk>,
>> >br...@spheroid.demon.co.uk says...
>> >> When the clown put his PC in to PC World to have it fixed I thought he was
>> >> just stupid and was prepared to assume him innocent but very silly.
>> >>
>> >> Last night's program revealed a history of abusing going back years.
>> >>
>> >One wonders if he had all those images on his PC, why take it into a shop?
>>
>> And how were they discovered? Should PC repairers root around your files when
>> all they should do is fix your PC?
>>
>Was it ever reported how they appeared on the PC? I don't recall hearing about
>that, so we don't know if they were deleted and the PC World bod had run a
>super-dooper scan program on it, or whether they were in a C drive folder
>marked "Filthy porn - do not look"
When the story first broke, PC Pro did an article on it saying the
pictures were in his cache, and that "pre-fetching" browsers could be
responsible for the child porn and he should be found innocent
But that was probably before they realised that there was 4000 of them
:-)
--
airds
MPG / D-TAG / UTILs - http://surf.to/chrome - Basic - http://users.demented.org/~airds
Tony Walton
>
> And how were they discovered? Should PC repairers root around your files when
> all they should do is fix your PC?
Wasn't there a similar case some time ago when a TV presenter (IIRC)
had some photos developed at Boots and Boots called the Plod in when
they found a picture of a naked child? The "obscene picture" turned
out to be completely innocent photo of the presenter's six-year-old
daughter playing with bubbles in the bath.
Or something like that.
--
Tony
Lee J. Moore
>
>
[..]
> that is true, but the chances are they were fucking about in Windows
> trying to fix something or other and found something dodgy. It's not
> that inconceivable. If you don't secure your stuff on your PC and then
> send it off to someone you're asking for it. Especially with peadophile
> stuff, they're not going to let that go. Anyway proving someone was
> snooping rather than just doing there job (ie which would involve
> rooting about the PC OS trying to fix it) would be pretty much
> impossible. He only has himself to blame.
I agree. I'm far more concerned though if PC World have an
arrangement with the police to snoop on random computers.
Wasn't there a problem with the CD drivers on Glitters PC? So
they had to look in /windows/system for conflicting drivers? I
can't remember - but if that was the case - then they certainly
needed to examine certain contents of his disk.
[..]
> I worked briefly at PC World and I wouldn't go there for
> anything other than mebbe printer paper.
The last time I visited PCWorld was in 1996 to get a scanner. I
paid over the odds because I required one that afternoon and
judging from their prices since (even in every computer shopper)
they are still charging well over the odds. They can't even
forecast how much cheaper prices will be by the time Computer
Shopper hits the shelves, often making them £50-£100 more
expensive for the same goods advertised on different pages. And
their website is incredibly amateur. It doesn't work with all
W3C compliant browsers, only *properly* on the one they designed
it for (one guess! ;)), which doesn't give much confidence that
they understand the sector they work in.
> They're actually more expensive than Dixons, you know, the
> people who own them. I certainly wouldn't take it in there for
> a repair (apart from the fact I could do it myself)
Yep. Simple enough with PC's innit? If something breaks, I
just replace it. From a hard disk or AGP card right down to the
case and motherboard.
> you'd be
> better off at your local little computer store where the guy
> who runs it probably has a clue. Plus that spring clean is a
> joke, all they did AFAIK was defrag it, run a virus scan etc.
> All stuff you could do at home by clicking an icon or three
> and all free. I doubt they even touched the hardware.
I have to say - I've never heard of the spring clean before.
That's just gimmicky beyond belief!
Lee J. Moore
That's right. It was Julia Somerville, the ITN newsreader.
Children naked in the bath eh? You never know what goes on
behind closed doors! ;)
Lee J. Moore
>
[..]
>> back would solve that problem. Although you do end up with a
>> lot of shit up the wall behind the computer. ;)
>
> Is that what your PC does if you look at German porn sites?
LOL! My computer literally shits itself. ;)
The Coffee Addict
It was Julia Somerville. A totally ludicrous fuss over nothing...
--
Mmm... coffee...
Nadia
>
> >In article <1028103095.14084....@news.demon.co.uk>,
> >br...@spheroid.demon.co.uk says...
> >> When the clown put his PC in to PC World to have it fixed I thought he was
> >> just stupid and was prepared to assume him innocent but very silly.
> >>
> >> Last night's program revealed a history of abusing going back years.
> >>
> >One wonders if he had all those images on his PC, why take it into a shop?
>
> And how were they discovered? Should PC repairers root around your files when
> all they should do is fix your PC?
Umm I think they can access some area. So they did that with Gary and
found obscene pics. Enough to warrant the police to take it away, who
found a lot more. Boo-hoo Gary. Not only is he twisted, he's a right
idiot too. It would be piss-easy to hide the files from anything but a
detailed search, even if it's only password-protected.
The most disturbing thing about all this is that - apparently - some
child porn is in a grey dubiously legal area so even if they found
certain pics they could be disgusting legal (it was on www.wired.com
if people disbelieve me).
Nadia
Johannes H Andersen
That was how it turned out. But the decision whether such pictures are
obscene or innocent depends on the circumstances as much as the pictures.
There was e.g. a quite dodgy photographic exhibition in London that
the police was interested in, but it was eventually passed as 'art'.
Tony Gowland
> child porn
I really hate that expression. "Child porn" besmirches the good name of
porn.
--
Tony Gowland
http://www.planethalflife.com/freakyzoids/
"Sausage on a fork would be an unlockable weapon."
JNugent
> Dom Robinson <d...@dvdfever.co.uk> wrote:
>> As an aside, a friend of mine took their PC to a similar shop (might
>> be the same one) for some kind of 40quid 'spring clean', but how
>> exactly do you do that to a PC?
>> I bet they'd just spend five minutes emptying the Temporary
>> Internet Files folder and running defrag.
> Don't they also "advise" you that you might consider a new 3D video
> card, that a 20Gb hard drive really isn't that big these days (what
> with all the new games taking up so much space), that they make 250x
> DVD-RAM drives now that could replace your old 6x CD-ROM, etc.
> And, of course, PC World stock all of these items at highly
> infla...uh, I mean very competitive prices. ;-)
Actually, they now stock a range of very competitively-priced components
(drives, motherboards, processors, memory, etc) in OEM-type brown cardboard
packaging and at the same price levels as Dabs and the rest of the
mail-order crew (some things are even cheapest at PCW).
An you don't even have to wait for the post...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.377 / Virus Database: 211 - Release Date: 15/07/02
Lee J. Moore
>
[..]
> (drives, motherboards, processors, memory, etc) in OEM-type brown cardboard
> packaging and at the same price levels as Dabs and the rest of the
> mail-order crew (some things are even cheapest at PCW).
That's pissed on my bonfire. I might go in for the first time
in six years now. Looks like getting components shipped in from
Scandinavia (Komplett) might not be cheaper anymore after all. ;)
--
Lee J. Moore
http://www.leej.dsl.pipex.com
----------------------------------
Powered by Gentoo (Portage 2.0.23)
than...@blueremoveyonder.co.uk
wrote:
>How are you supposed to fix a PC if you can't have access to it? Maybe
>that is true, but the chances are they were fucking about in Windows
>trying to fix something or other and found something dodgy.
You don't need to go anywhere near any .jpg, .gif or .bmp files to fix
a problem with Windows.
>It's not that inconceivable. If you don't secure your stuff on your PC and then
>send it off to someone you're asking for it.
No, I don't think you are. I have no problem with Gary Glitter being
done for having child porn on his PC. He got what he deserved.
The point is, if I were stupid enough to take my PC to PCW because of
a problem I was having with it, should I just expect that they'll go
rooting through my personal files? What if I have personal letters or
documents on there? Is it OK for their staff to just read through all
my personal files and data in the course of "fixing Windows"?
While I'm glad that the snooping took place in this instance, it does
open up the question of why the snooping happened in the first place.
Andy Mabbett
<ai...@chrome.clara.co.uk> writes
>When the story first broke, PC Pro did an article on it saying the
>pictures were in his cache, and that "pre-fetching" browsers could be
>responsible for the child porn and he should be found innocent
>
>But that was probably before they realised that there was 4000 of them
Do we know that all 4,000 images were illegal? And what were they -
pictures of young children being sexually abused, or pictures of 17 year
olds, but who looked 15, posing topless?
--
Andy Mabbett
"May contain traces of nuts or seeds."
(label on a packet of popcorn)
Helen
"Andy Mabbett" <an...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote in message
news:I82vJMK1...@pigsonthewing.org.uk...
> In message <aoqhku8b5ucnco7m0...@4ax.com>, airds
> <ai...@chrome.clara.co.uk> writes
> >When the story first broke, PC Pro did an article on it saying the
> >pictures were in his cache, and that "pre-fetching" browsers could be
> >responsible for the child porn and he should be found innocent
> >
> >But that was probably before they realised that there was 4000 of them
>
>
> Do we know that all 4,000 images were illegal? And what were they -
> pictures of young children being sexually abused, or pictures of 17 year
> olds, but who looked 15, posing topless?
> --
plead guilty, it must be fair to assume that there was no reasonable defence
for him to claim that all the pictures were of young-looking 16 year olds.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
>On Thu, 1 Aug 2002 05:42:12 +0100, Izo Mezzo <Iz...@hotmail.com>
>sprachen:
>
>>He only has himself to blame.
>
>Nah, I'm pretty good at fixing Windoze, and it never involved any JPG
>files.
>
Not intentionally, no, but you could quite easily stumble on them while
trying to fix something. For all we know Glitter might have had 30 icons
of kiddie pr0n scattered liberally on his desktop.
>Much as unbothered as I am that he went to prison, the principle is
>fucked up! I'd like to see him sue PC world, then give the money to
>the NSPCC or something.
>
I'd like to see him sue PC World as well, the fact that he hasn't is
more suspicious than anything, either he doesn't want to because he's
got a guilty conscience or there are no grounds to. But not the NSPCC,
please, the sensationalist scare mongering excuse for a charity are a
disgrace IMHO, give it to someone who deserved it like Barnardos or save
the children.
>Giving your computer to PC world, is not the same as consenting to a
>search. Tho I imagine Gary was just too stupid to hide his k1dd!3
>pr0n.
>
No it isn't but neither is finding something on it by accident.
>So... yup. PC World are definitely guilty of something, besides just
>being a cack-handed branch of Dixons with fairly reasonable prices
>when you look at it.
>
They're guilty of being completely incompetent and over priced.
>I don't like any of it, I don't like anything about the whole
>situation. FWIW if that girl had accused him of molesting her in
>public, the Police might have searched his PC anyway and the whole
>thing would have been done legally, which would have been much better.
Yes but there's still no evidence that PC World did search it, at least
intentionally anyway. Whether they did or not I don't care, but fixing a
PC without an element of that is asking a bit much.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
how marvellous it would be to be a werewolf when Lee J. Moore said:
>Hello Izo Mezzo, in uk.media.tv.misc recently, you wrote:
>>
>>
>[..]
>> How are you supposed to fix a PC if you can't have access to it? Maybe
>> that is true, but the chances are they were fucking about in Windows
>> trying to fix something or other and found something dodgy. It's not
>> that inconceivable. If you don't secure your stuff on your PC and then
>> send it off to someone you're asking for it. Especially with peadophile
>> stuff, they're not going to let that go. Anyway proving someone was
>> snooping rather than just doing there job (ie which would involve
>> rooting about the PC OS trying to fix it) would be pretty much
>> impossible. He only has himself to blame.
>
>I agree. I'm far more concerned though if PC World have an
>arrangement with the police to snoop on random computers.
>
>Wasn't there a problem with the CD drivers on Glitters PC? So
>they had to look in /windows/system for conflicting drivers? I
>can't remember - but if that was the case - then they certainly
>needed to examine certain contents of his disk.
>
I don't know the details of his problem but even replacing hardware
would require booting up and checking drivers etc. I agree totally with
the point about the snooping by the police and PC World though, I'm not
even sure if that's legal. But still, if you send your PC to some third
untrusted party you should secure personal details and files etc, or
else you can't really blame anyone for looking, at least accidentally.
>[..]
>> I worked briefly at PC World and I wouldn't go there for
>> anything other than mebbe printer paper.
>
>The last time I visited PCWorld was in 1996 to get a scanner. I
>paid over the odds because I required one that afternoon and
>judging from their prices since (even in every computer shopper)
>they are still charging well over the odds. They can't even
>forecast how much cheaper prices will be by the time Computer
>Shopper hits the shelves, often making them £50-£100 more
>expensive for the same goods advertised on different pages. And
>their website is incredibly amateur. It doesn't work with all
>W3C compliant browsers, only *properly* on the one they designed
>it for (one guess! ;)), which doesn't give much confidence that
>they understand the sector they work in.
>
They make their money from computer noobs and those who can't be
bothered shopping around. In fact they make the biggest profit from
selling 'cover' or their own insurance. The salesman I worked with got
pushed very hard to sell this at all costs.
MS is probably to blame for the lack of W3C since their browsers have
proprietary tags and all sorts. I think hotmail or MSN was one of the
worst W3C violaters.
>> They're actually more expensive than Dixons, you know, the
>> people who own them. I certainly wouldn't take it in there for
>> a repair (apart from the fact I could do it myself)
>
>Yep. Simple enough with PC's innit? If something breaks, I
>just replace it. From a hard disk or AGP card right down to the
>case and motherboard.
>
Yeah simple if you know how ;) But a lot of people don't, in fact while
I was working at PC world I would recommend people who came in for
various upgrades and the like to visit their local computer store
instead (well out of the managers earshot mind you) and get it done
there. The trouble with places like PC World is they have very little
time to fix stuff, it's like a production line, wham bang thankyou mam,
so don't be surprised if they buckle your case or forget to screw your
heatsink on properly etc.
>> you'd be
>> better off at your local little computer store where the guy
>> who runs it probably has a clue. Plus that spring clean is a
>> joke, all they did AFAIK was defrag it, run a virus scan etc.
>> All stuff you could do at home by clicking an icon or three
>> and all free. I doubt they even touched the hardware.
>
>I have to say - I've never heard of the spring clean before.
>That's just gimmicky beyond belief!
>
Yeah, another money making scam. I dunno if anyone was daft enough to
take them up on it at the time I remember it was roundly slagged by the
IT rags.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
>On Thu, 1 Aug 2002 05:42:12 +0100, Izo Mezzo <Iz...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>How are you supposed to fix a PC if you can't have access to it? Maybe
>>that is true, but the chances are they were fucking about in Windows
>>trying to fix something or other and found something dodgy.
>
>You don't need to go anywhere near any .jpg, .gif or .bmp files to fix
>a problem with Windows.
>
Do you know how many jpg gif and bmp files are on the average windoze
box? Thousands. The chances of you accidentally finding one is not
unheard of. What's more XP and possibly Win2k have previews, thumbnails
of the file should you happen to click on the icon, you don't even need
to load it. You could easily stumble across anything.
>>It's not that inconceivable. If you don't secure your stuff on your PC
>>and then
>>send it off to someone you're asking for it.
>
>No, I don't think you are. I have no problem with Gary Glitter being
>done for having child porn on his PC. He got what he deserved.
>
So you want to depend on your own security by trusting someone you have
never and will never meet in a computer shop? It's the same with
companies that get hacked despite the fact the security hole that was
used had been publicised for 2 years. Yes, its a crime to hack a box,
but it's also stupid not to secure your computers.
>The point is, if I were stupid enough to take my PC to PCW because of
>a problem I was having with it, should I just expect that they'll go
>rooting through my personal files?
No. Do you know they did that to Gary Glitter? No.
> What if I have personal letters or
>documents on there? Is it OK for their staff to just read through all
>my personal files and data in the course of "fixing Windows"?
>
If you had any sense you would password protect personal letters and the
likes, Word does this easily. You realise every time you connect to the
net someone could be quite easily rifling through all this stuff anyway?
You have to take some responsibility for your personal privacy yourself.
No it is not Ok that they rifle through it. I was not agreeing with the
point that PC World & the police should be allowed to snoop, I was
suggesting that PC World might have entirely innocently come across
those pictures. It is not as unlikely as some people here seem to think.
>While I'm glad that the snooping took place in this instance, it does
>open up the question of why the snooping happened in the first place.
>
Nobody said for sure snooping did take place, which is my point. It
shouldn';t be allowed, no, certainly not with the Police permission
either, but nobody has categorically proven that PC World were
'snooping' when they discovered Glitters pics. For all we know the CD
drive that apparently was being fixed at the time could've contained a
CD of millions of JPG's. Would it b *that* inconceivable that someone
would've spotted them while testing the CD drive? No it wouldn't.
Jim Hanner
wrote:
>On Thu, 1 Aug 2002 05:42:12 +0100, Izo Mezzo <Iz...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>How are you supposed to fix a PC if you can't have access to it? Maybe
>>that is true, but the chances are they were fucking about in Windows
>>trying to fix something or other and found something dodgy.
>
>You don't need to go anywhere near any .jpg, .gif or .bmp files to fix
>a problem with Windows.
You don't, but if this was a few years ago the PC would have had a
small HD compared to those available today. If he had 4000 or so jpegs
on it, it could easily have affected the amount of space available for
a swap file, temp space, and anything else he wanted to install.
It's a difficult one - if PC World hadn't checked what these pictures
were, the stuff in this programme may never have seen the light of
day. We now know that GG is evil - it's just a pity he couldn't be
charged for the things he did to that poor woman when she was 8 years
old. If he had, he'd still be in prison where he belongs.
--
Jim
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
how marvellous it would be to be a werewolf when said:
>On Thu, 01 Aug 2002 09:09:06 +0100, airds <ai...@chrome.clara.co.uk>
>sprachen:
>
>>When the story first broke, PC Pro did an article on it saying the
>>pictures were in his cache,
>
>See, exactly. I can understand them cleaning out his cache, the
>robbing arabs, but you don't have to look at all the pictures to do
>it.
>
>Then again, I might have done the same unofficially. And then I'd have
>been placed in a dilemna where I'd realise the chap might be abusing
>children and I'd probably have to tell the Filth.
>
>So... yeah, what should have happened is what did happen, then the
>employee sacked for breaking a policy they ought to have.
>
>Also interestingly, since there's NO legal defense against having
>child pr0n on your computer, I could stitch up anyone I liked by
>getting some and emailing it to them. That's FUCKED UP! All these
>absolutist, no-innocence laws are evil and wrong.
>
>Should we bother uk.legal about this? They're probably already talking
>about it, I might look.
>
Yes but you'd also get done because to email the pics you'd have to put
them on your comp. Even if you didn't save them they would be cached,
and if you deleted them they'd still be there, files aren't literally
deleted. A police comp forensic expert (or anyone with the software)
could find it.
So there :P
Lee J. Moore
> 20 quid! ha!
I think I saw one of those in Maplin for £30 quid. A tiny
little thing? It was begging me to buy it but I needed some
ridiculously expensive CAT5 cable more. ;)
> It's really a toy, but it stores 20 352x288 pictures, or
> 80 half-res pictures, and little movies (!), and is small enough to
> fit in a hand with your fingers closed over it. Same size as a couple
> of matchboxes but a bit deeper. USB connection and a load of fun
> software!
Why buy a disposable camera for a tenner when $10 quid more will
get you pictures for life? ;)
> There's one of them programs that lets you put people's heads on
> different bodies or pictures, and it lets you add your own scenes! So
> when I get the chance I can print out lovely pictures of my friends
> eating each other's shit. Great eh?!
Oooh, I never think of things like that. ;) My brothers webcam
came with these games where you interact with the objects on the
screen. I remember the one with basketball nets and a ball and
the live image of the people in the room (from the cam) on the
screen. If a person (their head, hand, whatever) makes contact
with the ball, it bounces off them. Very entertaining when
you're all pissed - and even more entertaining if you have a
camcorder to tape the action. Watching a bunch of pissed up
farts bouncing around the room trying to play with an invisible
basketball is more hysterical then anything you've seen on
You've Been Framed (OK, well that's not difficult). ;)
Schwingvey Waynesteen
<xxxx...@xxxxxx.com> of spake unto us:
I seem to remember a passage at the very end of the program which
referred to "babies as young as 2" (difficult to confuse a toddler
with a teenager). I'm also sure they reeled off a list of sexual acts
that were portrayed, although I can't recall what was in it. Then
again, there's been a shocking amount of major paedophilia busts in
the news these past few months. I might be confused.
----------------------------------------------
www.angelfire.com/electronic/electrovomit (ELECTROVOMIT - my music project)
SCHWINGVEY WAYNESTEEN... nice nym, shame about the post
Nadia
Except you *can* get programs which properly delete stuff. IIRC
Windows generally just deletes the information-type-header of a file,
leaving the body of the file intact. Over time this body will get used
up again. Some programs, such as WinDelete, wipe over the space 5
times in a military-grade style thus ensuring that is non-recoverable.
So you could still cover up your tracks (assuming there were no traces
elsewhere).
Nadia
Roger the cabin boy
charged for the things he did to that poor woman when she was 8 years
old. If he had, he'd still be in prison where he belongs.
Too true matey - she was unfortunately living in a world (at that time, the
80's) when these things "did not happen" and kids were to be seen and not
heard. Even though today I think its gone completely bonkers with all the
"PC" stuff about.
I admire her for speaking out and telling us how it really did affect her
life.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
how marvellous it would be to be a werewolf when said:
>On Thu, 1 Aug 2002 21:44:29 +0100, Izo Mezzo <Iz...@hotmail.com>
>sprachen:
>
>>
>>Yes but you'd also get done because to email the pics you'd have to put
>>them on your comp. Even if you didn't save them they would be cached,
>>and if you deleted them they'd still be there, files aren't literally
>>deleted. A police comp forensic expert (or anyone with the software)
>>could find it.
>>So there :P
>
>Not really.
>
>For one thing I'm talking about anonymously emailing someone
>something.
>
That's not the point I was making though, it was the fact that
downloading child porn is an offence. If anyone could prove you did it,
then you'd be in deep shit even if it was to plant on someone else. For
a start they might, depending on how careful you were, trace you from
the source of the images.
>For the other issue, it's not difficult to clear out your browser and
>use something like Realdel or Scorch to zap your disk, properly. This
>whole forensic thing is over-stated. It's hardly rocket science to
>wipe files.
>
True enough on both counts, but still it's not the only way you could
get found out.
>But ANYWAY! My point is, there's no innocent defense, AIUI. Which in
>general is a fucked-up principle for ANY law. Even the bloody Nazi war
>criminals got to plead ignorance.
Yeah I know that was the point, I was just waffling on.
Mike Plowman
<noch...@spamhell.com> wrote:
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>we did not see the program, but am ashamed to say we have been
>to one of his concerts (enjoyable), before we knew of his sordid
>activities..
>
>it makes my flesh crawl, thinking we might have funded his perverted
>lifestyle.
>
I'd been to loads. Saw him when he suddenly became hip again at
Futurama, Leeds 1980 and usually saw him live probably every year
after that. Ot doesn't matter about any of us helping to 'fund' his
lifestyle. His wealth, fame etc and nothing to do with his
paedophilia. If he'd have been working in the corner shop he'd have
still been the same I'm sure.
Didn't have have a thing with Denise Van Outen when she was well under
age too? I'm sure I can remember reading it somewhere.
--
Mike Plowman
Coronation Street Visual Updates - www.csvu.net
"There was life before Coronation Street,
but it didn't amount to much." Russell Harty
Dom Robinson
> That's not the point I was making though, it was the fact that
> downloading child porn is an offence. If anyone could prove you did it,
> then you'd be in deep shit even if it was to plant on someone else. For
> a start they might, depending on how careful you were, trace you from
> the source of the images.
>
technical term, which can mean something as simple as either saving them to his
hard drive or them being saved in his browser's cache? That would mean that any
website anyone visits could accidentally result in the same thing.
--
Dom Robinson
Editor, DVDfever.co.uk; Contributor, City Life (citylife.co.uk)
d...@dvdfever.co.uk http://dvdfever.co.uk/bigbro3.shtml
/* http://DVDfever.co.uk
/* 788 DVDs, 206 games, 33 videos, 40 cinema films, 32 CDs, laserdiscs & news
/* burnout, natalie imbruglia, resident evil, royal tenenbaums, john q, spyhunt
/* Reviews + TiVo, ITV Digital, DVD, WS VHS lists & release schedules online
Roland Perry
<d...@dvdfever.co.uk> writes
>Wasn't the actual offence that he had reproduced these pictures, or some other
>technical term, which can mean something as simple as either saving them to his
>hard drive or them being saved in his browser's cache? That would mean that any
>website anyone visits could accidentally result in the same thing.
People are often prosecuted for "making" pictures, which was probably
intended for those who originated the pictures. However, case law now
says that this applies to just about any 'copying' of pictures, such as
happens when you visit websites. In practice, you won't get prosecuted
for a handful of dodgy pictures. The police have their hands full with
those who have amassed collections of thousands of them - which rarely
happens "by accident" !!
--
Roland Perry
Farmer Alfalfa
"Roger the cabin boy" <dmrt46...@clara.co.uk> wrote in message
news:102832779...@demeter.uk.clara.net...
> it's just a pity he couldn't be
> charged for the things he did to that poor woman when she was 8 years
> old. If he had, he'd still be in prison where he belongs.
> <snip>
> Too true matey - she was unfortunately living in a world (at that time,
the
> 80's) when these things "did not happen" and kids were to be seen and not
> heard. Even though today I think its gone completely bonkers with all the
> "PC" stuff about.
What's this got to do with "PC"?
Are you saying there an acceptable level of sexual abuse of minors?
F A
Helen
"Farmer Alfalfa" <Alf...@bighouse.net> wrote in message
news:3d4b...@212.67.96.135...
hysteria surrounding child abuse, which has lead to a situation where many
fathers feel uncomfortable bathing their children, very few men would feel
happy going to help a distressed child on its one and teachers feel unable
to comfort an upset child by putting their arm round them.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
how marvellous it would be to be a werewolf when said:
>On Sat, 3 Aug 2002 02:05:02 +0100, "paula & tim"
><noch...@spamhell.com> sprachen:
>
>>it makes my flesh crawl, thinking we might have funded his perverted
>>lifestyle.
>
>I think abusing kids can be done very cheaply or free, so don't worry
>too much, your flesh can stop crawling.
>
>I personally am sick to death of the whole fucking thing on the news
>all the time. Yes kids get abused and it's awful, and can often ruin
>their lives. But people still get killed too. Including children.
>People fall off cliffs, get beaten up, get cancer, and get killed by
>roving woman-kidnappers (the flavour of the month in the 80s, do you
>remember?).
>
Agreed. It's just to sell papers, that's all. Whip up a big scare and
sale go thru the roof, the Daily Mail live on it. It's the same with
serial killers - they are incredibly rare yet they cause panic
everywhere and make all the headlines. If you compared kids who died or
were injured from serial killers/abductors/peodphiles etc to the same
damage done by car accidents...but that doesn't sell papers.
>Child abuse is unfortunate and of course abusers need arresting. But
>it's not the only thing that happens in the fucking world, so why does
>it need to be on the news 24/7?
>
Exactly.
>I really, really hate to say it, but if some complete stranger's kid
>is molested by some other stranger, I really don't give a toss.
>There's nothing I could have done about it, and it won't affect my
>life in any way. It's some insidious modern form of political
>correctness to obsess about children getting molested, and frankly it
>creeps me the fuck out.
>
Yeah, I think I would be disturbed if someone I knew had that happen to
them, but if it was a stranger then it'd be the same as if it were a
stranger that went missing or was murdered it wouldn't really effect me.
It is a bit odd how there is such hysteria over kids, considering most
abuse is done by family members (same goes for murders).
>It doesn't happen THAT often. And if people want to worry about kids,
>they'd do well to look in to their own homes.
>
>If the sort of rabble-rousing that caused that poor paediatrician to
>get her window bricked a couple of years ago, did the slightest thing
>to actually help children, then maybe it'd be worth something. But it
>doesn't. It's been turned into just another thing for people to be
>morally sickened by, and you KNOW we all love a good moral sickening.
>
Yeah, well these 'mobs' are just groups of thugs that have criminal
records and the like anyway. They're shown on TV as if it's the norm
when in fact about 50 million people watching at home are probably
commenting on the fact they're a bunch of fuckwits. Take one of the
vigilante mobs that tried to harass a peadophile out of his home, one of
the mothers in said mob was a known trouble maker and was eventually
flung out of her council house for harassing her neighbours and
generally being a neighbour 'from hell'.
>Another thing to kick off about, making sound and fury, and doing
>absolutely fuck-all except reducing what tiny residue of trust people
>might have had left in each-other, and making society yet worse a
>place, even more divided than it was 10 years ago. Chris Morris
>couldn't even SATIRISE the media phenomenon it's become, without
>people accusing him of being a nonce-sympathiser, whilst doing
>fuck-all but rabble-rousing in the opposite direction can be nothing
>but infinite good.
>
Yeah, Morrisey has a knack for pulling the very people his lampooning
into his own real life satire. He is a genius, whether he foresaw that
reaction I don't know but I doubt he was surprised.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
No he's saying the hysteria does not balance with the actual amount of
abuse and or risk of it.
Neil Hopkins
wrote:
>
>I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
>how marvellous it would be to be a werewolf when Farmer Alfalfa said:
>>
>>Are you saying there an acceptable level of sexual abuse of minors?
>>
>>F A
>>
>>
>
>No he's saying the hysteria does not balance with the actual amount of
>abuse and or risk of it.
Most abused children are abused by their parents or people known to
them - the media paints the impression of a world where child
molesters lurk on every street corner. There are actually very few
cases of abduction by strangers each year and it has stayed at pretty
much the same level for the last thirty years or so. Media hysteria
actually makes it more difficult for paedophiles to be monitored and
treated - in fact the only treatment center has recently been closed
down due to lack of funding and nimbyism.
--
neil h.
Spike : Sodding, blimey, shagging, knickers, bollocks, Oh God - I'm English!
Gordon Davie
message news:APZNvsDi...@holy.goat.com...
> In message <3d4d3d7d...@news.cis.dfn.de>, Neil Hopkins
> <neil_h...@hotmail.com> writes
> >Most abused children are abused by their parents or people known to
> >them - the media paints the impression of a world where child
> >molesters lurk on every street corner.
>
> Fairford Tattoo, and I glanced over the shoulder of the bloke in front
> of me to see the headline 'A CHILD MOLESTER ON EVERY STREET
> CORNER' on one of the inside pages. It was hard not to laugh.
So even though they were free, you didn't take one and had to read over
someone's shoulder?
Well done! I wouldn't give it houseroom either.
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland
"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God"
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
Yep. I actually pretty much said this in another reply, minus the bit
about the monitoring which is a good point. Same goes for the mobs etc,
they just drive them 'underground'. I remember seem some documentary
where a group of idiots decided to protest outside a peadophile
rehabilitation centre. I mean these guys were recovering, they would
have, in most cases, become law abiding citizens, but they were put
under so much pressure from these protesters that a lot of them left.
And who knows where they went and what they're doing now. Of course, all
this was whipped up by the local papers.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
Er...seem = seeing....woops.
Farmer Alfalfa
>
> I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
> how marvellous it would be to be a werewolf when said:
>
>
> >On Sat, 3 Aug 2002 02:05:02 +0100, "paula & tim"
> ><noch...@spamhell.com> sprachen:
> >
<snip>
> >If the sort of rabble-rousing that caused that poor paediatrician to
> >get her window bricked a couple of years ago, did the slightest thing
> >to actually help children, then maybe it'd be worth something. But it
> >doesn't. It's been turned into just another thing for people to be
> >morally sickened by, and you KNOW we all love a good moral sickening.
> >
>
> Yeah, well these 'mobs' are just groups of thugs that have criminal
> records and the like anyway. They're shown on TV as if it's the norm
> when in fact about 50 million people watching at home are probably
> commenting on the fact they're a bunch of fuckwits. Take one of the
> vigilante mobs that tried to harass a peadophile out of his home, one of
> the mothers in said mob was a known trouble maker and was eventually
> flung out of her council house for harassing her neighbours and
> generally being a neighbour 'from hell'.
I often wonder who the venom-spouting rent-a-mob set who always seem to be
present to line the prison-van route between police station, courtroom and
prison cell are.
I'm not saying their opinions aren't valid or their sentiments not genuine -
it's just the lengths they go to to make them known and the hatred with
which they do it.
F A
Farmer Alfalfa
"Helen" <xxxx...@xxxxxx.com> wrote in message
news:aih9dr$13c98o$1...@ID-144419.news.dfncis.de...
Although I agree with the sentiments you have just outlined, to use the term
"PC" is to introduce a particular political agenda into the datable.
The term "PC" is almost always used by the right when they object to the
thoughts and practices of the left. More often than not it's when their own
ignorance or bigotry is exposed.
What we see here in terms of child abuse is a mixture of what might be
termed "PC" (i.e. the over-protective attitude of some social workers and
educationalists) and right-wing paranoia (i.e. the need to clearly define
the population in terms of "good guys" and "bad guys" - making sure that one
is always on the side of good :-) - define suitable and nasty punishments,
and make sure that this is happening visibly and often).
IMV our "British" inability to discuss sexual issues openly and
unhypocritically makes any sensible and open debate about any form of sexual
abuse almost impossible.
Frankly I think we should import the Dutch to do it for us.
F A
Paul Hyett
Hopkins <neil_h...@hotmail.com> typed this -
> Media hysteria
>actually makes it more difficult for paedophiles to be monitored and
>treated - in fact the only treatment center has recently been closed
>down due to lack of funding and nimbyism.
>
Most peoples idea of 'treatment' for paedophiles would involve a strong
tree branch and a length of rope!
--
Paul 'US Sitcom Fan' Hyett - The Wild Frame Grabber of the Net!
Website at http://www.activist.demon.co.uk/USsitcoms/
Dom Robinson
pah...@activist.demon.co.uk says...
> On Sun, 4 Aug 2002, an infinite number of monkeys, masquerading as Neil
> Hopkins <neil_h...@hotmail.com> typed this -
>
> > Media hysteria
> >actually makes it more difficult for paedophiles to be monitored and
> >treated - in fact the only treatment center has recently been closed
> >down due to lack of funding and nimbyism.
> >
> Most peoples idea of 'treatment' for paedophiles would involve a strong
> tree branch and a length of rope!
>
rope to swing it forwards and backwards so as to build up momentum, then say to
the paedophile "Bend over and let's see how you like it!"
--
Dom Robinson
Editor, DVDfever.co.uk; Contributor, City Life (citylife.co.uk)
d...@dvdfever.co.uk Just two hours left for Jack Bauer
/* http://DVDfever.co.uk
/* 792 DVDs, 208 games, 33 videos, 41 cinema films, 32 CDs, laserdiscs & news
/* dog eat dog, collateral damage, time machine, ct: special forces, jason x
James Bremner
> Hopkins <neil_h...@hotmail.com> typed this -
>
> > Media hysteria
> >actually makes it more difficult for paedophiles to be monitored and
> >treated - in fact the only treatment center has recently been closed
> >down due to lack of funding and nimbyism.
> >
> Most peoples idea of 'treatment' for paedophiles would involve a strong
> tree branch and a length of rope!
>
Well, most people are morons.
--
James
I'm a demon raised from the dead. I've just been killed. I'm completely
pointless.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
>On Sun, 4 Aug 2002, an infinite number of monkeys, masquerading as Neil
>Hopkins <neil_h...@hotmail.com> typed this -
>
>> Media hysteria
>>actually makes it more difficult for paedophiles to be monitored and
>>treated - in fact the only treatment center has recently been closed
>>down due to lack of funding and nimbyism.
>>
>Most peoples idea of 'treatment' for paedophiles would involve a strong
>tree branch and a length of rope!
You are the voice of 'most people' are you?
Lee J. Moore
>
[..]
> have seen it, but i know i don't like it!!!') to capitalise on this
> FUD to try and ram through the extensions of the powers under the
> enabling sections of the RIP Act again? [..]
Are you the author of the Old Moores Almanac? Check this out:
305.00 Teletext 305 Aug10 13:39:09
######### ##### ###
############### ####
############### ######
############### ### #####
### ######
PRESSURE IS ON FOR INTERNET LAW ######
######
The Government is facing pressure to
speed up the introduction of new laws
to prevent paedophiles "grooming"
children over the internet.
It comes as police searching for
missing schoolgirls Jessica Chapman and
Holly Wells concentrate on contacts
they may have made over the web.
Home Secretary David Blunkett has
acknowledged legislation is needed.
Headlines 300 Sport 400
DIRECT HOLIDAYS p265
Next In Focus Regional Weather
[A direct page capture so apologies if the tabs/spaces mess up
the formatting in some newsreaders]
--
Lee J. Moore
http://www.leej.dsl.pipex.com
----------------------------------
Powered by Gentoo (Portage 2.0.27)
Dom Robinson
says...
> Watching the way the alleged net link has developed as a story on the
> Beeb's news services has been bizarre, culminating in a report for the
> Ten O'Clock News which stated "we managed to find this chat room in
> just a few minutes" and Newsnight's "the dangers of arranging to meet
> predatory adults that they've met on the net".
>
I saw the "chat room" bit yesterday. What a load of nonsense.
You can see the expectant glint in the media's eye as they secretly hope the
two girls are dead since they'll have a lengthy court case to comment on, and
since BB3 is over they've got column inches to fill.
Today the press has a story about how the cops think they're alive, yet someone
on TV mid-week said that those doing the official search "have been told what
they're looking for", so it reminded me of the Simpsons episode where Homer and
Mr Burns are lost in the snow. The park ranger said to Bart and Lisa (like the
media are reporting today), "Your father's gonna be just fine" and then turns
to his colleagues and says "Ok, men, put on your corpse-handling gloves"
One paper this past week had comments from Sarah Payne's mum about all the
anguish and trauma as if (a) we needed reminding, and (b) we couldn't have
guessed. Still, if they are dead and the papers have so much more to comment on
(not!), then they'll bring her back every day for some social commentary on the
latest developments of the case, wheeling her on as if to say "Hey, this
woman's a meeja mini-celeb because her kid's dead!"
Me, cynical?
By contrast The Sun have a weekly small slot in their paper with a few details
and a picture of another kid who has also gone missing. A recent one was a 15-
year-old girl. The media's response to that story? (FX: tumbleweed passing)
Dom Robinson
> Home Secretary David Blunkett has
> acknowledged legislation is needed.
>
> Headlines 300 Sport 400
> DIRECT HOLIDAYS p265
> Next In Focus Regional Weather
>
> [A direct page capture so apologies if the tabs/spaces mess up
> the formatting in some newsreaders]
>
I presume that was taken from ITV or Channel 4. They always only use half-a-
page and fill the rest with useless ads for loan companies and the like.
On a further subject of advertising spam, I looked at microsoft.com/outlook for
info on how to get rid of email spam from Outlook 2000. As I visited the page,
a pop-up advertisement appeared for something I couldn't begin to be interested
in(!)
Lee J. Moore
>
[..]
[..]
> Please tell me more about those Direct Holidays :)
2 weeks in Zante on 22 August for £316 squids Sir? ;-)
> I presume that was taken from ITV or Channel 4. They always
> only use half-a- page and fill the rest with useless ads for
> loan companies and the like.
Indeed. It was Teletext on ITV. I've noticed Teletext is doing
CH5's text now. Far better than when Sky did it. There was far
more realestate dedicated to adverts on CH5 back then.
> On a further subject of advertising spam, I looked at
> microsoft.com/outlook for info on how to get rid of email spam
> from Outlook 2000. As I visited the page, a pop-up
> advertisement appeared for something I couldn't begin to be
> interested in(!)
Aaah, spam. I use SpamAssassin with Vipuls Razor and according
to an article I read, Vipul Prakash (creator of Razor) has
created a Windows flavour of that for Outlook. It also uses P2P
to share spam preventative data (checksums of known spam, etc.)
I believe.
His Windows based software is at http://www.cloudmark.com/ but
IIRC you have to pay for it.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
>Izo Mezzo penned this response in uk.media.tv.misc to a possibly
>pointless meandering on Fri, 9 Aug 2002 20:33:15 +0100:
>
>>Mind you with the recent story about those two missing kids it looks
>>like there maybe a link to the net, maybe that is. If it is then we'll
>>get the predictable rambling by people who couldn't switch on a PC if
>>their life depended on it telling us the Net should be banned, snooped
>>on etc etc.
>
>This story is *really* starting to get on my tits due to the nature of
>the reportage.
>
>Watching the way the alleged net link has developed as a story on the
>Beeb's news services has been bizarre, culminating in a report for the
>Ten O'Clock News which stated "we managed to find this chat room in
>just a few minutes" and Newsnight's "the dangers of arranging to meet
>predatory adults that they've met on the net".
>
Yep. Today they finally admitted they'd been on the net but hadn't been
in one of those peadophile hang outs, what are they called, er chatrooms
or something. Or used email. They were probably surfing the Man Utd
website. Anyway I did have faith in the detectives up until the point
where they were enquiring whether they had met someone in the *same
town* in a chatroom on the net. The likeliness of that happening is
about er, 2 billion to 1 or something? And for starters they wouldn't
know where the girls lived (they wouldn't necessarily know if they were
girls in fact) etc etc etc. I dont think 10 year olds tend to give our
their real names and address, I suspect they're a lot more netwise than
their parents are.
Also I hated the coverage by that fat reporter on ITN this week, not in
an anti-net way but simply because he was really unprofessional in his
manner. He was hopeless.
>Any bets on how long it takes the uberfascist-Blunkett ('I may not
>have seen it, but i know i don't like it!!!')
And he's not likely to see it...ever...or have I just ruined your joke?
:/
>to capitalise on this
>FUD to try and ram through the extensions of the powers under the
>enabling sections of the RIP Act again?
>
Yes the RIP bill what a crock of shit. The irony is they needed the bill
because of the new human rights legislation. Yet in the RIP bill they
tore half of the human rights bill up....the right to privacy anyone?
>Oh well, time to fire up the divX's of the Brass Eye Special again.
>Ted Maul's O/B spots seem positively sane in comparison.
>
Sounds good to me. You wouldn't be so kind as to put it on Gnutella
would you?
>>They don't want the truth. The PM could easily tell everyone that crime
>>has fallen for the last god knows how many years but everyone would
>>accuse him of lying.
>
>People want to believe that the sky is falling down.
>
I blame all modern technology myself. Mostly just the bits I don't
understand and can't work.
>Remember when there was a brouhaha a couple of years ago because
>violent crime rates in the UK where higher than those in the US? What
>everybody had forgot to mention is that throughout the nineties
>violent crime rates decreased rapidly in the US, eventually reaching
>levels not seen since the 1960s. This, of course, tallies with the
>longest period of sustained rapid economic growth in the history of
>the United States. You were still four to five times more likely to be
>the victim of a murder in the US though, and were no more likely to be
>the victim of a violent crime in the UK than ten years earlier IIRC.
>
>
Ah yes. People just take figures as true without looking further. What
about all the nonsense on mobile phone theft? Yes lots of people get
mugged and their phones get nabbed, but a lot of people get their bag
nicked as well. And even more don't get mugged at all. Plus I bet it'd
be interesting to see how many innocent people are stuffed in the
slammer compared to here, what with the private prison system (more
prisoners equals more money, great idea that is), especially in the
southern states where they bang you up for being black.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
>In article <slrnala2c...@cafe.lan>, le...@dsl.pipex.com says...
>> Home Secretary David Blunkett has
>> acknowledged legislation is needed.
>>
>> Headlines 300 Sport 400
>> DIRECT HOLIDAYS p265
>> Next In Focus Regional Weather
>>
>> [A direct page capture so apologies if the tabs/spaces mess up
>> the formatting in some newsreaders]
>>
>Please tell me more about those Direct Holidays :)
>
>I presume that was taken from ITV or Channel 4. They always only use half-a-
>page and fill the rest with useless ads for loan companies and the like.
>
>On a further subject of advertising spam, I looked at
>microsoft.com/outlook for
>info on how to get rid of email spam from Outlook 2000. As I visited the page,
>a pop-up advertisement appeared for something I couldn't begin to be
>interested
>in(!)
Well there's a few pop up killer progs, try the proximotron or just turn
off javascript. There's a prog called pop up killer but it's shite, it
kills everything including legit pop up windows.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
how marvellous it would be to be a werewolf when Dom Robinson said:
>In article <b01alu0njj3gelmn3...@4ax.com>, take....@the.sig
>says...
>> Watching the way the alleged net link has developed as a story on the
>> Beeb's news services has been bizarre, culminating in a report for the
>> Ten O'Clock News which stated "we managed to find this chat room in
>> just a few minutes" and Newsnight's "the dangers of arranging to meet
>> predatory adults that they've met on the net".
>>
>I saw the "chat room" bit yesterday. What a load of nonsense.
>
>You can see the expectant glint in the media's eye as they secretly hope the
>two girls are dead since they'll have a lengthy court case to comment on, and
>since BB3 is over they've got column inches to fill.
>
That's pretty nasty, but sadly I can believe it.
>Today the press has a story about how the cops think they're alive, yet
>someone
>on TV mid-week said that those doing the official search "have been told what
>they're looking for", so it reminded me of the Simpsons episode where
>Homer and
>Mr Burns are lost in the snow. The park ranger said to Bart and Lisa (like the
>media are reporting today), "Your father's gonna be just fine" and then turns
>to his colleagues and says "Ok, men, put on your corpse-handling gloves"
>
The Simpsons excels at that kind of stuff. The same goes with the mob
mentality. I also remember an episode where Bart and Lisa are doing some
kids news program and Lisa is pissed off because Bart makes it all
sugary and emotional. It reminded me of that fat idiot on ITN news
covering the recent disappearance of those girls.
>One paper this past week had comments from Sarah Payne's mum about all the
>anguish and trauma as if (a) we needed reminding, and (b) we couldn't have
>guessed. Still, if they are dead and the papers have so much more to
>comment on
>(not!), then they'll bring her back every day for some social
>commentary on the
>latest developments of the case, wheeling her on as if to say "Hey, this
>woman's a meeja mini-celeb because her kid's dead!"
>
>Me, cynical?
>
The Simpsons again. A girl falls down a well, gets loads of publicity,
becomes a hero. Reminds me a bit of the Christopher Reeves thing, he
gets a standing ovation for being in a wheelchair (spot the irony
there).
>By contrast The Sun have a weekly small slot in their paper with a few details
>and a picture of another kid who has also gone missing. A recent one was a 15-
>year-old girl. The media's response to that story? (FX: tumbleweed passing)
Blimey, sounds pretty amazing for The Sun. Yeah, 100,000 kids go missing
a year. Nobody cares except a few commendable charities and volunteers.
It doesn't sell papers, apparently.
Dom Robinson
> >On a further subject of advertising spam, I looked at
> >microsoft.com/outlook for
> >info on how to get rid of email spam from Outlook 2000. As I visited the page,
> >a pop-up advertisement appeared for something I couldn't begin to be
> >interested
> >in(!)
>
> Well there's a few pop up killer progs, try the proximotron or just turn
> off javascript. There's a prog called pop up killer but it's shite, it
> kills everything including legit pop up windows.
>
which use them to overkill (Lycos, are you listening?).
However, my point was that I was search for ways to avoid spam, as directed by
Microsoft's own program and when I visited their site... (fill in the rest)
Dom Robinson
> >One paper this past week had comments from Sarah Payne's mum about all the
> >anguish and trauma as if (a) we needed reminding, and (b) we couldn't have
> >guessed. Still, if they are dead and the papers have so much more to
> >comment on
> >(not!), then they'll bring her back every day for some social
> >commentary on the
> >latest developments of the case, wheeling her on as if to say "Hey, this
> >woman's a meeja mini-celeb because her kid's dead!"
> >
> >Me, cynical?
> >
> The Simpsons again. A girl falls down a well, gets loads of publicity,
> becomes a hero.
It was Bart who fell down after allegedly spoofing the fact of a boy called
Timmy O'Tool falling down, but Bart's voiced by a woman so I'll let you off :)
> Reminds me a bit of the Christopher Reeves thing, he
> gets a standing ovation for being in a wheelchair (spot the irony
> there).
LOL!
I saw the Rear Window remake he did which was pretty ropey. Is he going to
continue with films at all? I could be nasty and say he could do "Ironside: The
Return" or "The Stephen Hawking Story", but I'm a kind soul so I won't.
Dom Robinson
says...
> >You can see the expectant glint in the media's eye as they secretly hope the
> >two girls are dead since they'll have a lengthy court case to comment on, and
> >since BB3 is over they've got column inches to fill.
> >
> round of name-a-nonce. That would be a good gameshow actually.
>
Followed by headlines of "Paediatricians in hiding"
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
how marvellous it would be to be a werewolf when Dom Robinson said:
>In article <3brUTNEp...@blueyonder.co.uk>, Iz...@hotmail.com says...
>> >On a further subject of advertising spam, I looked at
>> >microsoft.com/outlook for
>> >info on how to get rid of email spam from Outlook 2000. As I visited
>> >the page,
>> >a pop-up advertisement appeared for something I couldn't begin to be
>> >interested
>> >in(!)
>>
>> Well there's a few pop up killer progs, try the proximotron or just turn
>> off javascript. There's a prog called pop up killer but it's shite, it
>> kills everything including legit pop up windows.
>>
>I've heard of various pop-up programs, but find it easier just to avoid sites
>which use them to overkill (Lycos, are you listening?).
>
>However, my point was that I was search for ways to avoid spam, as directed by
>Microsoft's own program and when I visited their site... (fill in the rest)
Ah well that's easy, use another mail program.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
how marvellous it would be to be a werewolf when Dom Robinson said:
>In article <C78ZrwE3...@blueyonder.co.uk>, Iz...@hotmail.com says...
>> >One paper this past week had comments from Sarah Payne's mum about all the
>> >anguish and trauma as if (a) we needed reminding, and (b) we couldn't have
>> >guessed. Still, if they are dead and the papers have so much more to
>> >comment on
>> >(not!), then they'll bring her back every day for some social
>> >commentary on the
>> >latest developments of the case, wheeling her on as if to say "Hey, this
>> >woman's a meeja mini-celeb because her kid's dead!"
>> >
>> >Me, cynical?
>> >
>> The Simpsons again. A girl falls down a well, gets loads of publicity,
>> becomes a hero.
>
>It was Bart who fell down after allegedly spoofing the fact of a boy called
>Timmy O'Tool falling down, but Bart's voiced by a woman so I'll let you off :)
>
Oh yeah. Well it was on ages ago...and stuff...
>> Reminds me a bit of the Christopher Reeves thing, he
>> gets a standing ovation for being in a wheelchair (spot the irony
>> there).
>
>LOL!
>
>I saw the Rear Window remake he did which was pretty ropey. Is he going to
>continue with films at all? I could be nasty and say he could do
>"Ironside: The
>Return" or "The Stephen Hawking Story", but I'm a kind soul so I won't.
Yes, you hit the nail on the head. He wasn't a great actor, yet as soon
as he's wheelchair bound they're treating him like he's God. I don't
suppose any of them bothered to think there's millions of people like
him that aren't millionaires and can't afford care...
I have to admit that I didn't get the Ironside bit on the phone, I knew
I'd heard it somewhere, then later I realised it was Perry Mason with
wheels.
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
As Trev said:
>In message <MPG.17bf4da8a...@news.cis.dfn.de>, Dom Robinson
><d...@dvdfever.co.uk> writes
>>I saw the "chat room" bit yesterday. What a load of nonsense.
>>
>..and the current headline on teletext is '"No internet link" to
>disappearance.' Imagine the disappointed looks on the faces of hacks,
>who have just drafted massive scare stories for tomorrow's papers. Ahh..
>(they'll probably run 'em anyway).
>
Yeah, except it'll be "what could've happened"...
>>You can see the expectant glint in the media's eye as they secretly hope the
>>two girls are dead since they'll have a lengthy court case to comment on, and
>>since BB3 is over they've got column inches to fill.
>>
>Good news for the NotW too. It'd be twice the excuse to start up another
>round of name-a-nonce. That would be a good gameshow actually.
Hasn't anyone mentioned those terrible Alex Domestos ads yet?
It's amazing how talent less and bland the BB contestants are.
Dom Robinson
> >However, my point was that I was search for ways to avoid spam, as directed by
> >Microsoft's own program and when I visited their site... (fill in the rest)
>
> Ah well that's easy, use another mail program.
>
without me having to install another mail prog.
Inquisitor
Robinson (d...@dvdfever.co.uk) scrawled:
> On a further subject of advertising spam, I looked at
> microsoft.com/outlook for info on how to get rid of email spam from
> Outlook 2000. As I visited the page, a pop-up advertisement appeared for
> something I couldn't begin to be interested in(!)
Use the relays.osirusoft.com, ORDB and proxies lists, and practically all
your spam will vanish.
--
I N Q U I S I T O R | www.spamhunter.co.uk | inquisitor (at) domain
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
** SAVE THE NET FROM SPAM - SAVE JOEY MCNICOL
** <http://t3-v-mcnicol.ilaw.com.au/>
Izo Mezzo
I was sitting in my big leather arm chair, watching telly and thinking
how marvellous it would be to be a werewolf when The Reverend Bob said:
>Izo Mezzo penned this response in uk.media.tv.misc to a possibly
>pointless meandering on Sat, 10 Aug 2002 19:12:33 +0100:
>
>> Anyway I did have faith in the detectives up until the point
>>where they were enquiring whether they had met someone in the *same
>>town* in a chatroom on the net. The likeliness of that happening is
>>about er, 2 billion to 1 or something? And for starters they wouldn't
>>know where the girls lived (they wouldn't necessarily know if they were
>>girls in fact) etc etc etc.
>
>Hmmm... depends. ICQ, AIM or any other messaging/chat-client does
>allow personal information to be specified and available for public
>viewing, although this is entirely dependent upon the user inputting
>such data and configuring it to be publicly viewable. Typical User
>Error... solution: Shoot User.
>
>Also, most public chat fora (especially web-based java clients) define
>tend to have chatrooms defined by physical area, age or interest.
>
That's true enough. I suppose kids might be more inclined to go to
specific chatrooms in their own country mebbe, who knows. I suppose a
net savvy dodgy person could easily find their IP and whatnot. Mind you,
can't say I talk to any strangers on IM or ICQ that message me out of
nowhere.
>> I dont think 10 year olds tend to give our
>>their real names and address, I suspect they're a lot more netwise than
>>their parents are.
>
>I'd probably agree with you.
>
>>Also I hated the coverage by that fat reporter on ITN this week, not in
>>an anti-net way but simply because he was really unprofessional in his
>>manner. He was hopeless.
>
>It's odd ITN do the news for both ITV and C4, yet every single thing
>they put out on ITV is dire in terms of quality.
>
I've wondered that myself. I suppose they tailor it to whatever the
network wants, Ch4 obviously want in depth responsible reporting, ITV a
complete load of inaccurate toss. IIRC Ch5 news is done by ITN as well
and even it's better than ITV, it's not too bad really.
>>>Any bets on how long it takes the uberfascist-Blunkett ('I may not
>>>have seen it, but i know i don't like it!!!')
>>
>>And he's not likely to see it...ever...or have I just ruined your joke?
>>:/
>
>Brass Eye reference. Blunkett's condemnation of a show, which is
>dependent upon the fact that television is a visual medium, based
>entirely upon second-hand opinions of others.
>
Oh, I see. I just realised what I wrote there, that was
unintentional...!
>>Yes the RIP bill what a crock of shit. The irony is they needed the bill
>>because of the new human rights legislation. Yet in the RIP bill they
>>tore half of the human rights bill up....the right to privacy anyone?
>
>Pah... you don't need no steenkin rights! That's one of those funny
>things wot them Europeans have 'n all. Human rights, who needs 'em?
>;-)
>
>
Yeah but Joining the euro would be mince because er, them nasty
frenchies would steal our children and er....snails??? Yeah...
>>>Oh well, time to fire up the divX's of the Brass Eye Special again.
>>>Ted Maul's O/B spots seem positively sane in comparison.
>>>
>>
>>Sounds good to me. You wouldn't be so kind as to put it on Gnutella
>>would you?
>
>56.6kb/sec dial-up connection here, so somehow, i think not. Although,
>if you ask in alt.fan.chris-morris someone might be able to oblige or
>burn it onto CD-R and physically mail it to you.
Ah, I haven't been on fatband that long myself. It's like another
woooooooorllllldddddd. Well maybe not but it'd a damn sight better. I'm
not that desperate for it really didn't even know there was a chris
morris froup though, might have a look, cheers.