Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

[OT].. Just thinking..

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Granulated

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 7:19:18 AM4/23/02
to
.... Gary Glitter had apparently been using wigs for ages...

makes you think doesn't it...
quite easy for him to go about life (is he still inside BTW?)
when he (gets/got) out, and not be recognised.

挨Hedwigぐ

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 7:47:14 AM4/23/02
to

"Granulated" <An...@Nicotinepatch.co.uk> wrote in message
news:e8sdaugcvnu7dukg7...@4ax.com...

He's out, he only served something ridiculous like 3 months. I think he
lives in Brazil now he used to live there alot before he was arrested. But
yeah it makes you think.

--
ぐ`壶挨Hedwigぐ`壶挨

hedw...@NOSPAMhotmail.com
Dawn is nature's way of telling you to go to bed.

Tersefer

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 8:28:58 AM4/23/02
to

"Granulated" <An...@Nicotinepatch.co.uk> wrote in message
news:e8sdaugcvnu7dukg7...@4ax.com...

I suppose it is worth taking note of but it scares me.
--
Tersefer

@blueyonder.co.uk M_HOULLIER

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 8:54:21 AM4/23/02
to

He was hardly Mr Big as far as Internet Porn is concerned, I mean there's
images all over the fucking place, some sick images like, but that's just a
matter of taste. The real bastards are the ones who make that shit! That's
pure exploitation, simple as that.
So then the images go on the Net, and some people look at them - it's not
hard to get them, they're out there. In a world where you can download
information to make bombs and what the best way to send them to people are,
you can get hold of such images freely. Brittney Spears? Shakira? Billie?
All these other Lola-esque stars.

Take for instance people who get off on seeing things on bangedup.com such
as heads exploded, or dead people with infections etc etc etc etc Now I
think that's pretty fucked up myself. A lot of that is us being humand and
being curious creatures as we are, willing to poke our fingers in the wounds
etc.
But it's equivalent to standing over the dead body of someone and gawping,
maybe even laughing at the severity and ridiculous nature of some poor
unforunate souls death.

If these images are so "sick" to the core, how come 15 years 11 months and
29 days can be illegal and a few hours later it's legal. If we're making
younger and younger people more attractive then the consequences are that
there's no harm in finding something so young sexually attractive. Depending
on wether Mr Glitter was looking at these images from a curiousity point of
view ("What the hell would that look like?") based on image descriptions, or
wether he actuall would've been capable of any act upon a child.

Are the image producers exploiting the children as well as their audience?
Or is it a cowardly audience who want the image producers to exploit the
children to satisfy their needs?

You may yourself have slightly questionable images on your drive :) Don't
take it to friggin' Tiny Computer for a service :D


"挨Hedwigぐ" <Hed...@hedwig7.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aa3hg0$b21$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...

挨Hedwigぐ

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 11:15:11 AM4/23/02
to
Hardly Mr Big? He was arrested on 54 counts of possessing child pornography,
and at the time of his arrest had over 4,000 images on his lap top. Not what
I would class as just having a quick look out of curiosity. But I agree the
producers of this stuff are also to blame but then it gets in to the whole
chicken and the egg argument, if people didn't want it they wouldn't do it
and if they never did it no one would look at it.
Yes there are lots of sick things in this world unfortunately but just
because they are easily available doesn't mean it is right to look at them
IMO.

--
ぐ`壶挨Hedwigぐ`壶挨

hedw...@NOSPAMhotmail.com
Dawn is nature's way of telling you to go to bed.

"M_HOULLIER" <m_houllier @ blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%Pcx8.5516$Cp4.3...@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...

@blueyonder.co.uk M_HOULLIER

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 12:01:11 PM4/23/02
to
Did he actually wear that wig in the day??

Didn't he used to shag Denise Van outen?


"挨Hedwigぐ" <Hed...@hedwig7.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message

news:aa3tlt$r3v$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...

Baul

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 2:58:43 PM4/23/02
to
Yes I'm back :P

16? That's still illegal!!! If I found out that some shit had managed to
find naked pictures of my (16 and 17 yo) female friends, I would be
extremely pissed off! I admit that girls are lookign older younger and
younger these days, but that's WHY the age is 18, because by that time girls
are mature enough to make their own decisions. His crime was a horrendous
one. Hed said 4000 images on his laptop? WTF? Evil sick bastard.

"M_HOULLIER" <m_houllier @ blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%Pcx8.5516$Cp4.3...@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
>

yidaho

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 3:11:40 PM4/23/02
to
"Baul" <boff...@bowsher.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

>Yes I'm back :P
>
>16? That's still illegal!!! If I found out that some shit had managed to
>find naked pictures of my (16 and 17 yo) female friends, I would be
>extremely pissed off! I admit that girls are lookign older younger and
>younger these days, but that's WHY the age is 18, because by that time girls
>are mature enough to make their own decisions. His crime was a horrendous
>one. Hed said 4000 images on his laptop? WTF? Evil sick bastard.

AFAIK the age of consent is still 16, Baul. But, yes, you're right,
Gary Glitter's collection of downloaded kiddie porn and printed
material featuring children as young as 2 was horrendous, and only a
sicko would attempt to defend him.

--
~yidaho~
"There are only 10 types of people in the world - Those who understand binary, and those who don't."

Tess

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 3:14:51 PM4/23/02
to

"yidaho" <yid...@blooyonda.co.uk> wrote in message
news:m8cbcu0u6to48b319...@4ax.com...

> "Baul" <boff...@bowsher.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Yes I'm back :P
> >
> >16? That's still illegal!!! If I found out that some shit had managed to
> >find naked pictures of my (16 and 17 yo) female friends, I would be
> >extremely pissed off! I admit that girls are lookign older younger and
> >younger these days, but that's WHY the age is 18, because by that time
girls
> >are mature enough to make their own decisions. His crime was a horrendous
> >one. Hed said 4000 images on his laptop? WTF? Evil sick bastard.
>
> AFAIK the age of consent is still 16, Baul. But, yes, you're right,
> Gary Glitter's collection of downloaded kiddie porn and printed
> material featuring children as young as 2 was horrendous, and only a
> sicko would attempt to defend him.
>
In N.I the age of consent is 17 for girls and 16 for boys - and paedophilic
pornography is revolting, there is no defence. Many of us will remember
M_Houllier from last year, he just likes to be controversial

Theresa


yidaho

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 3:18:38 PM4/23/02
to
"Tess" <theresa...@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>In N.I the age of consent is 17 for girls and 16 for boys - and paedophilic
>pornography is revolting, there is no defence. Many of us will remember
>M_Houllier from last year, he just likes to be controversial

Indeed, Tess, to both statements.

Boffy

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 3:32:07 PM4/23/02
to
16 is the legal age for sex, yes, but pornography is 18, isn't?

--
Boffy
"Baul" <boff...@bowsher.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Caix8.7554$xn.3...@news8-gui.server.ntli.net...

Granulated

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 3:51:09 PM4/23/02
to
The Gilbert O'Sullivan-esque : "M_HOULLIER" <m_houllier @ blueyonder.co.uk>, On Tue, 23 Apr 2002
13:54:21 +0100 combed-over :

>If these images are so "sick" to the core, how come 15 years 11 months and
>29 days can be illegal and a few hours later it's legal.

He had pictures of 2 year old girls being abused.

Defend that...

Boffy

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 3:56:38 PM4/23/02
to
2 year olds? Fucking hell, and only 3 months? That's outrageous!!!

Yo Gran, BTW

--
Boffy


"Granulated" <An...@Nicotinepatch.co.uk> wrote in message

news:78qeaukstse6lstc6...@4ax.com...

vjc

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 4:07:41 PM4/23/02
to
"Tersefer" <tere...@tesco.net> wrote this, suspiciously:

Far more dangerous ar re the pedo's whose faces you wont recognise
than any you do.
--
Vanessa

Some people have a way with words, while others... erm... thingy.

vjc

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 4:14:05 PM4/23/02
to
"Baul" <boff...@bowsher.freeserve.co.uk> wrote this, suspiciously:

>Yes I'm back :P
>

Welcome back

Granulated

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 4:26:24 PM4/23/02
to
The Gilbert O'Sullivan-esque : "Boffy" <boff...@bowsher.freeserve.co.uk>, On Tue, 23 Apr 2002
20:56:38 +0100 combed-over :

>Yo Gran, BTW


Yo Boff.. AFAIK

Boffy

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 4:25:28 PM4/23/02
to
Cheers hun.
I may be around a bit more now, just finishing off some coursewrok in for
Thursday and then revision, so I'll definately be more freer, which is more
gooder, and more FUKTVBBer :). Missed you guys. I HAVE been in the chat
room, and me and Hed have been talking on the phone, and she's always going
on about you lot and whenever she says about one of you I promise myslef
I'll get over my fear of all the unread messages and get back in here

--
Boffy
"vjc" <v...@sistersofstreisand.com> wrote in message
news:44gbcukc04dm3idel...@4ax.com...

Granulated

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 4:31:41 PM4/23/02
to
The Gilbert O'Sullivan-esque : "Baul" <boff...@bowsher.freeserve.co.uk>, On Tue, 23 Apr 2002
19:58:43 +0100 combed-over :

>Yes I'm back :P

You were "gone" ?

tim(bo) ;-)

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 4:30:05 PM4/23/02
to
I'm drunk at the moment but thought that I might have something to add
to this discussion.
Living as I do in The Netherlands., there is a completely different view
as regarding sex of all natures and sorts bar one. Child pornography is
despised here, as much as anywhere else in the world. It is highly
illegal as well.
Unfortunately it would appear that a lot of child pornography, if not
produced here, seems to pass through here.

All child pornography literally makes my stomach turn, and as for the
thought of those two year old children being involved - heart wrenching.

I was once unfortunate enough to open a post on an ng with similar
atrocities, I just could not comprehend it, and it took several seconds
for the image to actually hit home. The smiling face of the little girl
on the picture was the first thing that I homed on to, and then I saw
the rest . Her smile still haunts me, and just the thought of that smile
alone, is the only reason I need to brand it all as sick.
If I had it my way, I'd castrate not only the people who are producing
it, but the parents who allow their children to me misused in this
fashion.

As for the pedophiles themselves, they really do need help, and in The
Netherlands they get it.

Gary Glitter got off very, very lightly indeed.


I'm not sure it this is the right forum for this discussion, but I just
had to say it.

yidaho

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 4:42:34 PM4/23/02
to
> 16 is the legal age for sex, yes, but pornography is 18, isn't?

Ah, yes... you're prolly right, Boffy.


--
~yidaho~
"I love my dust. It shows I had something better to do." -- Anonymous


@blueyonder.co.uk M_HOULLIER

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 4:49:57 PM4/23/02
to
Did you see the kind of sentences that some of the biggest hubs of Internet
Porn got off with?

You'd think he was Ronnie Kray sometimes :)
But seriously though, I've thought that any crime where the crime is to look
at something is quite weird.
2 years old is sick, in that case probably banging someone up aint gonna do
any good - they're still gonna be the kind of person who likes that kinda
thing at the end of the day, need to be some sort of rehab there for sure?
All the rehab he's had is to serve 3 months and then buggar off abroad
living a happy life.

Didn't Catherine of Russia used to like horses? (not sure if she DID them of
course, although it's bullshit that that's how she died).

But hey, the world's a big place, Gary Glitter looking at dodgy pictures
aint the biggest fish in the pond now is it.

Oh and, Morning all :)
Just thought I'd pop in.

Tess - I didn't leave you aggreived didst thou?

- MH


"tim(bo) ;-)" <shaw...@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:3CC5C5B6...@wanadoo.nl...

Boffy

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 5:00:19 PM4/23/02
to
Well, not officially, but yeah, I was. I'm sure Statto could tell you when
my last post was

--
Boffy


"Granulated" <An...@Nicotinepatch.co.uk> wrote in message

news:2kseaug7aj3amepgi...@4ax.com...

Tess

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 5:10:14 PM4/23/02
to

"M_HOULLIER" <m_houllier @ blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7Ojx8.1413$dh5.1...@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...

> Tess - I didn't leave you aggreived didst thou?
>
> - MH

Nah, but you can't deny you're a stirrer! Half the time I don't think you
even agree with what you're saying, you just like an argument lol. and
before another English picks up on it, shouldn't it be didst I? ;-)

Tess


vjc

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 5:17:43 PM4/23/02
to
"Tess" <theresa...@ntlworld.com> wrote this, suspiciously:

or dickest i?

yidaho

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 5:17:32 PM4/23/02
to
vjc <v...@sistersofstreisand.com> wrote:

>"Tess" <theresa...@ntlworld.com> wrote this, suspiciously:
>
>>
>>"M_HOULLIER" <m_houllier @ blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:7Ojx8.1413$dh5.1...@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>>> Tess - I didn't leave you aggreived didst thou?
>>>
>>> - MH
>>Nah, but you can't deny you're a stirrer! Half the time I don't think you
>>even agree with what you're saying, you just like an argument lol. and
>>before another English picks up on it, shouldn't it be didst I? ;-)
>>
>>Tess
>
>or dickest i?

snnnnn!!

@blueyonder.co.uk M_HOULLIER

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 5:23:31 PM4/23/02
to
You remind me of my local MP :)

They now begin to realise that I don't take NO for an answer!

:-P

However, we shouldst not be arguing amongst ourselves, we need to unite
against the common enemy!

THE JUDEAN PEOPLE'S FRONT?

(either them or Rupert Murdoch!)

(hugs and kisses and flowers in Tess' direction)
Doesn't everyone deserve a second chance? :-)

- MH

"Tess" <theresa...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:_4kx8.14873$A43.3...@news11-gui.server.ntli.net...

Tess

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 5:26:51 PM4/23/02
to

"M_HOULLIER" <m_houllier @ blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%hkx8.1510$dh5.1...@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...

> You remind me of my local MP :)
>
> They now begin to realise that I don't take NO for an answer!
>
> :-P
>
> However, we shouldst not be arguing amongst ourselves, we need to unite
> against the common enemy!
>
> THE JUDEAN PEOPLE'S FRONT?
>
> (either them or Rupert Murdoch!)
>
> (hugs and kisses and flowers in Tess' direction)
> Doesn't everyone deserve a second chance? :-)
>
> - MH

Aww, thanks for the kisses and flowers, I am starved of affection here!!


tim(bo) ;-)

unread,
Apr 23, 2002, 5:27:18 PM4/23/02
to
I've never actually thought about that. Mr Glitter (he off the spinning balls)
was actually arrested because he was looking at something. He didn't actually
steel anything.


I hate to admit this but.........

I have a Greatest Hits of Gary Glitter and the Glitterband on CD.
Shocking stuff. I think I'll emigrate to Brazil too.


M_HOULLIER wrote:

--
TimBo :-)

"ooe err, zei de actries tegen de bischop, dat is een grote klokkenspel!"


Tersefer

unread,
Apr 24, 2002, 3:22:19 AM4/24/02
to

"vjc" <v...@sistersofstreisand.com> wrote in message
news:snfbcus1cbcblo1c4...@4ax.com...

> "Tersefer" <tere...@tesco.net> wrote this, suspiciously:
>
> >
> >"Granulated" <An...@Nicotinepatch.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:e8sdaugcvnu7dukg7...@4ax.com...
> >> .... Gary Glitter had apparently been using wigs for ages...
> >>
> >> makes you think doesn't it...
> >> quite easy for him to go about life (is he still inside BTW?)
> >> when he (gets/got) out, and not be recognised.
> >
> >I suppose it is worth taking note of but it scares me.
>
> Far more dangerous ar re the pedo's whose faces you wont recognise
> than any you do.

You got that right and so many are 'respectable' people you would
never suspect.
--
Tersefer

Tersefer

unread,
Apr 24, 2002, 3:26:38 AM4/24/02
to

"vjc" <v...@sistersofstreisand.com> wrote in message
news:irjbcu08rae078i7n...@4ax.com...

> "Tess" <theresa...@ntlworld.com> wrote this, suspiciously:
>
> >
> >"M_HOULLIER" <m_houllier @ blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:7Ojx8.1413$dh5.1...@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> >
> >> Tess - I didn't leave you aggreived didst thou?
> >>
> >> - MH
> >Nah, but you can't deny you're a stirrer! Half the time I don't
think you
> >even agree with what you're saying, you just like an argument
lol. and
> >before another English picks up on it, shouldn't it be didst I?
;-)
> >
> >Tess
> >
>
> or dickest i?

snnn
--
Tersefer

挨Hedwigぐ

unread,
Apr 24, 2002, 5:12:40 AM4/24/02
to

"Baul" <boff...@bowsher.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Caix8.7554$xn.3...@news8-gui.server.ntli.net...
> Yes I'm back :P

Helloooooo! :p Welcome back :)

Paul

unread,
Apr 24, 2002, 6:37:44 PM4/24/02
to
I know the answer to that..surprisingly. :-D

It's 16 for topless only and 18 for full nudity, etc.

--
Paul
remove the medication from email address to reply
-- -- --
Boffy <boff...@bowsher.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:XFix8.14369$A43.3...@news11-gui.server.ntli.net...

vjc

unread,
Apr 24, 2002, 7:03:08 PM4/24/02
to
LMAO

Dorty booger...................


Welcome back!


V

"Paul" <dp.v192m...@ntlworld.com> wrote this, suspiciously:

>I know the answer to that..surprisingly. :-D
>
>It's 16 for topless only and 18 for full nudity, etc.

--

Paul

unread,
Apr 25, 2002, 12:19:49 PM4/25/02
to
> Dorty booger...................

What, me?? <:-)

> Welcome back!

Cheers. :-) I'll be in and out (easy!) of here, post when I can (be
bothered that is). Got a ton of college work on at the moment, nearly the
end of the first year, so I ain't had the time to post a thing.

I have, however, found the time/put back an assignment to go out on the town
tonight. yay! :-)


--
Paul
remove the medication from email address to reply
-- -- --

vjc <v...@sistersofstreisand.com> wrote in message

news:pceecugrc8c9kibr1...@4ax.com...

0 new messages