Category Archives: Uncategorized

Finnish Nationalism & Thoughts on American Alt-Right

Swan of Tuonela is a Finnish nationalist and Vlogger.

A video version of this show can be found in the TV section.

Swan joins us for an interesting conversation on Finland, nationalism, and multiculturalism. We begin by discussing the origins of her name. Swan tells us that it derives from Finnish mythology, and proceeds to explain how the folktales and fables from her homeland are quite different from those of other European countries. We discuss Swan’s red-pill process, which began when she started questioning the migrant crisis. This leads to a discussion on Finnish nationalism. Swan tells us that most Finns are opposed to mass immigration, but that the nationalist scene in Finland is defined by a plurality of groups which don’t always get along. We discuss the mainstream media in Finland, which is, unsurprisingly, working against the interests of indigenous Finns. Our show also covers migrant rape in Finland, LGBT organizations, Russophobia, and much more.

Relevant Links

Swan of Tuonela’s YouTube channel

Music

Jean Sibelius – The Swan of Tuonela

Source

Donald Marshall: George Lucas

Donald Marshall (Fri. December 2, 2011) – George had them light me on fire for the end of his movie Revenge of the Sith, Said he wanted Hayden Christiensen to scream realisticly, Hayden watched me listened to me scream and groan in pain and copied the sounds exactly, he knows all about it. As does Natalie Portman, and a quarter of the cast. Many directors have used me like that, in a role playing situation, cause me some kind of excruciating pain just to see what kind of squeak or screech I will make, as if I were less than a dog, then when I’m a bloody mess on the floor they crawl on my broken body and sodomize me saying something like they love me and can’t control themselves because I made all they’re favorite songs and I’m so “special”. Broken ribs bending and internal bleeding, me crying or screaming if I am able, but they just keep on going and they videotape this so they can view it again like evil pornography.

—————————————————————————–

Donald Marshall (January 2014) – They’re down with cloning,… I had to think up idea’s for both Bethesda and Lucas arts. George Lucas bothered me a lot there, thinking I was just going to die anyway. He’s gonna get it though.

—————————————————————————–

Donald Marshall (Mon. June 24, 2013) – Star Wars concept is not an original idea, George Lucas extrapolated his intrepretation of the Nostradamus prophecy to make it. Just space age setting.

Same basic storyline

—————————————————————————–

Donald Marshall (October 2012) – Vrill were accurately portrayed in the star wars movie (attack of the clones) they are ashamed of their appearance and wanted to see what people would say about them… it was George Lucas’s was of informing on them without informing, and without being killed.

—————————————————————————–

Donald Marshall (October 2012) – George Lucas was told the long necked trolls wanted to be in a movie…. He put them in star wars attack of the clones. Kaminoans. Google image. Exact depiction.

http://i1363.photobucket.com/…/As…/kaminoans_zpskzbxhaxs.jpg

—————————————————————————–

Donald Marshall (October 2012) – Vrill were accurately portrayed in the star wars movie (attack of the clones) they are ashamed of their appearance and wanted to see what people would say about them… it was George Lucas’s was of informing on them without informing, and without being killed.

—————————————————————————–

Question (November 2012) – You said Peter Jackson went to the Cloning Centre? This creepy guy let 27 horses die in the making of the Hobbit… What is he like at the Centre?

Donald Marshall – He acts like he’s a lord of the land and untouchable… george lucas and steven speilberg do too… all the rich ones do, until a politically powerful person talks down to them and then they hush up and look to the floor.

—————————————————————————–

Donald Marshall (Tue. June 18, 2013) – They wanted to be seen in the movie Star Wars “attack of the clones” to gauge public opinion on their appearance… they used the best looking younger vrill type they could copy from.

Kaminoans they are called in the movie… they run a cloning operation in the movie LMAO!!!

George Lucas and the others at the clone zone were only too happy to put them in the movie… to identify them in future somehow…

—————————————————————————–

Donald Marshall (April 2013) – they make the cartoon the clone wars… disney just bought the rights to star wars from george lucas, who also has a clone attends

all the biggest people in hollywood,… many are host…parasite hosts os lizards

Source

Get Your Own Clone Today

Advances in knowledge and related developments in the procedures of molecular biology, genetics and artificial fertilization have long made it possible to experiment with and successfully achieve the cloning of plants and animals.

Since the ’30s experiments have been made in producing identical individuals by artificial twin splitting, a procedure which can be improperly called cloning.

The practice of twin splitting in the zootechnical field has been spreading in experimental barns as an incentive to the multiple production of select exemplars.

In 1993 Jerry Hall and Robert Stilmann of George Washington University published data concerning the twin splitting they performed on human embryos of two, four and eight embryoblasts. These experiments were conducted without the prior consent of the appropriate Ethics Committee and were published, according to the authors, in order to stimulate the ethical debate.

The news published in the journal Nature, 27 February 1997, about the birth of the sheep Dolly through the efforts of the Scottish scientists Jan Vilmut and K.H.S. Campbell and their team at Edinburgh’s Roslin Institute, however, had an unusual effect on public opinion and led to statements being issued by committees and national and international authorities: this happened because it was something new and was considered troubling.

There are two new aspects of this event. The first is that it is not a question of splitting but of a radical innovation defined as cloning, that is, an asexual and agamic reproduction meant to produce individuals biologically identical to the adult which provided the nuclear genetic inheritance. The second is that until now this type of true and proper cloning was considered impossible. It was thought that the DNA in the somatic cells of the higher forms of animal life, having already undergone the imprinting of differentiation, could no longer recover their original totipotentiality and, consequently, their ability to direct the development of a new individual.

With the overcoming of this supposed impossibility, the way now seems open to human cloning, understood as the replication of one or more individuals somatically identical to the donor.

The event has rightly caused concern and alarm. But after an initial phase of unanimous opposition, some have wished to call attention to the need for guaranteeing freedom of research, for not demonizing progress. The prediction has even been made that the Catholic Church herself will one day accept cloning.

Now that some time has passed, it would be useful in a more detached way to examine closely the fact that has been noted as a disturbing event.

THE BIOLOGICAL FACTS

In its biological aspects as a form of artificial reproduction, cloning is achieved without the contribution of two gametes; therefore it is an asexual and agamic reproduction. Fertilization properly so-called is replaced by the “fusion” of a nucleus taken from a somatic cell of the individual one wishes to clone, or of the somatic cell itself, with an oocyte from which the nucleus has been removed, that is, an oocyte lacking the maternal genome. Since the nucleus of the somatic cell contains the whole genetic inheritance, the individual obtained possesses—except for possible alterations—the genetic identity of the nucleus’ donor. It is this essential genetic correspondence with the donor that produces in the new individual the somatic replica or copy of the donor itself.

The Edinburgh event occurred after 277 oocyte-donor nucleus fusions: only eight were successful, that is, only eight of the 277 started to develop as embryos and only one of these eight embryos reached birth: the lamb called Dolly.

Many doubts and questions remain about quite a few aspects of the experiment: for example, the possibility that among the 277 donor cells used there were some “staminals”, that is, cells endowed with a not totally differentiated genome; the role that could have been played by possibly residual mitochondrial DNA in the maternal ovum; and many other questions which the researchers, unfortunately, did not even attempt to address. However, it is still an event that goes beyond the forms of artificial fertilization known until now, which have always been performed by using two gametes.

It should be stressed that the development of individuals obtained by cloning, apart from eventual possible mutations—and there could be many—should produce a body structure very similar to that of the DNA donor: this is the most disturbing result, especially when the experiment is applied to the human species.

It should be noted however that, should the extension of cloning to the human species be desired, this duplication of body structure does not necessarily imply a perfectly identical person, understood in his ontological and psychological reality. The spiritual soul, which is the essential constituent of every subject belonging to the human species and is created directly by God, cannot be generated by the parents, produced by artificial fertilization or cloned. Furthermore, psychological development, culture and environment always lead to different personalities; this is a well-known fact even among twins, whose resemblance does not mean identity. The popular image or aura of omnipotence that accompanies cloning should at least be put into perspective.

Despite this impossibility of involving the spirit, which is the source of personality, the thought of human cloning has already led to the imagining of hypothetical cases inspired by the desire for omnipotence: duplicating individuals endowed with exceptional talent and beauty; reproducing the image of departed loved ones; selecting healthy individuals immune from genetic diseases; the possibility of choosing a person’s sex; producing selected frozen embryos to be transferred in utero at a later time to provide spare organs, etc.

By regarding these hypothetical cases as science fiction, proposals can soon be advanced for cloning considered “reasonable” or “compassionate”: the procreation of a child in a family whose father suffers from aspermia or to replace the dying child of a widowed mother; one could say that these cases have nothing to do with the fantasies of science fiction.

But what would be the anthropological significance of this activity in the deplorable prospect of applying it to man?

ETHICAL PROBLEMS
CONNECTED WITH HUMAN CLONING

Human cloning belongs to the eugenics project and is thus subject to all the ethical and juridical observations that have amply condemned it. As Hans Jonas has already written, it is both in method the most despotic and in aim the most slavish form of genetic manipulation; its objective is not an arbitrary modification of the hereditary material but precisely its equally arbitrary fixationin contrast to the dominant strategy of nature.

It represents a radical manipulation of the constitutive relationality and complementarity which is at the origin of human procreation in both its biological and strictly personal aspects. It tends to make bisexuality a purely functional left-over, given that an ovum must be used without its nucleus in order to make roomfor the clone-embryo and requires, for now, a female womb so that its development may be brought to term. This is how all the experimental procedures in zootechny are being conducted, thus changing the specific meaning of human reproduction.

In this vision we find the logic of industrial production: market research must be explored and promoted, experimentation refined, ever newer models produced.

Women are radically exploited and reduced to a few of their purely biological functions (providing ova and womb) and research looks to the possibility of constructing artificial wombs, the last step to fabricating human beings in the laboratory.

In the cloning process the basic relationships of the human person are perverted: filiation, consanguinity, kinship, parenthood. A woman can be the twin sister of her mother, lack a biological father and be the daughter of her grandfather. In vitro fertilization has already led to the confusion of parentage, but cloning will mean the radical rupture of these bonds.

As in every artificial activity, what occurs in nature is “mimicked” and “imitated”, but only at the price of ignoring how man surpasses his biological component, which moreover is reduced to those forms of reproduction that have characterized only the biologically simplest and least evolved organisms.

The idea is fostered that some individuals can have total dominion over the existence of others, to the point of programming their biological identity—selected according to arbitrary or purely utilitarian criteria—which, although not exhausting man’s personal identity, which is characterized by the spirit, is a constitutive part of it. This selective concept of man will have, among other things, a heavy cultural fallout beyond the—numerically limited—practice of cloning, since there will be a growing conviction that the value of man and woman does not depend on their personal identity but only on those biological qualities that can be appraised and therefore selected.

Human cloning must also be judged negative with regard to the dignity of the person cloned, who enters the world by virtue of being the “copy” (even if only a biological copy) of another being: this practice paves the way to the clone’s radical suffering, for his psychic identity is jeopardized by the real or even by the merely virtual presence of his “other”. Nor can we suppose that a conspiracy of silence will prevail, a conspiracy which, as Jonas already noted, would be impossible and equally immoral: since the “clone” was produced because he resembles someone who was “worthwhile” cloning, he will be the object of no less fateful expectations and attention, which will constitute a true and proper attack on his personal subjectivity.

If the human cloning project intends to stop “before” implantation in the womb, trying to avoid at least some of the consequences we have just indicated, it appears equally unjust from the moral standpoint.

A prohibition of cloning which would be limited to preventing the birth of a cloned child, but which would still permit the cloning of an embryo-foetus, would involve experimentation on embryos and foetuses and would require their suppression before birth—a cruel, exploitative way of treating human beings.

In any case, such experimentation is immoral because it involves the arbitrary use of the human body (by now decidedly regarded as a machine composed of parts) as a mere research tool. The human body is an integral part of every individual’s dignity and personal identity, and it is not permissible to use women as a source of ova for conducting cloning experiments.

It is immoral because even in the case of a clone, we are in the presence of a “man”, although in the embryonic stage.

All the moral reasons which led to the condemnation of in vitrofertilization as such and to the radical censure of in vitro fertilization for merely experimental purposes must also be applied to human cloning.

The “human cloning” project represents the terrible aberration to which value-free science is driven and is a sign of the profound malaise of our civilization, which looks to science, technology and the “quality of life” as surrogates for the meaning of life and its salvation.

The proclamation of the “death of God”, in the vain hope of a “superman”, produces an unmistakable result: the “death of man”. It cannot be forgotten that the denial of man’s creaturely status, far from exalting human freedom, in fact creates new forms of slavery, discrimination and profound suffering. Cloning risks being the tragic parody of God’s omnipotence. Man, to whom God has entrusted the created world, giving him freedom and intelligence, finds no limits to his action dictated solely by practical impossibility: he himself must learn how to set these limits by discerning good and evil. Once again man is asked to choose: it is his responsibility to decide whether to transform technology into a tool of liberation or to become its slave by introducing new forms of violence and suffering.

The difference should again be pointed out between the conception of life as a gift of love and the view of the human being as an industrial product.

Halting the human cloning project is a moral duty which must also be translated into cultural, social and legislative terms. The progress of scientific research is not the same as the rise of scientistic despotism, which today seems to be replacing the old ideologies. In a democratic, pluralistic system, the first guarantee of each individual’s freedom is established by unconditionally respecting human dignity at every phase of life, regardless of the intellectual or physical abilities one possesses or lacks. In human cloning the necessary condition for any society begins to collapse: that of treating man always and everywhere as an end, as a value, and never as a mere means or simple object.

HUMAN RIGHTS
AND FREEDOM OF RESEARCH

At the level of human rights, the possibility of human cloning represents a violation of the two fundamental principles on which all human rights are based: the principle of equality among human beings and the principle of non-discrimination.

Contrary to what may appear at first sight, the principle of parity and equality among human beings is violated by this possible form of man’s domination over man, and the discrimination comes about through the whole selective-eugenic dimension inherent in the logic of cloning. The Resolution of the European Parliament (12 March 1997) expressly states the violation of these two principles and forcefully appeals for the prohibition of human cloning and for the value of the dignity of the human person. Since 1983 the European Parliament and all the laws passed to legalize artificial procreation, even the most permissive, have always forbidden human cloning. It should be recalled that the Church’s Magisterium has condemned the possibility of human cloning, twin fission and parthenogenesis in the 1987 Instruction Donum vitae. The basic reasons for the inhuman nature of possible human cloning are not because it is an extreme form of artificial procreation in comparison to other legally approved forms, such as in vitro fertilization, etc.

As we have said, the reason for its rejection is that it denies the dignity of the person subjected to cloning and the dignity of human procreation.

The most urgent need now seems to be that of re-establishing the harmony between the demands of scientific research and indispensable human values. The scientist cannot regard the moral rejection of human cloning as a humiliation; on the contrary, this prohibition eliminates the demiurgic degeneration of research by restoring its dignity. The dignity of scientific research consists in the fact that it is one of the richest resources for humanity’s welfare.

Moreover, there is a place for research, including cloning, in the vegetable and animal kingdoms, wherever it answers a need or provides a significant benefit for man or for other living beings, provided that the rules for protecting the animal itself and the obligation to respect the biodiversity of species are observed.

When scientific research in man’s interest aims to cure diseases, to relieve suffering, to solve problems due to malnutrition, to make better use of the earth’s resources, it represents a hope for humanity, entrusted to the talent and efforts of scientists.

To enable biomedical science to maintain and strengthen its relationship with the true welfare of man and society, it is necessary to foster, as the Holy Father recalls in the Encyclical Evangelium vitae, a “contemplative outlook” on man himself and the world, with a vision of reality as God’s creation and in a context of solidarity between science, the good of the person and of society.

“It is the outlook of those who see life in its deeper meaning, who grasp its utter gratuitousness, its beauty and its invitation to freedom and responsibility. It is the outlook of those who do not presume to take possession of reality but instead accept it as a gift, discovering in all things the reflection of the Creator and seeing in every person his living image”

Source

Codex Gigas – The Devil’s Bible

The Codex Gigas (English: Giant Book) is the largest extant medieval manuscript in the world.[1] It is also known as the Devil’s Bible because of a large illustration of the devil on the inside and the legend surrounding its creation. It is thought to have been created in the early 12th century in the Benedictine monastery of Podlažice in Bohemia (modern Czech Republic). It contains the Vulgate Bible as well as many historical documents all written in Latin. Eventually finding its way to the imperial library of Rudolf II, the entire collection was taken as war booty by the Swedish in 1648 during the Thirty Years’ War, and the manuscript is now preserved at the National Library of Sweden in Stockholm, on display for the general public.

Description

The codex is bound in a wooden folder covered with leather and ornate metal. At 92 cm (36 in) tall, 50 cm (20 in) wide and 22 cm (8.7 in) thick, it is the largest known medieval manuscript.[2] Weighing 74.8 kg (165 lb), Codex Gigas is composed of 310 leaves of vellum allegedly made from the skins of 160 donkeys or perhaps calfskin.[3] It initially contained 320 sheets, though some of these were subsequently removed.[4] It is unknown who removed the pages or for what purpose but it seems likely that they contained the monastic rules of the Benedictines.

Legend has it, that it was written by one scribe.[5] Acts 12:25 reads ab Hierosolymis (= ἀπὸ Ἰερουσαλὴμ, i.e. “from Jerusalem” – this reading is normal in Vulgate) along with manuscripts: D, Ψ, 181, 436, 614, 2412, 147, 809, 1021, 1141, 1364, 1439, ar, d, vg, Chrysostom; majority reads εἰς Ἰερουσαλὴμ (to Jerusalem).[6] Acts 18:26 supports reading τὴν ὁδὸν of Codex Bezae[7] (instead of τὴν ὁδὸν τοῦ θεοῦ present in other manuscripts and also supported by translations like the Vulgate).

History

The codex is believed to have been created by Herman the Recluse in the Benedictine monastery of Podlažice near Chrudim in the Czech Republic. The monastery was destroyed during the 15th century during the Hussite Revolution. Records in the codex end in the year 1229. The codex was later pledged to the Cistercians Sedlec Monastery and then bought by the Benedictine monastery in Břevnov. From 1477 to 1593, it was kept in the library of a monastery in Broumov until it was taken to Prague in 1594 to form a part of the collections of the Emperor Rudolf II.

At the end of the Thirty Years’ War in 1648, the entire collection was taken as war booty by the Swedish army. From 1649 to 2007, the manuscript was kept in the Swedish Royal Library in Stockholm.[8] The site of its creation is marked by a maquette in the town museum of Chrast.

On Friday, 7 May 1697, a fierce fire broke out at the royal castle in Stockholm, and the Royal Library suffered very badly. The codex was rescued from the flames by being thrown out of a window. The codex apparently injured a bystander and some of its leaves fluttered away and they are still missing today.[9] In September 2007, after 359 years, the Codex Gigas returned to Prague on loan from Sweden until January 2008, and was on display at the Czech National Library.[10][11][12]

A National Geographic documentary included interviews with manuscript experts who pointed towards evidence (handwriting analysis and a credit to Hermann Inclusus – “Herman the Recluse”) that indicates the manuscript was indeed the work of just one scribe.

Content

About half of the codex consists of the entire Latin Bible in the Vulgate version, except for the books of Acts and Revelation, which are from a pre-Vulgate version. They are in the order: Genesis–Ruth; Isaiah–Daniel; Hosea–Malachi; Job; Samuel and Kings; Psalms–Song of Solomon; Wisdom of Solomon; Wisdom of Jesus; Esdras; Tobit; Judith; Esther; and Maccabees. Between the Testaments are JosephusAntiquities of the Jews and De bello iudaico, as well as Isidore of Seville‘s encyclopedia Etymologiae and medical works of Hippocrates, Theophilus, Philaretus, and Constantinus. Following a blank page, the New Testament commences with Matthew–Acts, James–Revelation, and Romans–Hebrews. Following the picture of the devil, Cosmas of Prague‘s Chronicle of Bohemia, a list of brothers in the Podlažice monastery, and a calendar with necrologium, magic formulae and other local records round out the codex. The entire document is written in Latin; in addition, it contains Hebrew, Greek, and Slavic alphabets (Cyrillic and Glagolitic).[1]

The manuscript includes illuminations in red, blue, yellow, green and gold. Capital letters are elaborately illuminated, frequently across the entire page. The codex has a unified look as the nature of the writing is unchanged throughout, showing no signs of age, disease or mood on the part of the scribe. This may have led to the belief that the whole book was written in a very short time (see Legend), but scientists are starting to believe and research the theory that it took over 20 years to complete.[14]

Folio 290 recto,[15] otherwise empty, includes a unique picture of the devil, about 50 cm tall. Directly opposite the devil is a full page depiction of the kingdom of heaven, thus juxtaposing contrasting images of Good and Evil. Several pages before this are written on a blackened parchment and have a very gloomy character, somewhat different from the rest of the codex. The reason for the variation in coloring is that the pages of the codex are of vellum. Vellum, or scraped and dried animal hide, “tans” when exposed to ultraviolet light. Over centuries, the pages that were most frequently turned to will developed this tell-tale darker color.

Legend

According to one version of a legend that was already recorded in the Middle Ages, the scribe was a monk who broke his monastic vows and was sentenced to be walled up alive. In order to avoid this harsh penalty he promised to create in one day a book to glorify the monastery forever, including all human knowledge. Near midnight, he became sure that he could not complete this task alone so he made a special prayer, not addressed to God but to the fallen angel Lucifer, asking him to help him finish the book in exchange for his soul. The devil completed the manuscript and the monk added the devil’s picture out of gratitude for his aid.[1][16][17] In tests to recreate the work, it is estimated that reproducing only the calligraphy, without the illustrations or embellishments, would have taken five years of non-stop writing.[14] In popular fiction, the 12 missing pages of the Codex Gigas are rumored to contain an apocalyptic text called “The Devil’s Prayer”.

Source

Did Iron Maiden knew about Jimmy Savile?

This was my first thought today when I woke up. I have listen Iron Maiden and other heavy metal bands a lot and there was this one line in the Iron Maiden song called Holy Smoke, which stuck in my head. Did Iron Maiden knew back in 1990, that Jimmy Savile was a reptile/beast pedophile which molested hundreds of kids? And because band is from England they could have known the evil doings behind BBC curtains.

Here are the lyrics of this song called Holy Smoke:

IRON MAIDEN LYRICS
“Holy Smoke”
1990

Believe in me – send no money
Died on the cross and that ain’t funny
But my so called friends are making me a joke
They missed out what I said like I never spoke
They choose what they wanna hear – they don’t tell a lie
They just leave out the truth as they’re watching you die
Saving your souls by taking your money
Flies round shit, bees around honey.

[Chorus]
Holy Smoke, Holy Smoke, plenty bad preachers for
The Devil to stoke
Feed ’em in feet first this is no joke
This is thirsty work making Holy Smoke

Jimmy Reptile and all his friends
Say they gonna be with you at the end
Burning records, burning books
Holy soldiers Nazi looks
Crocodile smiles just wait a while
Till the TV Queen gets her make up clean
I’ve lived in filth I’ve lived in sin
And I still smell cleaner than the shit you’re in

[Chorus]

They ain’t religious but they ain’t no fools
When Noah built his Cadillac it was cool
Two by two they’re still going down
And the satellite circus just left town
I think they’re strange and when they’re dead
They can have a Lincoln for their bed
Friend of the President – trick of the tail
Now they ain’t got a prayer – 100 years in jail

[Chorus]

Source

This is the line “Jimmy Reptile and all his friends” Isn’t it weird, that they use the word “reptile”, when that is the most common way to describe sexual predators?

Then just look at the cover of this single. Its all about how Illuminati controls media. Also Illuminati is behind these pedophile organizations for example Ninth Circle, which operate in all levels of societies.

2507

Iron Maiden tried to cover these pretty obvious lyrics in hilarious video, which would take all the attention:

Here is something about the Savile’s case. Just look, “Sir” Jimmy Savile. This just tells how the monarchs are also covering these kind of monsters, because they use their services.:

Jimmy Savile sexual abuse scandal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sir Jimmy Savile (1926–2011) was an English DJ, television and radio personality, who was well known in Britain for his eccentricities and, at the time of his death, was generally respected for his charitable work. He was knighted in 1990. In September and October 2012, almost a year after his death, claims were widely publicised that he had committed sexual abuse, his alleged victims ranging from prepubescent girls and boys to adults. By 11 October 2012 allegations had been made to 13 British police forces,[1] and this led to the setting-up of inquiries into practices at the BBC and within the National Health Service.

On 19 October 2012 the Metropolitan Police Service launched a formal criminal investigation, Operation Yewtree, into historic allegations of child sexual abuse by Savile and other people, some still living, over four decades. It stated that it was pursuing over 400 lines of inquiry, based on the claims of 200 witnesses, via 14 police forces across the UK. It described the alleged abuse as being “on an unprecedented scale”, and the number of potential victims as “staggering”.[2][3] By 19 December, eight people had been questioned as part of the investigation. The Metropolitan Police stated that the total number of alleged victims was 589, of whom 450 alleged abuse by Savile.[4][5]

The report of the investigations undertaken jointly by the police and the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC), Giving Victims a Voice, was published on 11 January 2013. It reported allegations covering a period of fifty years, including 214 alleged acts by Savile which, though uncorroborated, have been formally recorded as crimes, some involving children as young as eight. The report states “within the recorded crimes there are 126 indecent acts and 34 rape/penetration offences.”[6] Alleged offences took place at 13 hospitals as well as on BBC premises, according to the report.[7][8] In October 2013 it was announced that inquiries had been extended to other hospitals.[9] On 26 June 2014, the Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt, reported on the findings of the investigations led by Kate Lampard. He said that Savile had sexually assaulted victims aged between five and 75 in NHS hospitals, and apologised to the victims.[10] Further investigations, in hospitals and elsewhere, led to additional allegations of sexual abuse by Savile.

Much of Savile’s career involved working with children and young people, including visiting schools and hospital wards. He spent 20 years presenting Top of the Pops before a teenage audience, and an overlapping 20 years presenting Jim’ll Fix It, in which he helped the wishes of viewers, mainly children, come true. During his lifetime, two police investigations had looked into reports about Savile, the earliest known being in 1958, but none had led to charges; the reports had each concluded that there was insufficient evidence for any charges to be brought related to sexual offences.[11][12][13] In October 2012 it was announced that the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer, would investigate why proceedings against Savile in 2009 were dropped.

The scandal was a major factor leading to the establishment of the wider-ranging Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse which was announced by the Home Secretary, Theresa May, in July 2014. In February 2015 the inquiry was reconfigured as a statutory inquiry to be chaired by Justice Lowell Goddard.

Exposure: The Other Side of Jimmy Savile

An ITV documentary, Exposure: The Other Side of Jimmy Savile was broadcast on 3 October 2012. It was researched and presented by Mark Williams-Thomas, a police investigator in the successful prosecution of Jonathan King over sexual offences involving children in 2001.

In it several women said that, as teenagers, they had been sexually abused by Savile. It was said Savile obtained access to teenage girls through television programmes such as Top of the Pops and Clunk, Click (1973–74), and his charity work. Savile’s former colleagues said he made no attempt to hide his interest in girls from them, while another said she had walked in on him french kissing an underage girl. One woman who said Savile had sexually assaulted her when she was 14 in 1970 explained she had not pursued her complaint to police in 2008 after being told it would lead to a “media circus“.[34] The founder of ChildLine, Esther Rantzen, was shown the interviews by Williams-Thomas and commented that “There were always rumours that he [Savile] behaved very inappropriately sexually with children.”[35]

An update to the original documentary, Exposure Update: The Jimmy Savile Investigation, was shown on ITV on 21 November.[36] It won a Peabody Award in 2012.[37]

Source

It just makes me sick if that these bands know about things and just hide the facts in their songs. They should openly tell about these things so that innocent people won’t suffer in the hands of these monsters.

Read more from Auricmedia:

[carousel-horizontal-posts-content-slider]