ex BBC presenter found guilty of abusing 6 boys

[52N4E]

all the more reason the world rejoiced when yer rancid club died like a pish stained beggar in the gutter

Rolf won't like that but I do ...

[ontherise]

I don't think I ever suggested the victims were guilty in any way. I never even mentioned the vicitims in my post.

I never said you blamed the victims, I was pointing out your statement that they were only guilty due to the age of the victims being somewhat self evident.

[ontherise]

why is who I support relevant in anyway to anything I have said?? You sound like a typicial hvvvn ******* obcessed with child abuse to use as a stick but one who really dosnt give a flying fuvvk about the victims,, nice to sing about tho

do me a favour, try and talk about child abuse without mentioning Celtic............but you couldnt,,could u ??

all the more reason the world rejoiced when yer rancid club died like a pish stained beggar in the gutter

Firstly I am not a hun , but as far as being obsessed about child abuse I would like to point out it was you that started a thread laughing at the victims of child abuse.

On caring about the vicitms, well you laughing at them makes your views perfectly clear.

You also claim underage *** is an unfortunate technicality.

Two posters on this thread think the behaviour of the abusers who were sentenced to five years being acceptable are both supporters of celtic, hence why your club is named, however in this regard you are correct, when discussing the abuse of male children on a Scottish football messageboard it is impossible not to connect it with celtic football club, especially with several former employees currently awaiting trial for historical abuse of children.

For what its worth I find both the ugly sisters repugnant with celtic just shading it.

PS, your English is awful, are you a foreigner?

[Sevvy too 2]

Firstly I am not a hun , but as far as being obsessed about child abuse I would like to point out it was you that started a thread laughing at the victims of child abuse.

On caring about the vicitms, well you laughing at them makes your views perfectly clear.

You also claim underage *** is an unfortunate technicality.

Two posters on this thread think the behaviour of the abusers who were sentenced to five years being acceptable are both supporters of celtic, hence why your club is named, however in this regard you are correct, when discussing the abuse of male children on a Scottish football messageboard it is impossible not to connect it with celtic football club, especially with several former employees currently awaiting trial for historical abuse of children.

For what its worth I find both the ugly sisters repugnant with celtic just shading it.

PS, your English is awful, are you a foreigner?

This angry man sounds very familiar,not a Hun? Not to my mind,I feel like it's the return an old angry friend, as for the laughing at the victims, I think he knew what the posters meant, a bit crass maybe but he knew how they meant it, by the way, I'm a Tim too, but you knew that already

[JackSnakes]

“She had ***ual activity with these young boys again and again. The boys, who were mostly aged around 14."

Again children being abused is obviously enjoyed by this particular celtic supporting ***ual deviant.

"The pair were found guilty of indecently assaulting under-age boys", this is perfectly acceptable behaviour to the celtic support, not surprised given their history.

It is obvious because it is a male child these celtic supporting perverts deem this normal behaviour, its a wee boy so its ok is the way of the celtic supporter, history has proven this and the responses by celtic supporters on here seal the deal.

If it were a female child being abused would the celtic supporter feel the same, a willing ***ual partner regardless of age would seem to be fair game for these perverts.

Don't try and swerve the issue nomark - she was 34, not fkn 60...

[JackSnakes]

I am not wanting to make light of this situation in any way but the perpretators of the offence are 60 and 69 now; the offences took place between 1992 and 1996 when the guilty parties were 45/49 and 54/58. Still guilty due to age of victims.

Anither yin who canny fkn count...

[JackSnakes]

They groomed the kids before abusing them, that's what pedophiles and perverts do, they normalise the abuse, just like what we are reading from the celtic supporters on here, normal behaviour.

"But the court heard how the couple had befriended their young victims and, once they had their trust, proceeded to ***ually abuse them."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...th-GUILTY.html

Your 13 year son comes home one night and says he was approached by some old burd asking to feel his cock, she said her man would stand ****ing himself whilst she did so, and your response is "why are you here telling me this, you should have let her do whatever she wanted and if he wanted to join in then all the better".

A 13 year old is a child, is most definitely off the radar when it comes to any ***ual practices and is of course illegal, regardless if you think having *** with a child is a "technicality" due to the age of that child.

You consider ***ual acts with male children to be acceptable, in fact you seem to think this is normal behaviour, it is no wonder there are five beasts awaiting trial for the same offences at your club.

The celtic supporters would simply laugh and allow these depraved perverts to move on to their next victims as they have in the past, but thankfully the courts seen this for what is obviously was and handed down the appropriate sentence, five years for abusing several children.

It reads (and believes) the Daily Mail.... 'nuff said there I think...

[JackSnakes]

The offences took place when the victims were under age. Doesn't matter when the guilty parties were caught. I was mearly pointing out the ages of the offenders at the time of the offence. Does not make them any less guilty.

Thank you for pointing out the blatantly obvious.

And blatantly erroneous...

[JackSnakes]

I was referring to the age of the children who were abused, you said they were "Still guilty due to age of victims".

Bit like saying "the thief was guilty due to stealing the money".

Anyway, why do celtic supporters think the abuse of children is OK or funny or perfectly normal when the offences are serious enough to warrant five years in prison?

No you didn't. Your main point was that the perpetrators (at the time) were 60 and 69... which they weren't...

Yer gonnae have to find a better stick to beat us with - nae cnt gives a fk about this yin...

[ZombieSkelper]

Is this our old friend Rolf posting again under a cunning disguise?