3 ms·

Why do we need to be aware of a baseless allegation?

linuxkerneldev 10y ago
> Why do we need to be aware of a baseless allegation? I do not find them baseless. I find it very suspicious that a wealthy European man would choose to live in a wartorn country. We've recently found that many prominent people from that period were committing horrific acts and getting away with it because of a general atmosphere of silence and fear of bringing such issues up. Eg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile Lets take a different approach. Say for example, Michael Jackson suddenly chose to live in Sri Lanka. Then allegations started popping up. Then the police said he was not guilty. Would you find such allegations to also be baseless?
- jacobush 10y ago
  Pretty much yeah, unless you have other evidence this Michael Jackson (who is that anyway?) did horrific acts.
  - linuxkerneldev 10y ago
    > Pretty much yeah Are you saying it is not suspicious for a wealthy guy to suddenly move to a wartorn country? Lets say someone you know who has no previous links with that area, suddenly moves to Syria and says it is because he loves diving in the Mediterranean sea. I'm saying such actions are very suspicious and the fact that there was no investigation by impartial non-corrupt authorities from a developed country makes the allegations carry some weight.
    - jacobush 10y ago
      Well it may be perhaps not suspicious but intriguing. There may be any number of reasons for such a move. (For instance he may have felt more at ease fraternising with boyfriends away from prude old England.) Look, I am not trying to whitewash him. But saying: wealthy european moves to wartorn country, therefore paedophile, is using the "jump to conclusions mat" a bit too much.
      - linuxkerneldev 10y ago
        > But saying: wealthy european moves to wartorn country, therefore paedophile, is using the "jump to conclusions mat" a bit too much. I'm not extending the logic that far. I'm saying those allegations and the lack of investigation is something that needs to be pointed out, and fixed so that similar things can't reoccur.
- BeetleB 10y ago
  >I find it very suspicious that a wealthy European man would choose to live in a wartorn country. This is the classic example of: "Out of ignorance comes certainty." You're essentially saying that because you cannot explain the behavior of one individual, then the explanation is likely/must be X. You don't know = ignorance It must be X = certainty. Just as an FYI, he moved there long before it was a wartorn country. He chose to stay. Just as so many wealthy Sri Lankans who could have left did not. Why focus on the wealthy European and not the wealthy locals?
jacobush 10y ago
I think it's valuable for history. These allegations should be part of any exhaustive historical account of the man. If nothing else to better understand the times of his day. Edit to clarify my point: should we erase from history books accounts of baseless accusations of prominent people? People accused of being witches, accused of being traitors because they subscribed to the wrong beliefs etc. Regarding Clarke, I can easily imagine people having a beef with his (also alleged!) homosexuality prefer to smear him as a paedophile. Indeed the term is used interchangeably by many to this day, by malice or lack of knowledge or both. If he actually was one, well we may never know. Knowing the nature of mankind, he would not be the first. But we have not been presented with evidence of wrongdoing, so, the allegations are baseless.

> Why do we need to be aware of a baseless allegation? I do not find them baseless. I find it very suspicious that a wealthy European man would choose to live in a wartorn country. We've recently found that many prominent people from that period were committing horrific acts and getting away with it because of a general atmosphere of silence and fear of bringing such issues up. Eg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile Lets take a different approach. Say for example, Michael Jackson suddenly chose to live in Sri Lanka. Then allegations started popping up. Then the police said he was not guilty. Would you find such allegations to also be baseless?

jacobush 10y ago
Pretty much yeah, unless you have other evidence this Michael Jackson (who is that anyway?) did horrific acts.
- linuxkerneldev 10y ago
  > Pretty much yeah Are you saying it is not suspicious for a wealthy guy to suddenly move to a wartorn country? Lets say someone you know who has no previous links with that area, suddenly moves to Syria and says it is because he loves diving in the Mediterranean sea. I'm saying such actions are very suspicious and the fact that there was no investigation by impartial non-corrupt authorities from a developed country makes the allegations carry some weight.
  - jacobush 10y ago
    Well it may be perhaps not suspicious but intriguing. There may be any number of reasons for such a move. (For instance he may have felt more at ease fraternising with boyfriends away from prude old England.) Look, I am not trying to whitewash him. But saying: wealthy european moves to wartorn country, therefore paedophile, is using the "jump to conclusions mat" a bit too much.
    - linuxkerneldev 10y ago
      > But saying: wealthy european moves to wartorn country, therefore paedophile, is using the "jump to conclusions mat" a bit too much. I'm not extending the logic that far. I'm saying those allegations and the lack of investigation is something that needs to be pointed out, and fixed so that similar things can't reoccur.
BeetleB 10y ago
>I find it very suspicious that a wealthy European man would choose to live in a wartorn country. This is the classic example of: "Out of ignorance comes certainty." You're essentially saying that because you cannot explain the behavior of one individual, then the explanation is likely/must be X. You don't know = ignorance It must be X = certainty. Just as an FYI, he moved there long before it was a wartorn country. He chose to stay. Just as so many wealthy Sri Lankans who could have left did not. Why focus on the wealthy European and not the wealthy locals?

jacobush 10y ago

I think it's valuable for history. These allegations should be part of any exhaustive historical account of the man. If nothing else to better understand the times of his day. Edit to clarify my point: should we erase from history books accounts of baseless accusations of prominent people? People accused of being witches, accused of being traitors because they subscribed to the wrong beliefs etc. Regarding Clarke, I can easily imagine people having a beef with his (also alleged!) homosexuality prefer to smear him as a paedophile. Indeed the term is used interchangeably by many to this day, by malice or lack of knowledge or both. If he actually was one, well we may never know. Knowing the nature of mankind, he would not be the first. But we have not been presented with evidence of wrongdoing, so, the allegations are baseless.