Pete Townshend's "research"..

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Should he be shot?
He said he told police beforehand and he used his own credit card but why would anyone want to "research" child porn in such a manner. Will classic rock end up like the catholic church, full of discraced pedophiles. Hmm. And after the whole Entwistle coke death thing it doesn't help does it.

Major Alfonso (Major Alfonso), Saturday, 11 January 2003 18:19 (twenty-two years ago)

It's shocking that rock stars do coke.

Sean (Sean), Saturday, 11 January 2003 18:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes that does like a naive sentence. I meant the continued touring of the other pair, not the taking of coke.

Major Alfonso (Major Alfonso), Saturday, 11 January 2003 18:57 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm glad this came to light before I finished working on a new blog design based around an image of Townshend in his white jumpsuit flying through the air...

I still want to give him the benefit of the doubt, though. Maybe he was experimenting with how easy it would be to find and purchase the material from blackmarket vendors?

paul cox (paul cox), Saturday, 11 January 2003 19:22 (twenty-two years ago)

bah!... such dirty tidings

(that i knew nuthin about)

i see, this not the best place then, perhaps, to sigh,
"'behind blue eyes' is Townshend's beautifullest solo job"?

t\'\'t (t\'\'t), Saturday, 11 January 2003 19:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Is there a news item on this? Hadn't heard about it. What's the story?

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Saturday, 11 January 2003 19:55 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.ananova.com/entertainment/story/sm_738721.html

paul cox (paul cox), Saturday, 11 January 2003 19:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Firstly, notifying the police that you are doing something doesn't make it okay. Secondly, doing something as research did not prove a good defence for Winona Ryder. Thirdly, if he is being asked to take part in a campaign, couldn't the asking organisation fulfil any research needs? Fourthly, I believe that there are enough free sites that you don't have to give your money to paedophiles. Fifthly, How much research do you need to do before you happily launch into condemning paedophiles? Did he think he might find the child porn on the web acceptable?

None of this makes him a paedophile (I'd also distinguish a bit in levels of evil between looking at child porn, creating it, and abusing children, by the way), necessarily, but it is an astoundingly crap and weak and stupid explanation for an intelligent man to offer. I'm a long-time big fan, by the way.

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Sunday, 12 January 2003 13:29 (twenty-two years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.