secondtube Posted January 15, 2003 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 the good ole' tube greg, there was someone on phishook trying to get a hold of you. said he met you in new york. i gave him your email address as well as this site msg board address, he should be contacting you soon. he wants to get it into NYCity i think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcO Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 A google news search found multiple stories on this. I randomly went through a half-dozen or so and found nothing other than allegations. again, from CNN.com : "Townshend was arrested at his home in Richmond, southwest London on Monday on suspicion of possessing indecent images of children, suspicion of making indecent images of children and suspicion of incitement to distribute indecent images of children, Scotland Yard said." I haven't seen anything stating that the police had actually *found* homemade or self-produced materials. Remember - he's not guilty, just being investigated. His alibi seems a bit weak but let's not rush to immediate judgment. We've probably all been in situations where we're telling the truth in a situation where it actually looks like we're trying to hide something, but we're not. Hopefully not anywhere near as nasty as child porn but did you ever get "caught" doing something you didn't actually do? Or maybe having done something with noble intention that turned out to be a less than noble act? I will say that even if he were to be cleared of the charges, the damage to his reputation and career would be immediate and harsh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 well isnt that interesting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secondtube Posted January 15, 2003 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 yes, i was desperately looking, searching for something that would change the way i was looking at him. when i play tommy (which is a lot) i don't want to be thinking funny thoughts. errrr, different funny thoughts from the weird thoughts i normally have during tommy. such a remarkable story. anyways, yes, after finding that, i figured considering i started the post, and that i love townshend and the who, i'd better find something that supports him. i think this is it. allz well here in Listening Land now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 i put my tommy tshirt on today actually in my own little way of support - i was very glad to see you post that cuz i was feeling a little in the minority in waiting for a little more evidence before condemning. Hopefully it will all turn out to be that he was doing as he says and that all this outrageous publicity might work towards smartening people up who are just curious and click away just because of the availability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieDon'tSurf Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 quote:Originally posted by arcane: Yes, that's right, we should never doubt the police or other authorities. Judges are obviously redundant--get them off the public payroll. actually, the only true authority is the media - so the police and courts are redundant! Each major network, including CNN, can have penitentiaries (like the NBC Maximum Security Institution, starring Warden Tom Brokaw) that they can place publically convicted criminals in. if you want they could incorporate 'reality tv' juries, like faux celebrities or former survivor contestants.... but that'd be reduntant too, as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esau Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 quote: Originally posted by Booche: That is against the law, and he should be punished. I dont care what his motives were.I agree with that. Esau13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secondtube Posted January 15, 2003 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 another VERY valid point. You can always say, leave THAT sorta touchy issue TO THE EXPERTS. Rockstars always feel this untouchable attitude towards the law. this is rather obvious when looking backstage or in the hotel rooms of major rock acts. its ok then? its only minors right? Well, even if he did it for his 'research' which seems mostly valid right now, does that make it ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieDon'tSurf Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 its interesting how, as soon as a high-profile media figure runs amok with the law, many cry 'conspiracy' or point accusatory fingers at the very machine that helped make them famous... guilty is as guilty does... i'm doing a PhD on the BIQ (Bong Inhale Quotient), mainly cuz my parents did alot of it when i was a kid and i found it traumatic... next step is to call the cops and let them know that i'll be doing some research and where can i score a cheap quarter.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 i've already posted too much on this for my comfort level, but i dont think it's a rockstar thing as much as it is an internet thing. You get a feeling of anonymity when you are at home surfing. You feel you are totally alone and i think that gives people a certain false sense of invincibility... couple that with the availability - you cant go anywhere without stumbling on porn, and i bet lots of people have browsed pictures at home that they wouldnt buy at the corner store. I'll be clear on this though - I am not on the side of letting people browse kiddie porn. But I can understand his explanation - at least so much in that by the time this media blitz is done he'll have been punished enough if what he said he did is all he did. I dont totally understand why the FBI isnt spending more time shutting down the sites and castrating the photographers. burning cds and installing unregistered software is the same crime as shoplifting it from the store - what people do at home somehow doesnt feel quite as real sometimes. this case should hopefully wake a lot of people up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcO Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 I think everyone should read Townshend's paper (that secondtube posted) before rushing to any conclusions. Thanks for the link, Steve! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secondtube Posted January 15, 2003 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 as i said, i was trying to find something to help his side a bit. and that sure helped a lot. and yes, read it, don't just read the first pages paragraph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 perhaps he felt thatif he was going to write about it he should know about it and not just talk out of his ass like most of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieDon'tSurf Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 as much as i love talking out my ass, i steer away from funding kiddie porn, terrorist regimes and whatnot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 well lets not start talking about terrorists cuz if you've driven a motor vehicle or heated your house or smoked some hash you might just be funding more than you know ass talker. i'm just kidding - i meant myself too - i thought we were just being devils advocates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcO Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 another important aspect of all this that the media seems to have missed: what's with all the new avatars? I mean I like 'em, but there seems to be lots of new ones and it's messing me up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieDon'tSurf Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 devil's advocate by day, ass-talker by night i'm assuming that if jesus wouldn't drive an SUV he wouldn't research kiddie porn either... don't worry, cuz i'm almost always funning around Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieDon'tSurf Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 i got mine from: www.russianorphanages.org you should check it out lots of good avatars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Not Bob Posted January 15, 2003 Report Share Posted January 15, 2003 You are a sick sick man, charlie Rob Not Bob NP : Grateful Dead - Dick's Picks Volume 7 : Alexandra Palace, London, England, September, 1974 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieDon'tSurf Posted January 16, 2003 Report Share Posted January 16, 2003 You know what? Touching piece and all, but as Pete says: "However, what many people fail to realise is how - by visiting their websites - we directly and effectively susidise pornographers. This is true whether we do so unwittingly or deliberately..." thus, clearly arguing against internet vigilantism and the credibility of doing research by visiting the sites... seeing as a victim of abuse has their greatest fear rooted in the crime being committed on another innocent victim, this would make one further question why Mr. Townshend would subsidise these pornographers... [playing role of Devil's Advocate, nothing more, nothing less] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradm Posted May 7, 2003 Report Share Posted May 7, 2003 According to a story at Salon.com, Townsend has been cleared of charges of possessing child pornography, but has been warned by police not to access a Web site containing images of child abuse. Aloha, Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B & Z Posted May 8, 2003 Report Share Posted May 8, 2003 It's one thing to accidently click on a link or in a moment of weakness do so but quite another to give your credit card. His excuse is weak and because of his monster talent, we don't like to believe that he could do it, just like many people in the states felt that OJ the murderer didn't do it. I am quite aware of how much the media twists things and I'm hoping that this is yet another case. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
secondtube Posted May 8, 2003 Author Report Share Posted May 8, 2003 please steve, read his paper that is posted earlier on in this thread. it may change your view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancingbear Posted May 9, 2003 Report Share Posted May 9, 2003 I think the excuse is bull. It is weak and pathetic. Knowingly he entered a sight that supports wrongs against the most innocent. And as for defending him based on "knowing his backgrond", like any of us know the least friggin bit about anyone we have not met. Also, as for statements regarding the guilty not trying to explain things and issuing denial statements with the help of lawyers, while good old innocent people just try to explain themselves, well with tidy fool-proof remarkably insightful insights like that why do we even have a court of law? ( Sorry for the sarcasm) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Not Bob Posted May 9, 2003 Report Share Posted May 9, 2003 Well guess what? The police didn't seem to think it was bull, and they did a damned sight deeper investigation than you did. I think what he did was stupid, but there is an important distinction to be made between "stupid" and "morally reprehensible". You talk about courts of law? Well, the legal authorities in his country that investigated him have also cleared him, and believe me they would not be likely to cut *any* celebrity slack on a matter like this (I'm looking at you, Gary Glitter). Rob Not Bob annoyed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.