[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Pete's Statements



	>From: "Schrade, Scott" 
	>Subject: Pete's Statements 
	>
>I hate to bring this all up again but I have some lingering questions as
>to just what Pete looked at on the internet that got him into trouble.

You too??

>Remember, what seems like years ago, Pete stated that he visited sites 
>*three or four times.*  Was he speaking of the portal, or list-site then?
>The same one he is referring to in his latest diary entry?

I don't get that either.
That's been bugging me now for several days.
It just doesn't seem to fit.
(funny, ICSFM just started on the radio)
What I keep dwelling on, is why this "Detail" is just revealed now?
I mean, it changes the *entire* view of the whole mess?
Why didn't he state this months and months ago to the press?
This just seems like such an about-face.

Instead of saying "I didn't download any images", and "only visited sites 3 or 4 times for research for his diary" (see that's strange, now, too), why not just come out with it at the beginning that his research was limited to this list of sites, didn't visit any of the sites,  didn't even view images, and the research was for a campaign to further the awareness of these sites.

I'm sorry, but it feels like these are two different stories.
It pains me, as a Townshend fan, to even think this.

To be clear, I'm not calling anyone a liar or anything, but damn, had Pete made this not so subtle distinction right at the very beginning, it could have avoided months of speculation by the media, the public, and fans.

I'm at a loss.
Not the first time.
Hoping someone can sharpen the fuzziness.

Kevin in VT