alchresearch Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 It all depends on how accurate this "list" is. Schofield himself said he found it after a few seconds of trawling the internet which has no degree of accuracy or accountability whatsoever. A couple of weeks ago the BBC reported about a young actor in trouble for sexually abusing a 14 year old boy in a theatre. A quick Google brought me six names on various forums, but only one was correct. How would you feel if you were famous but completely innocent and Schofield wrote your name down in that list simply because someone on that forum didn't like you or your work and decided to have a bit of anonymous fun? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RosyRat Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 It all depends on how accurate this "list" is. Schofield himself said he found it after a few seconds of trawling the internet which has no degree of accuracy or accountability whatsoever. A couple of weeks ago the BBC reported about a young actor in trouble for sexually abusing a 14 year old boy in a theatre. A quick Google brought me six names on various forums, but only one was correct. How would you feel if you were famous but completely innocent and Schofield wrote your name down in that list simply because someone on that forum didn't like you or your work and decided to have a bit of anonymous fun? Excellent point. Following on from this, how soon before people stop believing in the internet as a source of info on paedophilia? There will be so many false accusations, speculations & unfounded allegations, that it will lose all credibility. The internet isn't a reliable source of info & should never be regarded as such. What was Schofield thinking of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dosxuk Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 How would you feel if you were famous but completely innocent and Schofield wrote your name down in that list? What was Schofield thinking of? Schofield won't have made up the list, or come up withe idea. It'll have been a producer or researcher behind the scenes, and authorised by whoever was producing yesterdays show and that segment. Presenters don't get as far in the business as Schofield has by dropping thier superiors in it by suddenly presenting thier own research as fact with nobody elses knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puisseguin Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 It all depends on how accurate this "list" is. Schofield himself said he found it after a few seconds of trawling the internet which has no degree of accuracy or accountability whatsoever. A couple of weeks ago the BBC reported about a young actor in trouble for sexually abusing a 14 year old boy in a theatre. A quick Google brought me six names on various forums, but only one was correct. How would you feel if you were famous but completely innocent and Schofield wrote your name down in that list simply because someone on that forum didn't like you or your work and decided to have a bit of anonymous fun? This is correct. Let's not forget Damian McBride and his smear campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Schofield won't have made up the list, or come up withe idea. It'll have been a producer or researcher behind the scenes, and authorised by whoever was producing yesterdays show and that segment. This was my feeling too. He admitted on live TV that he researched and wrote this list. Let's see if he backtracks and says someone else did, which exposes him as a liar at the very least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
embotr Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 I'm not a crackpot conspiracy theorist...but the fact is we were promised for days of imminent arrests of household names & key figures...what did we get in the end? The the most obvious candidates in the whole planet, if sacrificial lambs or scapegoats were required to be offered - Freddie Starr & Gary Glitter. No-one else. Oh yeah....also the guy who drove Jimmy round everywhere - quelle surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vResistance Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 It'll all get covered up anyway, they might sacrifice one or two to make it look dealt with. I predict the police will say they have investigated, but there is not enough evidence to prosecute. Their names won't ever be published, they will lock it away with a D notice like Blair did before. And it will be, as you were paedo's. Let that be a lesson to those that think they'll ever see justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vResistance Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 I'm not a crackpot conspiracy theorist...but the fact is we were promised for days of imminent arrests of household names & key figures...what did we get in the end? The the most obvious candidates in the whole planet, if sacrificial lambs or scapegoats were required to be offered - Freddie Starr & Gary Glitter. No-one else. Oh yeah....also the guy who drove Jimmy round everywhere - quelle surprise. They did the same with 'operation ore' It's obvious why paedophilia is treated like a minor crime (no pun intended) when so many in high positions are involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Its like the phrase "D-Notice". Mention that and posts disappear, threads get shut down. The powers-that-be have shocking, well, power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esme Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Mod Note I would remind users that this forum is classed as a publication in the eyes of the law, posts made here are not legally regarded as ephemeral or of limited scope like a chat with a friend in a pub, they can be read world wide. Posts making derogatory or inflammatory comments about a living person, may subsequently be read by that person and if that causes them offence they can take the person making the derogatory and inflammatory comments to court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.