"Free Polanski" = Liberals gone crazy

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by 27jd

 

I don't watch the guys movies because I think he's a sick freak. I have to wonder how much of this is just posturing on the part of others though. It's been 30 years. Why didn't they come after him all those years ago when he was in France? Unless the french are child-rapist sympathizers I don't see them protecting him.....

[edit on 29-9-2009 by antonia]

His arrest warrant has been active - one foot on US soil, he would be taken into custody. Same as those on the FBI most wanted list. Even if cases are a zillion years old - they are still open and active.

France is his home of birth and probably has strict extradition laws and probably want to protect thier own famous citizen. And Switzerland has an agreement with US, therefore, took him into custody.

Originally posted by 27jd


Amen to that. They ALWAYS flood these threads, and i get furious reading their posts.

Yeah, they sure do. You know what they say - those that make the loudest noise usually have the most to hide.

Maybe that's why Polanski is such a successful Movie maker.

Originally posted by Orion65

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by antonia
I think some of you need to consider why she won't testify and why she wants this dropped.

I think you're a little confused about this case. She already testified and he plead guilty, back when it all happened. It's done. She isn't being asked to testify, the trial is done. He fled his before his sentencing. But again, the trial was over long ago. She no longer has any say in this case...

The victim didn't want to deal with the media frenzy all over again (who would?). While I disagree with Skyfloating about political labels being brought into this I do agree with him that the elite backing Polanski are pathetic and WRONG. Say for example Whoopi Goldberg or Harrison Ford's daughter had been the victim? Would they really be clamoring for the "forgiveness" of the perpetrator?

Perhaps they'd be like the little boys' families given to Greek men for "teaching." They'd consider it an honour if some rapist director drugged their children and raped them.

Originally posted by Orion65
The victim didn't want to deal with the media frenzy all over again (who would?).

Right, and that's understandable, but it's out of her hands either way, and has been since the trial. And like i said before, she already took a settlement, i'm sure she'll have the opportunity to make even more money with some exclusive interviews. That's all on her. But he was convicted in a court of law, and fled sentencing. That in itself is a crime, on top of raping and sodomizing a young girl. It really is out of her hands.

While I disagree with Skyfloating about political labels being brought into this I do agree with him that the elite backing Polanski are pathetic and WRONG. Say for example Whoopi Goldberg or Harrison Ford's daughter had been the victim? Would they really be clamoring for the "forgiveness" of the perpetrator?

I also agree about the political labeling. I haven't even addressed it because i'm so sick of the right vs. left BS. We're all people, and you're right, those "stars" would likely be singing a different tune if it were there kids. I imagine the victim in this case would too, which is why i think it's weak that she thinks it should be let go. That would only embolden other sick bastards to attack other people's children.

Originally posted by DraconianKing
A forum moderator using child rape as a means to attack liberalism is absolutely disgusting and pathetic.

You sending me threats by U2U because I post uncomfortable facts is even more troubling.

Being fairly liberal-minded I´ll forgive you. But keep the foul-languaged U2Us to yourself from now on.

It makes you wonder how many more children Roman Polanski has raped over these last 30 years that he has been on the run. We all know that child molestors dont just stop molesting.

I guess the super liberals support the idea of him continuing his child rape fest for another 10 or 20 years.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by HotDogNoBun]

reply to post by 27jd


I'm with you all the way.

As much as I think Skyfloating should change the topic heading to "Hollywood Elite Gone Crazy" I do agree with his basic thoughts on this topic. And hopefully Sky will be able to perform CPR on himself when after numerous pages of bickering with him in this thread he sees that I admit I agree with him.

Originally posted by Orion65
As much as I think Skyfloating should change the topic heading to "Hollywood Elite Gone Crazy"

French-officials, the Swiss Green Party, the Swiss Directors Association, etc. are hardly "The Hollywood Elite".

Originally posted by verylowfrequency
Yeah, they sure do. You know what they say - those that make the loudest noise usually have the most to hide.

Speaking of that, here's a quote from another thread where the death penalty for child rapists was being debated, from the poster that sent nasty U2U's to the OP of this thread...

Originally posted by DraconianKing
There is no punishment that has ever been affective in deterring criminals. Many people who rape and murder multiple times not only do it because they enjoy it but because they have to do it. It's like being addicted to heroin but ten times worse and with no hope of ever getting rid of that addiction. They can try and starve themselves but they are not in control and eventually their sickness will win.

Also as soon as you murder one of these people you become their equal and you lose your humanity. What you need to do is ask yourself why you are so eager to become one of these monsters? Do you not have any respect for yourself?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Using the term "starve themselves" when referring to a chomo trying to abstain from molesting? Like it's some kind of sustainance they need to live, disgusting. That little freudian slip says alot, IMO. As for his/her attempted point, there's a huge difference between slaying monsters, and becoming one.

Apparently there is a petition with 138 names on it from the Film industry.

Can someone find it?

reply to post by 27jd


Well unfortunately for that person's opinion, it is just that and opinion and not based in facts.

And for anyone to say that deterrence never works - does not know what they are talking about

This might be enlightening.

The Way "Not Rape-Rape" Rapists think.

My liberal brain does not typically like the following:
Rapists (children, adults, elderly)
Murderers (unless its in strictly self defense and as a last option)
Burglers (sliding scale here..someone shoplifting I have more tolerance for than lets say someone whom does home invasions)
Armed robberers

I am forgiving for anyone whom:
is in any of the above catagories and have gotten treatment/help and is no longer a threat...if someone did 10 years in the pokey but got no help for their issues, I would still be concerned...if someone got a slap on the hand probation but also got lots of therapy and made a effort to fix their issues, then I would be less concerned.

For me, its a thinking issue, not a society box label issue.

I dont know who this person is, but I did note how you used scary labels for him to sway a feeling...I know a child rapist would be a 40 year old grabbing a 5 year old...OR a 20 year old with a almost 16 years old...the label is very wide open and I am no longer phased by drama enforced titles (omg, hide the women and animals, a sex offenders in town...pfft)

Personally, I am more concerned about the drug dealer and the home invasion clients he creates living down the street than some old perv that got smacked some years back for oggling some lolita somewhere...and my children will end up in far more likely danger from that drug dealer than from the "man in the scary van".

Call it what you will, but I simply refuse to be a ignorant tool...too many rights are being pushed away from society in the name of villifying a specific group or two (and as usual, its a testbed for acceptability to push onto the next group of scarys...)

This is a general statement, again, this case in particular I have no knowledge about nor do I care to even investigate in on him. chances are I will be struck by lighting 5 times while being eaten by a shark holding a winning lotto number before I end up crossing paths with this chap, or asking him to babysit my family.

Originally posted by TravelerintheDark
The victim has asked for as much. She wants the issue dropped.

The question is whether or not it's any of the victims business at this point.

We have to ask ourselves why we have laws and penalties: to make victims feel better, or to compell the submission of individuals who run amok on our society before they hurt anyone else, and to make an example for the next person who gets the same idea.

Some say that kind of a penal system doesn't work. I say that I know better, because at one time in my life I planned and prepared certain actions and CERTAINLY would have carried them out, had I not suddenly been overcome by the sneaking suspicion that I would never be happy again if I were to get caught.

If you sell crack to a child, and the child says, "it's ok, I'm kinda starting to like crack" we still send you to jail.

If you set a brushfire but there are no victims before the fire is contained, in fact even if the only thing your fire burns down is a horrible eyesore that everyone is thrilled to be rid of, you're still going down for arson.

Personally I think that's a good system.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
How can you keep denying he was engaged in a pedophilic act,

Pedophilia

Pedophilia is a perversion in which the perpetrator PREFERS children. There's no indication that Polanski has this perversion. This was a one time deal as far as I know.

Polanski didnt just "have sex" with an underaged girl. He forced her to have it.

Then that's rape. And I believe he did rape her. It was not consensual. And since I have learned this fact, I'm back on the other side of the fence... :shk: Shame on me. :shk:

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by mikerussellus
but the fact that most conservatives would NOT support him makes this a partisan issue.

Exactly.

So, the fact that most liberals would not support a pedophile priest makes that a partisan issue?

The fact is, there are plenty of people (of all political persuasions and intensities) who support letting this drop. And there are just as many (from all political persuasions and intensities) who support stringing him up. That's why I believe that the association between liberalism and defense of Polanski is a logical fallacy.

Connecting Polanski supporters to liberal extremism is flawed in many ways, one of which is that the people who support him are not liberal extremists. Many lean right or left and many are more intense in their political ideology.

Here we are!

The Petition for Poor Polanski

Livejournal tracking signatories for this Special-Poor-Polanski

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Call it what you will, but I simply refuse to be a ignorant tool...too many rights are being pushed away from society in the name of villifying a specific group or two (and as usual, its a testbed for acceptability to push onto the next group of scarys...)

Yet, in the very same post you say....

Personally, I am more concerned about the drug dealer and the home invasion clients he creates living down the street than some old perv that got smacked some years back for oggling some lolita somewhere...and my children will end up in far more likely danger from that drug dealer than from the "man in the scary van".

Ironic, the war on drugs is one of the most manipulative and hypocritical tools being used by those who wish to push our rights away. It seems like you're trying to play on this site's general questioning of authority to somehow minimize the rape and molestation of children. I know FAR more people who were molested and emotionally scarred for life, than people who have had their homes invaded by drug dealers or users. Usually they invade the homes of other dealers, whom they know have money and valuable property.

List of Signatories

Polanski petition signatories, as of September 29th:

Fatih Akin
Stephane Allagnon
Woody Allen
Pedro Almodovar
Wes Anderson
Jean-Jacques Annaud
Alexandre Arcady
Fanny Ardant
Asia Argento
Darren Aronofsky
Olivier Assayas
Alexander Astruc
Gabriel Auer
Luc Barnier
Christophe Barratier
Xavier Beauvois
Liria Begeja
Gilles Behat
Jean-Jacques Beineix
Marco Bellochio
Monica Bellucci
Djamel Bennecib
Giuseppe Bertolucci
Patrick Bouchitey
Paul Boujenah
Jacques Bral
Patrick Braoudé
Andre Buytaers
Christian Carion
Henning Carlsen
Jean-Michel Carre
Patrice Chereau
Elie Chouraqui
Souleymane Cisse
Alain Corneau
Jerome Cornuau
Miguel Courtois
Dominique Crevecoeur
Alfonso Cuaron
Luc et Jean-Pierre Dardenne
Jonathan Demme
Alexandre Desplat
Rosalinde et Michel Deville
Georges Dybman
Jacques Fansten
Joël Farges
Gianluca Farinelli
Jacques Fansten
Etienne Faure
Michel Ferry
Scott Foundas
Stephen Frears
Thierry Fremaux
Sam Gabarski
René Gainville
Tony Gatlif
Costa Gavras
Jean-Marc Ghanassia
Terry Gilliam
Christian Gion
Marc Guidoni
Buck Henry
David Heyman
Laurent Heynemann
Robert Hossein
Jean-Loup Hubert
Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu
Gilles Jacob
Just Jaeckin
Alain Jessua
Pierre Jolivet
Kent Jones
Roger Kahane,
Nelly Kaplan
Wong Kar Waï
Ladislas Kijno
Harmony Korine
Jan Kounen
Diane Kurys
Emir Kusturica
John Landis
Claude Lanzmann
André Larquié
Vinciane Lecocq
Patrice Leconte
Claude Lelouch
Gérard Lenne
David Lynch
Michael Mann
François Margolin
Jean-Pierre Marois
Tonie Marshall
Mario Martone
Nicolas Mauvernay
Radu Mihaileanu
Claude Miller
Mario Monicelli
Jeanne Moreau
Sandra Nicolier
Michel Ocelot
Alexander Payne
Richard Pena
Michele Placido
Philippe Radault
Jean-Paul Rappeneau
Raphael Rebibo
Yasmina Reza
Jacques Richard
Laurence Roulet
Walter Salles
Jean-Paul Salomé
Marc Sandberg
Jerry Schatzberg
Julian Schnabel
Barbet Schroeder
Ettore Scola
Martin Scorcese
Charlotte Silvera
Abderrahmane Sissako
Paolo Sorrentino
Guillaume Stirn
Tilda Swinton
Jean-Charles Tacchella
Radovan Tadic
Danis Tanovic
Bertrand Tavernier
Cécile Telerman
Alain Terzian
Pascal Thomas
Giuseppe Tornatore
Serge Toubiana
Nadine Trintignant
Tom Tykwer
Alexandre Tylski
Betrand Van Effenterre
Wim Wenders

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Disclaimer: This is no criticism of liberalism as such but of its darker side

How the left-wing are treating the Polanski-case is a good example of the dark-side of liberalism, a good example of what happens when a soft heart becomes a soft brain.

..... several "liberal" activists such as Harrison Ford, Monica Belluci, Harvey Weinstein, various left-wing-organizations, are calling to "Free Polanski".

As is quite typical for left-wing-extremists, right/wrong are relativised and even reversed, ......

Im interested in hearing the viewpoints of both political sides on this...

[edit on 29-9-2009 by Skyfloating]

interested in hearing the viewpoints of both political sides on this...???

How is this an issue with "political" sides???

There are a dozen different ways this story could have been intelligently discussed and opinions offered...without the "Liberal" slam or the inane assumption this is somehow a "political issue" just awaiting the partisan wedge hammering as you are attempting here.

I was unaware that defending child molestation was a "Liberal" past-time.

That explains the ever "liberal" Catholic church scandals.
It also explains how under the current "right wing" Obama administration the USA would demand his arrest.

So dissapointed that a Mod, of all people, chose to spin this story this way...as a partisan wedge.

FYI when I read this OP I thought to myself..."Various Left Wing Organizations"???

...I thought well Huffington Post is the most left leaning news source I know of...If all the "Liberals" are screaming en masse for his release their must be an opinion piece there stating the same.......and sure enough right there on the front page of the site was a story about Polanski's arrest....

The arrest of Roman Polanski is a good idea, and should stand. It doesn't matter whether he is a genius.

BTW I consider myself Liberal and agree with the Huffpost on this one.

To the OP

Sky, it would seem they're throwing Polanski to the wolves at this time. Why is that? They've had earlier chances at extradition, it's been 32 years for pity's sake. Has he worn out his usefulness to someone or some group? The saddest part of this would seem to be not that Polanski got away with this for so long but that the girl, now woman, has moved on with her life and seems very reluctant to be put through this media blitz. So at first robbed of her childhood and now her adult privacy.

I had to laugh when I heard Woody Allen was speaking up for Polanski. Was this friend-to-friend, director to director, mid-life crisis to mid-life crisis or pervert to pervert admiration? As Yakov Smirnoff would say: "What a country!"