"Free Polanski" = Liberals gone crazy

Wow, the story continues....

Woody Allen, Pedro Almodovar and Martin Scorsese have "demanded the immediate release" of fellow filmmaker Roman Polanski, who was arrested in Switzerland on a U.S. arrest warrant related to a 1977 child sex charge.
www.cnn.com...

Are they serious? Who the hell do they think they are?! What position are they in to demand his release?

reply to post by 27jd


I will have you know my friend, I have a photographic memory and am able to remember everything that I have ever read, seen, said or done from the moment of birth to today!

My memory in fact is so photographic the Rolling Stone Magazine that the article was in looked like this!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9241fb359711.jpg[/atsimg]

I know it's truly a rare gift, don't try this at home boys and girls.

I splerged the 20.00 to order another copy from a collector. It was a great article and Polanski's had a fascinating life from surviving the Holocuast in Poland as a small boy during World War II, to having his pregnant wife murdered by Charlie Manson's family to writing and directing a slew of critically acclaimed movies.

Most of the details about the case have long been forgotten and if you really have any interest in the real story Rolling Stone writes some of the most indepth, hard hitting, investigative journalism type stories you are ever going to find.

The company I ordered the magazine from (A collector) said it would be sent in 7 to 10 days, I will try to scan the article when I get it and post it.

You know for the skeptics who don't trust in my photographic memory!

reply to post by Hemisphere


The guy's lawyers took another stab at getting him off.

Which put his case right back in front of someone's eyes. His own actions put his case file right back up on top of the pile.

The egomaniac did it to himself.

Don't poke the wolf, and if you do and get bit.......

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


I never said i didn't believe the rolling stone article existed, i just doubt it paints the victim as a hippy whore who lied about her age. You never answered why he had to lie to her mother, but i'd hate to have you waste all that grandstanding.

I am interested to read what the article says though, and since there's no need for both of us to shell out 20 bucks, i'll wait for you to scan it.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by 27jd]

I'm disgusted at the people that could or would stand up and protest the arrest of a damn child molester.

Yes. He is a child molester.

31 years too late, as the COWARD who dared to do such a thing to a child fled the country like a chicken and evaded police for over 3 decades.

But the worse are the people up in arms over his arrest. They are just as bad as Polanski is. How dare people rationalize a grown man doing such a thing with a child, and then rush to his defense.

These are the same kinds of people that would advocate lowering the age of consent as far as possible. It's a sick world we live in when sick people as such are supported, given voice.

Originally posted by 27jd
He was already prosecuted. Doesn't matter AT ALL what civil settlements were made AFTER HE FLED CRIMINAL SENTENCING!!! That settlement was made because she was going to SUE him. She got her cash, and now she wants it dropped? Doesn't work that way. He plead guilty and was convicted, and i hope they throw the book at his old, disgusting @ss.

Does it matter at all to you or anyone else of your kind that the victim has clearly stated that as an adult, wife and mom - she does not feel like reliving this again.

Does it not matter at all the she likens it to being raped all over again but this time her kids have to watch as well?

I am so glad there are people like you out there to decide what is best for the victim, even if it does twice the damage the crime did.

Originally posted by Skyfloating


Yes. Organized Pedophilia carried out by high-ranking people, apparently.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by Skyfloating]

It was BOY scouts being brought into the white house to sexually service ranking REPUBLICANS in the Reagan administration.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by jimmyx
a grown man over the age of 18, had sex with a 13 year old.

Not only that, but the girl felt afraid, intimidated and asked him "not to".

Thats called child-rape (according to one poster Im not allowed to say "pedophile" anymore).

LOL, you can say pedophile all you like. It is just grossly inaccurate. Have you grabbed a dictionary yet? If I murder one person, can you call me a spree killer? Mass murder? No. Pedophilia is actually quite specific and if you really want to continue to sound ignorant, go for it but the crime was bad enough on its own. You seem to really like the idea of diminishing what pedophilia actually is by claiming it is the same has sex with and underage person. Please get a dictionary and some law books.

The man did a horrible thing and I would have been more than happy to see him go to prison at sentencing. It did not go that way, life is not perfect. I am not defending him but I am sticking up for victims of pedophilia while you insist the crimes against them just be lumped together with what you see Chris Hanson talk about. Hint - there is no pedophilia on "To Catch a Predator" either. Sorry if I just expect people to use English words as they are defined, especially when talking about such tender subjects. Then again, what am I thinking about. I should really let you men decide what my words mean and what is best for a female rape victim.

reply to post by Lillydale


She doesn't have to take any part in it. Let's not forget that she long ago waived her right to annonymity.

But she doesn't have the right from stopping our society from dealing with conduct that we have collectively determined to be dangerous and therefore deserving of legal consequences.

Originally posted by 27jd
i just doubt it paints the victim as a hippy whore who lied about her age

On 2nd thought, i take that back. I really don't doubt it. The rolling stone is pretty strongly connected to the entertainment industry, no? I don't think they would set out to do a hard hitting piece on the crimes of one of their own, won't get too many celeb interviews that way i imagine. Either way, one would wonder, if this rolling stone article provided proof that she was lying about her age, and about the rape itself, why would he have fled? And why did he have to lie to get her mothers permission to do the shoot, if he believed she was 19? He should have had nothing to worry about, since you're basing your views on this case off that mainstream article while scoffing those of us who have read other mainstream articles, i would imagine it contained some pretty concrete evidence proving his innocence.

Also, i'm not sure why you keep bringing up the murder of his wife and unborn child, almost like it's some kind of pass to go rape somebody else's child. I don't care what reasons people have for raping children, i don't care at all. I have no compassion for them once they've harmed a child. 1 strike you're out if it were up to me, and i'm not talking about a 20 year old dating a consentual 16 year old. That kind of thing should be up to the girls parents until she's 18. But he was 40 and this 13 year old girl said no, until you provide evidence otherwise, that's what she swore under oath, and i have no reason not to believe her based on his pleading guilty of the crime.

edit to break up that super long paragragh

[edit on 30-9-2009 by 27jd]

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Because this kind of thing tends to be a weakness of the left. There are weaknesses of the right, but why do weaknesses of the right, but they are not part of this discussion.

I have about 7+ threads where I lament the left/right divide and polarization. But this, for a change, is not artificial polarization, its a REAL reality-impairment induced by leftist-relativist doctrine.

This is the the most ignorant and uninformed thing I have read on ATS in a long time.

Right on this page you have mention of the Franklin coverup. That was GROUPS of BOYS being used as sex toys for REPUBLICANS. Where were you when every other weak some righty was getting busted, Craig trolling bathrooms for men, Foley cybering 15 year old BOYs, Ted Haggard and his male prostitute meth dealer. How about Jeff Gannon?

I cannot help but think you actually think this is true. Mormons - raise girls to be married by 13 and are very RIGHT of center. I really was hoping this could be about rape, justice, crime but you insist that it is a left/right thing because the left has a weakness for this? Read this damn thread and not just the posts that you like or agree with. You have no stats to back up this claim so put it away.

You are just trying to push an anti liberal agenda and using the rape of a young girl to do it. A righty using a woman who is a victim of a man to get what they want...sounds about par for the course; especially if you have a 15 year old boy waiting for you at home. Have fun.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
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.

Look at that huge list Aeons posted. All of the supporters are known leftists. Some of my favourite actors and directors are in that list, but they are still leftists.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
to let nonsense like this distract one from the more pressing issues of the day is well…stupid.

There is no more pressing issue than the brains of the populace getting manipulated to think the villain is the hero.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by blupblup
I have to say.... the backing of this guy is all a little weird.

We all know politicians and "famous people" in general can do as they please and are above the law... but for so many to defend him is crazy...

I dunno man.

And guess what...not only celebs are backing him but even people right here...

Originally posted by 27jd
Wow, the story continues....

Woody Allen, Pedro Almodovar and Martin Scorsese have "demanded the immediate release" of fellow filmmaker Roman Polanski, who was arrested in Switzerland on a U.S. arrest warrant related to a 1977 child sex charge.
www.cnn.com...

Are they serious? Who the hell do they think they are?! What position are they in to demand his release?

Im glad this is coming up because it points out a derangement / reality impairment in parts of society.

How dare we arrest a criminal

[edit on 30-9-2009 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by Lillydale
It was BOY scouts being brought into the white house to sexually service ranking REPUBLICANS in the Reagan administration.

You keep emphasising Republican as if I were one or would be defensive on behalf of Republicans. As difficult as it is to comprehend for black/white-thinking minds, Im not.



[edit on 30-9-2009 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by Lillydale
It was BOY scouts being brought into the white house to sexually service ranking REPUBLICANS in the Reagan administration.

You keep emphasising Republican as if I were one or would be defensive on behalf of Republicans. As difficult as it is to comprehend for black/white-thining minds, Im not, and will not defend them.

Are you reading this thread at all? The one subtitled "Liberals gone crazy?" I am responding to the thread and other posters as much as you. Take what is relevant and toss what is not to the others. The subject of the thread is not just Polanski and his crime. The subject of the thread is how LIBERALS in particular support him.

Even before Weinstein enlisted the left wing in his fight to free the famed director of "Chinatown," "Rosemary's Baby" and "The Pianist," celebrities were picking up the drumbeat.

1

Originally posted by The Vagabond
reply to post by Lillydale

 

She doesn't have to take any part in it. Let's not forget that she long ago waived her right to annonymity.

But she doesn't have the right from stopping our society from dealing with conduct that we have collectively determined to be dangerous and therefore deserving of legal consequences.

Huh?????

Did you not read? She does not want her children to have to hear all about this. She does not want to have to be reminded of all of this. Do you think she is supposed to go live in a cave because you have some mislead sense justice?

He is not a threat to anyone anymore. He was certainly not a threat to her anymore. It has been 30 years and at this point, the only person who is going to suffer is going to be the victim and her family.

I guess you seem to think that you and I are having a private conversation that she can avoid by not coming between us. I have news for you. She has already been being dogged by journalists and her children will not only get to hear how mommy was raped as a kid but EXACTLY how mommy was raped as a kid.

What is the point? If making her suffer more than him is the end result, what exactly is the point?

Do you think this will encourage other people to commit rape and then flee the country 30 years ago?

Originally posted by Lillydale
Are you reading this thread at all? The one subtitled "Liberals gone crazy?" I am responding to the thread and other posters as much as you.

The emphasizing of REPUBLICAN was in response to one of my posts above.

Take what is relevant and toss what is not to the others. The subject of the thread is not just Polanski and his crime. The subject of the thread is how LIBERALS in particular support him.

Precisely. Liberalism-gone-too-far / Left-extremes. Not liberals per se.

Funny how a dozen posters are misrepresenting that.