What's new
Troll Kingdom

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Tell Me About....

The one aspecct of this that is totally defendable in Polanski's favor is the reckless abandonment of process by the judge and DA in the original case. A celebrity wasn't getting special treatment, a celebrity was being punished extra hard for being a celebrity, The judge was a vain asshole who wanted to be a bigger celebrity at the expense of Polanski's basic rights as a defendant who had been talked into pleading guilty in a plea bargain.

Some people can't separate that from what he did, which I understand. But I can also understand Hollywood types fighting this, since it sends a message that LA law enforcement can simply hunt them for sport and for exposure, rights be damned.
 
^^That's a whole new level of liberal bullshit I thought I'd never see.

The end of justice isn't at the egomaniac judge's doorstep. If you think you've gotten a bum deal, which btw he has no idea if he did or not because he didn't stick around long enough to find out, then take your MILLIONS and pay your big fat law team to take it to the supreme court. To say he THOUGHT he was going to get screwed by a nutso judge does not hold water. He's a chicken shit sack of Euro trash kiddie diddler and deserves to be ass raped twice a day every day until his anus falls out and he bleeds to death on a filthy jail cell floor.

People that don't deserve to get screwed by the lousy system get screwed every single day and have little or no resources to make the wrong right. If Polanski had gotten 10 years, he most certainly deserved it but on the WAY OFF chance he didn't deserve it he had/has plenty of resources to right his wrong. Fuckin' baby.

As far as Hollywood worrying they may actually be held accountable for their illegal and obnoxious behavior...Well, it'd be about time. Hollywood rarely pays for it's crimes, I'd like to see more bleary eyed starlets in orange CDC jumpsuits, might keep them from killing and injuring innocent people...Ala Brandie, Halle Barry, Vince Neil, Leaf Garrett, etc.
 
And that is the typical, emotional, knee-jerk, conservative bullshit reaction of someone who can't separate the crime from the process (as I mentioned above). Your leaders keep you angry, and want you to keep your pitchforks high against imaginary threats to our safe little society for any reason that can be scrounged up, all so healthcare stays a for-profit endeavor, poors and darkies die young, and cars continue to guzzle Arab gas.

You might as well have not even read my post.
 
Hollywood's run by Jews. Jews like to corrupt the host cultures they infect. Polanski exemplifies that corruption. Therefore, Polanski's thoroughly all right with Hollywood.
 
So is Charlie Manson a hero for executing his infected bride and firstborn?
 
Nah, he's a wackaloop.
 
Eggs Mayonnaise said:
And that is the typical, emotional, knee-jerk, conservative bullshit reaction of someone who can't separate the crime from the process (as I mentioned above). Your leaders keep you angry, and want you to keep your pitchforks high against imaginary threats to our safe little society for any reason that can be scrounged up, all so healthcare stays a for-profit endeavor, poors and darkies die young, and cars continue to guzzle Arab gas.

You might as well have not even read my post.
Click to expand...

I think I've MORE than put aside some highly conservative views I may have had in the past so instead of playing the same old tune like I'm the same person I was five years ago try something new...Like paying attention.

I AM separating the crime from the process. The crime was and IS heinous. Raping a child is absolutely despicable and disgusting and quite fucking frankly Polanski's sentence 30 years ago was a slap on the wrist, pedophiles deserve the death penalty as far as I'm concerned. Luckily, so it seems, Polanski didn't ruin that child's life but who knows how many children's lives he did ruin, the kiddie diddler's been running free for 30 fuckin' years. The man is a disgusting, vile, perverted excuse for a human being and it's probably a good thing he doesn't believe in hell because his soul is headed straight for the pit of it and he's going to be Satan's bitch.

Those making an excuse for his behavior are pieces of shit, it's disgusting. Because the crime was committed so long ago doesn't magically make it not a crime. Fine, Polanski's last trial was a circus? Retry him. Thirty years ago things were looser, Hollywood types weren't so exposed, things like this warranted a couple months in jails because it was all love, peace, and hair grease man. Child rape went hidden and unnoticed, un-prosecuted and misunderstood. Unfortunately, or fortunately, we're ALL TOO familiar with child rape now so let's do it, give the kiddie fucker another trial, let's see if he get's off with probation or even 10 years in jail. I'm all for it!

Fucking ridiculous apologists, absolutely pathetic. I've personally known several Holocaust survivors and they're wonderful, beautiful people that have gone on to live gorgeous productive and meaningful lives. Being a Holocaust survivor doesn't give you the right or excuse to be a disgusting piece of garbage, in fact it tarnishes what good and decent survivors fought for. You don't get to victimize because you were a victim. Roman Polanski is a sick mother fucker who needs more therapy than the 70's ever had to offer.

I'm sure Roman Polanski's parents fought for their lives so their adult son could make borderline crappy movies and fuck children. They'd be so proud.
 
Polanski was interviewed by the Tattler shortly after he fled to England. It was 1979, and the noted novelist Martin Amis conducted the interview, which was later re-published in one of his books. This is what Polanski said:

“If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the
press, you see? But… fucking, you see, and the young girls. Judges
want to fuck young girls. Juries want to fuck young girls. Everyone
wants to fuck young girls!”

http://groups.google.com/group/alt....ad/31a650f867401037/1744e3d91b5a5736?lnk=raot
Click to expand...

So by his reasoning, it's not like he killed someone, he just fucked a young girl. In the ass. After giving her quaaludes and champagne. After she repeatedly told him "no" and tried to leave. And since Polanski is obviously a mind-reader and knows that everyone wants to fuck young girls, it's ok, right?

Put aside the fact that he, himself, used the term young girls instead of young women, even IF everyone wanted to fuck young girls, that doesn't make it right. I'll tell you, there are days I want to ram my fucking car into the thoughtless morons who cut me off, and I guarantee you the majority of law-abiding motorists feel the same. Doesn't make it right.

Look, if the girl had been 17, MAYBE even 16, that's a different story. But she was THIRTEEN, barely a teenager, and he drugged and ANALLY RAPED HER. How the FUCK can anyone defend a worthless piece of shit that would do something like that???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top