It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Whoopi Goldberg: Polanski Child Rape Wasn't Rape, Rape

page: 1
21
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 12:42 PM
link   


Blown away by this.

WTF????

Is she for real?

ETA:

Guess it was a pattern:






edit on 13-10-2017 by loam because: (no reason given)



+2 more 
posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

People like her is the reason why I absolutely hate Hollyweird.

Maybe the fall of Weinstein is the beginning of the fall of Hollyweird.



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

Yup, it was child molesting.
But she wanted it.....ugh



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:00 PM
link   
They all know, condone, accept, the abuse of others. It's treated as a joke. They are filthy disgusting pigs, nothing more than predators.



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Personally I see paedophile sympathisers as no better than who they defend...

Both kinds of people deserve a bullet.



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

A bullet I would happily supply



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:06 PM
link   
The American Left ladies and gents!



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

This was 1977. It's painfully obvious, to me, that Whoopi was grappling with her own exploitation, at a young age, that women from that era were taught was not "rape".

1977 was a different culture than now, and even Whoopi Goldberg will tell you that her views have evolved. Just this week, she placed the blame of Harvey Weinstein's behavior, partially, on the women who went along with it, and then looked the other way when other women had to go through the same humiliation.


Now, women are more, and more, able to speak out about these kinds of things, that were rampant and untouchable just a decade ago. Just ask Corey Feldman
and Jimmy Savile.

edit on 13-10-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Her comments were in 2009.



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:18 PM
link   
This is from 2009. Slow news day or something?

Whoopi has been spewing poop from her mouth for years, and continues to do so. How revelatory.



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:23 PM
link   
I can see the point she's making. He wasn't convicted of rape. Semantics. Hell this board lives off of semantics. People in this thread split hairs that way. I didn't hear her say it was OK though.



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid


originally posted by: intrepid
I can see the point she's making. He wasn't convicted of rape. Semantics. Hell this board lives off of semantics. People in this thread split hairs that way. I didn't hear her say it was OK though.


Polanski pleaded guilty to "unlawful sexual intercourse" with a minor.

Who exactly is splitting hairs???

wow
edit on 13-10-2017 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

so its only rape when convicted?

ok
edit on 13-10-2017 by Jiggly because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: loam


Oh. I thought, the View was on in 1977! My mistake.

But, I stand by my opinion that Whoopi was painfully trying to justify that her own exploitation wasn't rape. That was the culture in those days.

Sincere questions:
When were Statutory Rape laws first enacted. Wouldn't they have to have been enacted AFTER age of consent laws were enacted? Wouldn't those laws differ from state to state?


edit on 13-10-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: loam

People like her is the reason why I absolutely hate Hollyweird.

Maybe the fall of Weinstein is the beginning of the fall of Hollyweird.



I doubt it. I am convinced that Weinstein just pissed off somebody much more powerful than himself. Maybe he diddled the wrong person's daughter or niece. Maybe he crossed some line within the context of the elites' culture.

But, you can be sure that he's not being castigated because he did wrong to those women, he's being castigated because he crossed somebody and he's being made an example of.



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

He was, he took off before sentencing... Drugging a young girl is rape...



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:36 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: intrepid


originally posted by: intrepid
I can see the point she's making. He wasn't convicted of rape. Semantics. Hell this board lives off of semantics. People in this thread split hairs that way. I didn't hear her say it was OK though.


Polanski pleaded guilty to "unlawful sexual intercourse" with a minor.

Who exactly is splitting hairs???

wow


Well you just did. That isn't rape. Get the point? I doubt it.



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: incoserv

And possibly a sacrificial pawn for a greater agenda.



posted on Oct, 13 2017 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

Barf.

No material difference.

From the article:



Polanski pleaded guilty to "unlawful sexual intercourse" with a minor. What's the difference between that and statutory rape?

They're synonymous. Only a few states—Georgia, Missouri, and North Carolina—actually use the term "statutory rape" in their penal codes. Other legal euphemisms for having sex with someone who's underage include "Rape in the Third Degree" (New York), "Felonious Sexual Assault" (New Hampshire), and "Carnal Knowledge of a Child" (Virginia).

edit on 13-10-2017 by loam because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
21
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join