I really do not believe this to be a liberal issue. I'm ever so slightly to the right of Lenin these days, but I believe Polanski needs to come home and do his 6 hours in prison (and after 6 hours, if he hasn't been raped to death by the other inmates, he should be set free [in an Afghani mine field, where he will be lit on fire and used by the taliban for heat-seeking missile practice] and all of the other inmates should be executed for their failure).

I think this is an issue with our celebrity culture. We don't hold them to the reasonable standards of everyday people- only to the unreasonable standards of TMZ- and thus they've tuned out all judgement of themselves and lost all touch with that little voice that helps normal people identify and check their animal impulses against our personal and collective concept of what it is to be a civilized human being. In short, they've gotten too far away from the cattle prod and it's turned them back into wild beasts.

And in case there's any doubt in anyone's mind, when wild beasts encroach on our civilization and threaten our children, we capture and destroy them.

Originally posted by Orion65
If he were just a "regular guy" who was 44 having a history of sex with a 13 year old they'd roast him over an open flame and crucify him in the press.

Look around the various discussion Forums which offer anonymity and you`ll always find a crowd of people apologizing pedophilia as "free sexuality", even when no celebs are involved.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by The Vagabond
I really do not believe this to be a liberal issue.

Then it must be a coincidence that those behind the various free-polanski campaigns are very well-known left-leaning-activists...

[edit on 29-9-2009 by Skyfloating]

To Imply anything more than that would be assumptious in the extreme. What is important to the few in not necessarily important to the many.

Look around the various discussion Forums which offer anonymity and you`ll always find a crowd of people apologizing pedophilia as "free sexuality", even when no celebs are involved.

The funny thing about anonymity is that you can't pin political affiliation on someone without looking foolish.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by An0nym0use]

Originally posted by An0nym0use
To Imply anything more than that would be assumptious in the extreme. What is important to the few in not necessarily important to the many.

Its actually quiet obvious that pedo-apology is an extreme-form of liberalism.

I dont mind liberalism and moderate-leftism myself, but Im surprised that so many deny any connection of this campaign to liberalism.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by Orion65
If he were just a "regular guy" who was 44 having a history of sex with a 13 year old they'd roast him over an open flame and crucify him in the press.

Look around the various discussion Forums which offer anonymity and you`ll always find a crowd of people apologizing pedophilia as "free sexuality", even when no celebs are involved.

WTH kind of forums are you visiting?? Whatever they are, I'll pass on going there.

I'm talking about average people and what they think, not creepy people on an anonymous board. Wait, what am I doing here? Just kidding, you know what I mean. Everyone I know without exception from both sides of the political fence thinks Polanski needs to go to jail.

Originally posted by grover
In case you haven't noticed the victim is on record asking for the whole thing to be dropped

I know thats what the victim said ($$$$$$).

So you agree it should be dropped?

Free the man. i think its time to realize that maybe something that happened a while ago should be dropped?

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by An0nym0use
To Imply anything more than that would be assumptious in the extreme. What is important to the few in not necessarily important to the many.

Its actually quiet obvious that pedo-apology is an extreme-form of liberalism.

I dont mind liberalism and moderate-leftism myself, but Im surprised that so many deny any connection of this campaign to liberalism.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by Skyfloating]

If I may use a term coined by my contemporaries: Lolwat?

Yes, it is true that a few well known liberals are making a push to free Polanski, but it does not follow that it is a liberal issue in nature. One could make that association, but it's not logical. It'd be the equivalent of watching an add commercial for the advocation of car safety where the all the actors were Republican and then saying, "Car Safety is a Republican Issue!". It's a logical fallacy.

As far as I know, there's no fundamental tenement of Liberalism that wants you to touch little boys.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by An0nym0use]

You must remember that there is a State factor and a Civil factor to this case. If there is sufficient evidence that Polanski is guilty of the crime and it can be proven beyond reasonable doubt that he did do this, then he will be found guilty and placed in jail.

As for the Civil case against him, the only known victim has stated that she does not intend to pursue any charges against him. You might think this is outrageous but on the Civil side of things, it is up to the victim whether they want to take matters further.

For example: If I were to get into a fight with somebody outside a bar and it resulted in me punching him in the face and breaking his jaw, I could be in serious trouble. Evidence would need to be presented and proven beyond reasonable doubt that I did in fact hit and break his jaw. Let's assume it is decided that I receive a $500 fine from the police but no conviction. Police will then interview the victim and ask whether they wish to pursue an assault conviction. Unless the victim agrees to pursue an assault conviction against me, I cannot be convicted for physical assault.

While there may be public outrage that I was not convicted and there might be fear that I will do the same thing to another person, it is still the victim's decision.

P.S.: I am not a Liberal, but I can see the difference between a state crime and a civil crime.

[edit on 29/9/2009 by Dark Ghost]

Originally posted by gandhi
Free the man. i think its time to realize that maybe something that happened a while ago should be dropped?

So if a pedophile can evade arrest for an extended period of time - you think we should not prosecute them when we are finally able to make the arrest...

And any pedophile who hasn't been caught, should be let go if they can stay on the lam for several years...

That is what you are saying, correct?

I really doubt there's any conspiracy here. Especially over some mvie about a fucticoius Blair. It's not like anybody ever sees these "hard-hitting" movies anyway. I think 8 people saw that "W" movie. Nobody saw that movie with the mock Bush assasination. Nobody cares about Moore anymore not that many average people ever did. These movies are just choir preaching that mean nothing to vast majority of people.

Besides, there have been several attempts to catch him in a country that would extradite over the years. A couple in Germany and some in the UK. He just never showed up when he was supposed to. Maybe he showed up this time be ause he's sick of running?

I want to know why a guy who drugged and raped a child was permitted to plea down to statutory rape and serve a month in the first place.

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by gandhi
Free the man. i think its time to realize that maybe something that happened a while ago should be dropped?

So if a pedophile can evade arrest for an extended period of time - you think we should not prosecute them when we are finally able to make the arrest...

And any pedophile who hasn't been caught, should be let go if they can stay on the lam for several years...

That is what you are saying, correct?

I believe there is a statue of limitations on crimes, actually. Murder, robbery, rape, etc. That being said, innocent before proven guilty.