Roman Polanski, or pardon me but your poll is in my neck.

j0rdan otm in this thread.

― deej, Sunday, September 27, 2009 9:03 PM (23 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

This whole case, this whole argument is so not at all as interesting as The Tenant. Great movie. Go see it.

Frédéric Mitterrand, the French culture minister, said the arrest was proof of the "frightening" side of America.

"In the same way as there is a generous America which we love, there is also a certain kind of America which is frightening, and it is this America which has now shown us its face," he said.

there is also a certain kind of America which is frightening

yeah, it's called north america

In a few months Interpol will bust Mitterand while feeding Camembert to a fifteen-year-old boy in a stable.

The age of consent for being fed cheese by an older man is fourteen in France, IIRC.

Memories.

There is no way Polanski will be extradited. The French don't want it, and they will twist whichever arms necessary.

The age of consent for being fed cheese by an older man is fourteen in France, IIRC

not true, although there is no age limit if you do it at home with your family during meals.

Sure was nice of Anne Applebaum, in that atrocious Washington Post op-ed, to mention the fact that her husband is, you know, the Foreign Minister of Poland. Who might have an interest in the case.

But it was a balanced piece - she even acknowledged that "He can be blamed, it is true, for his original, panicky decision to flee"

Yes, but please note the use of the passive voice.

lol

Shortly after the United States Presidential Election, 2008, opposition politician Ryszard Czarnecki charged Sikorski had repeated a joke suggesting President-elect Barack Obama's grandfather was a cannibal (who had eaten a Polish missionary. A spokesman for the Polish foreign office denied it, explaining Sikorski "was only giving an example of the unpalatable and racist 'jokes' that surround President Elect Obama".[7] His wife Anne Applebaum had declared her intent to vote for Obama.[8]

that joan z. shore essay is a humour piece right? a parody?

i am wondering that about all these articles tbh. people seem to have lost their minds.

that joan z. shore essay is a humour piece right? a parody?

― fountain bleaut (s1ocki), Monday, September 28, 2009 4:54 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

srsly.

"Swiss banking secrecy, after all, has not been a ploy to launder dirty money; it has been a time-honored tradition to respect the privacy of their customers."

not sure what the technical term is for this. "fake ratiocination"?

whatever, j0rdan, i think your argument is tunnel-visioned. on one side, we have frothing BY THE LAW loonies like you who make it into a vast bourgeois conspiracy, and on the other hand we have people crying about the holocaust and how wonderful his films are.

i am arguing that both sides are fucking idiots and are making too much of a fuss out of it. extradite him, make him invest LOTS of his money in efforts to prevent child abuse/protect abused children, and be done with it. putting dude in jail does nothing.

let's invent a new penal tariff... for some reason!

putting anyone in jail for anything "does nothing"! i think that's the point, the nothing of it.

I'm inclined to cut Polanski a tiny bit of slack, having seen the documentary on the case. He committed a crime. He pleaded guilty, as part of a plea bargain which had him serving 90 days in prison. He was freed, then apparently the judge changed his mind about the plea bargain and ordered him back to jail. It does seem there's a good chance the case might be dismissed on appeal, on account of judicial misconduct. Only he can't appeal without going back to the U.S., which in turn puts him in danger of a lengthy sentence, precisely on account of a plea that he submitted as part of a plea bargain that was never honoured. Whatever slant you want to put on this, you can hardly say it's simply justice taking its course.

is jordan or whoever really arguing that he should be in jail? mostly i think the non-joan z. shores are just arguing that he should be extradited like any other child rapist and then lets let, i dunno, a judge, or something, decide what to do

it's almost enough to put you off sex with 13 year olds, it really is.

yup um xp

I don't know about J0rdan – I'm simply arguing that I'm glad he was arrested. What happens next is for the courts to decide.

i think your argument is tunnel-visioned. on one side, we have frothing BY THE LAW loonies like you who make it into a vast bourgeois conspiracy

wtf does this even mean

what are the benefits of bumming a younger girl?

presumably he'd have a new charge to deal with for running, right? i understand that also is a no-no

presumably he'd have a new charge to deal with for running, right? i understand that also is a no-no

― goole, Monday, September 28, 2009 5:10 PM (17 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

he directed 'rosemary's baby' though.

wtf do you even mean, alfred. it's pretty simple to follow: j0rdan sounds like a right-wing wingnut, but instead he's frothin at the mouth about Polanski and nt Obamacare.

hahahahaha

u are somethin else dude

keep on keepin on

Because it's right wing to hope that the law catches a fugitive.

table is the table, the more i read your post the less sense it makes

make him invest LOTS of his money in efforts to prevent child abuse/protect abused children

what's the logic here? since he has the money, presumably, to make a better show of Doing Something for further prevention, he ought to be let off? what about a poor child rapist who bailed, does prison still Do Nothing for him, or for us? who, or what authority, bears the responsibility for footing the bill for Doing Something about abused kids, rich abusers who get caught? i don't get how draining his bank account in favor of (presumably) a child's charity, a drop in the bucket, is any more or less symbolic than throwing RP in the clink. what you are suggesting is tabloid justice as much as anything the STRING HIM UP crowd is calling for...

it is if he's an artist, i think. xp

sure, goole, but it also doesn't require the already-strained prison-industrial complex from catering to the needs of another dumbfuck child rapist.

you are a treat.

the system is bankrupt and corrupt, its punishments arbitrary, might as well let him go, it would be political capitulation not to...

i guess i really don't have a comeback for that.

i think it's a vast conspiracy by the prison-industrial complex to cater to yet another rapist. they are insatiable

whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat

i thought i had a bead on this conversation but

i am the samantha geimer to tables roman polanski right now

i'm not #1 fan of the prison-industrial complex or the long arm of the law either (they are as much a part of the "vast bourgeois conspiracy" as the idea that this one rich famous guy should be left alone because he managed to stay away for 30 years) but can't find a compelling reason why this particular one should be allowed to escape it. he's probably not going to be locked up anyway.

So is it true said girl from back then doesn't want to see the case being re-opened? Heard this on the radio today.

Yes it's true.

Some people are against capital punishment because they say that it turns the state into a murderer. I'm against imprisonment because it turns the state into a gay dungeon-master.

true. in alll honesty, i've just been trying to point out the lunacy by acting like a lunatic.

in the end, here's what i think: he's a fucking celebrity director, let the law take care of it, worry about yourself. what'll happen will.

(and i bid adieu).

So is it true said girl from back then doesn't want to see the case being re-opened? Heard this on the radio today.

― young depardieu looming out of void in hour of profound triumph (Le Bateau Ivre), Monday, September 28, 2009 5:33 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

also did you know he directed 'cul de sac'. not one of his best, but just saying.

let the law take care of it

so you're in favor of extradition now?

table you sure are spending a lot of words to communicate that you have nothing to say about this matter

i don't think the guy should go to jail necessarily. i just think the case should be resolved, which clearly it isn't because he illegally fled the country and pointedly avoided capture for over 20 years. i'm arguing against the idea that the length of time means that it's not worth pursuing or that any iota of pity should be felt for this man because of the holocaust or because he was forced to live in france (the horror!) and switzerland (*clutches heart*) or anything like that.