Forum
#Topics
+Start a topic
?Search __________________________________

-Log In
-Register
Shame on the Swiss
Log In to post a reply
Pages: 12 – [ Previous | 17 8 9 10 11 12 | Next ]

View: flat \ threaded
________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

JS
JS
489 posts

Re: More proof that JS is nothing but a troll

Cheeso wrote:
(A bunch of stupid stuff.)


Who is obsessed with whom, really?

For a couple pages, it seems you have given up on this thread, Only Dara and Hito were substantially carrying the discussion.

Then , a few minutes after I reply, BAM! there you are, as if you were there, waiting for me.

In fact, most of the interventions you made in this thread (your thread, btw) were about me.

I mostly never reply to your stuff nowadays, unlike you, who had to post nasty comments in my two latest threads.

It is clear that you are the obsessed one here, Cheeso. Pitiful indeed.


You accuse me of being a troll. Do yo remember, Cheeso the rule number one about troll management?

It goes like this:

"The troll craves for a reaction by others, positive or negative. Never feed a troll. Always ignore the troll."

Well, you don't ignore me. It can only mean one of three things.

Either:

1-I am not a troll.
Or
2-You are a moron who enjoy being trolled.
Or
3-You are yourself a troll who is trying to troll me by calling me a troll.


In any case, your best course of action from now on is simply to ignore me, but you and I know that you are too much obsessed about me to do this.

Jul 16, 2010, 06:40


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

wracket
wracket
1426 posts

Get a room

Cheeso, JS...I said it years ago and I'll say it again: will the two of you please just get a room, fuck each others' brains out and finally take this courtship to its natural conclusion? Because we're really sick of your elementary school, gum-in-the-hair flirting here.

Jul 16, 2010, 06:43


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Cheeso
Cheeso
642 posts

Re: Get a room

I'm done with JS. His trolling is there for everyone to see.

Jul 16, 2010, 06:45


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

JS
JS
489 posts

Re: More proof that JS is nothing but a troll

JS wrote:


In any case, your best course of action from now on is simply to ignore me...


Cheeso wrote:
I'm done with JS...


So, you're doing what I told you. I am glad you finally understood that your attitude on this forum was just plain wrong, but somewhat, I doubt you (or your alias Squirrel) can manage to stop being jerks for long.

But if you can really keep your word and ignore me forever, no one would be happier than me, because dealing with your bullshit was getting a little tiresome.

Jul 16, 2010, 07:13


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Cheeso
Cheeso
642 posts

Re: Get a room

He's like a dog chasing his own tail...

Jul 16, 2010, 13:36


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

motoroller
79 posts

Re: Shame on the Swiss

He'll also never be.....RON HOWARD!!!!

Jul 16, 2010, 14:01


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Squirrel M. Nutter
890 posts

Re: General question for those supporting Polanski...

Here is a great take on the situation:
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/this+sympathy+child+rapist/3285510/story.html
Here, just to set the scene, as it were, is how the 13-year-old girl whom Roman Polanski pleaded guilty to having illegal sex described the assault: Testifying before the Los Angeles Supreme Court in 1978, she said that Polanski, then 44 years old, gave her a sedative, Quaalude, along with champagne. He performed a number of sex acts on her, as she repeatedly told him "no" and that she wanted to go home. Unsure whether the child was taking a birth-control pill, Polanski sodomized her.

Because the girl did not want to testify at the rape trial of an internationally admired film director, Polanski was allowed to plead guilty to the least important charge against him, that of having sex with a minor.

The effect of that plea bargain has been to put the emphasis on the age of the girl rather than the assault, as though she had been amenable, just too young to be having sex.

This idea that the girl wasn't entirely unwilling might be what prompted Whoopi Goldberg to say "Whatever Polanski was guilty of, it wasn't rape-rape," as if real rape only happens in dark alleys. (This is nonsense, of course: According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, 38 per cent of rape victims are assaulted by a friend or acquaintance, 28 per cent by "an intimate" and seven per cent by a relative. Only one in four is committed by a stranger.)

Polanski also has long held the view that sex with a minor is of little consequence. In a Tatler magazine interview in 1979, he said there was so much interest in his case only because "everyone wants to f---young girls." By this year, he had gone in his mind from being an object of interest to becoming the chief and possibly only victim in the case. The case against him was a "lie," and U.S. authorities were seeking his extradition only to "serve me on a platter to the media of the world," he said from his Swiss chalet where he was confined after Switzerland arrested him at the request of the U.S.

Unfortunately for the cause of defending children from the sexual attentions of grown men, Polanski is not alone in thinking he is the victim. A distressing number of writers, film directors and actors lobbied for his release.

On Monday, when Switzerland set Polanski free, the unspeakably pretentious French writer Bernard-Henri Levy pronounced himself "mad with joy." Polanski's beautiful and much younger wife -she is 44, he, 76 -was relieved that the "undeserved suffering" of their children, ages 17 and 10, was over.

Stars such as Salman Rushdie and Martin Scorsese apparently gave no thought to the effect their support of a child rapist could have on what is still an uphill battle to criminalize child sexual abuse. But at least as artists they don't have a hand in public policy. Unhappily, some of Polanski's most fervent backers are highly placed elected officials. France's foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, to take one frankly scary example, said he was "delighted" by Switzerland's ruling.

Kouchner, co-founder of Medecins sans frontieres, was at various times in the running to be head of the World Health Organization and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. These organizations' missions include protecting children. How could a man who believes that the rape of a child is less important than the freedom of a film director have upheld his duty to keep children from harm?

The tragedy of sexual abuse, including sexual trafficking, of children throughout the world should, at this point, be known. Everyone might not know specifically that one in four South African girls will be raped before the age of 16, but the broad outlines of child sexual abuse are known. Less well known, perhaps, is that conviction rates for rape in general remain shockingly low: In Britain in 2006, the BBC reported, there were 85,000 reports of women raped and only 800 convictions.

Switzerland did not extradite Polanski because under its rules a person must face a minimum six-month sentence in the country requesting extradition. In Polanski's case, there is confusion about whether the Los Angeles judge promised the director his time undergoing psychiatric evaluation would constitute his entire sentence. There's nothing there to suggest that Polanski was not guilty of a crime, whatever his sentence. His wealthy, privileged cheerleaders might drop that particular illusion and give some thought to how their support for a child rapist has undermined the seriousness of child rape.

Jul 16, 2010, 18:47


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

JS
JS
489 posts

Re: General question for those supporting Polanski...

Squirrel M. Nutter wrote:
Here is a great take on the situation: (snip)


You say in the title "General question for those supporting Polanski..."


This is dishonest, and a flaw of logic. You stupidly assume that because some of us are not madly outraged that Polanski escaped justice, that we support him and therefore support rapists.

I think nobody here are "supporting" Polanski, rather, we just think that little good will come out from sending a harmless old man to jail. Yes, Polansky should have been to jail, but now, it's too late. An unlikely chain of circumstances made him escape justice for decades. Too bad.

Jul 17, 2010, 06:45


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

s_lush_s
s_lush_s
7383 posts

Re: Shame on the Swiss

no, not without the lisp. to say the least. the fact that he made movies for thirty years is infuriating (after incident)
NO! he is no Ron Howard. Not even funny at all. Ron Howard isn't a child raper.

Jul 17, 2010, 07:26


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

vivakomeda
746 posts

something about enough rope...

"An unlikely chain of circumstances made him escape justice for decades. Too bad."

Jul 17, 2010, 13:06

Pages: 12 – [ Previous | 17 8 9 10 11 12 | Next ]

add a reply to this topic
________________________________________________________________\______________________________________
stereolab table Index