Bingo! Found the connection! Phew!

marybel on February 22, 2009 at 8:39 PM

Here’s the connection, you can justify anything if you are enthralled with the person or the position of the leader.
Let me give you five examples:
Multitude of NBA players (Kobe being one)
Cardinals (as mentioned above)
Joseph Smith (two child brides)
Polanski
And the guy who “honor” killed his two daughters (Muslim’s extremists)
All of them supported by their “followers”, and all defended, sometimes to their death.
Get the connection now? Justification includes rapists and murderers. And hardly a peep.
Why, there are even people who think Polanski is an isolated case, and can’t make a connection between him and other “cult” followers…imagine.

When there’s an attempt to say that molesting priests are OK, you’ll have a cogent point. Otherwise, I don’t see a correlation, other than a cheap attempt at moral equivalence.

ddrintn on February 22, 2009 at 10:11 PM

There was an “OK”. Cardinal Mahoney never (until he was caught) punished the rapists, he just moved them around the country from one area to the next. The Cardinal in Boston did the same…they protected the priests, and fought the victims.

Where’s all the vitriol for the sanctified pedophile Catholic priesthood?

Ares on February 22, 2009 at 3:11 PM

When there’s an attempt to say that molesting priests are OK, you’ll have a cogent point. Otherwise, I don’t see a correlation, other than a cheap attempt at moral equivalence.

Certainly glad to know you’re not trying to take us all off topic… Let’s see…

Polanski = Catholic priest. Nope. I. know not so.

Polanski = Hollyweird High Priest of drug cocktailing a 13 year old and anally sexually molesting her.

Bingo! Found the connection! Phew!

Thanks for providing the NAMBLA perspective, douche.

Cute ad hominem.

Thank you for sharing.

Every once in a while, you see a full show or at least a short in some larger TV show of Hollywood trying to dispute the Fatty Arbuckle murder. Image!

hawkdriver on February 22, 2009 at 4:03 AM

Arbuckle was never convicted of murder. Both the original jury and the retrial jury hung.

Polanski, on the other hand…

RickZ on February 22, 2009 at 5:44 AM

I know. I guess it just amazes me that they feel compelled even after all this time to try to whitewash the image of it all.

Every once in a while, you see a full show or at least a short in some larger TV show of Hollywood trying to dispute the Fatty Arbuckle murder. Image!

hawkdriver on February 22, 2009 at 4:03 AM

FWIW, after two mistrials, Arbuckle was acquitted in a third trial of murder charges.

[Hollyweird] can have him. After he serves every second of every minute of every hour, of every day of his sentence.

Exactly. Victor Salva, the director of the bizarre Touchstone Pictures teen fantasy Powder, filmed himself in a sex act with a minor cast in his first motion picture (The Clownhouse). He did his time years before it was revealed after the release of Powder that he was a registered sex offender.

Francis Ford Coppola likes Salva a lot — he produced Clownhouse and Salva’s two Jeepers Creepers movies after Salva’s victim urged a boycott of Powder, making him radioactive to Touchstone’s parent company, Walt Disney Pictures.

According to Wikipedia, Jeepers Creepers 3 is expected to be released later this year … on DVD.

I hear OJ needs a roommate.

Polanski, artistic genius notwithstanding, was most likely always a child molester, Baldi.

Stamn draight. It seems to be accepted fact that Nastassja Kinski, the star of the first film he directed after fleeing America (1979′s Tess), had a sexual relationship with Polanski beginning at the age of fifteen.

Who leaves their 13-year old daughter alone with a adult, male, complete stranger for 12-24 hours?

Tanya on February 21, 2009 at 1:33 PM

Twice. And knowing that it was a nude photo shoot.

Blake on February 21, 2009 at 2:00 PM

Still happens. Thora Birch was only 16 when she did a nude scene for American Beauty. Parental permission was required. Someone is going to have to explain to me why that isn’t child pornography.

Polanski belonged to Hollywood

And they can have him. After he serves every second of every minute of every hour, of every day of his sentence.

Even if the mother was essentially “pimping her daughter,” how does that absolve Polanski, who has free will and acts perversely in his own prurient interest? He’s a deviant.

I don’t care if the THIRTEEN year old GIRL herself was twirling around on a desk “asking for it.” She was still a MINOR. Come on people, this is a teenager, no matter how alluring, a virtual girl inside an alluring body, that this PERVERT drugged and raped anally. This act was a complete volitional perverse choice by no one but Polanski. He forced himself on this young woman that he’d, unbeknownst to her, drugged. It was an abomination, and it was Polanski’s evil act, period.

In no way imaginable does this compare with you, unclesmrgol, missing the signs of your son’s drug abuse. Screwing up here, when your son took pains to deceive you (classic with drug abusers) does not make you a bad parent. You are probably just a parent who wasn’t informed,snoopy, or suspicious enough. You are not in the same league with Polanski – he’s a guilty slime, you’re just normally gullible parents with a kid who was abusing drugs…and they’re always deceptive. Ask anyone in AA or NA, they’ll tell you what I say is absolutely true.