It’s Piracy All The Way

I am not one to begrudge paying a fiver for a good DVD, or even the extortionate price of a cinema ticket for the right feature. I like films, some of them quirky, some of them even Roman Polanski’s (Chinatown is one I could recommend). However with so much of Hollywood’s out-of-touch elite objecting to a child rapist serving his sentence, I cannot now decide who to boycott, and will have to simply watch illegal copies.

That list consists of people who favour the release of a man who has served not one day of his sentence (the 42 days he was incarcerated were for pre-sentence psychological evaluation). As far as I have read the sentence was never even pronounced.

The sentence, remember, relates to the admitted statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl. The remaining allegations were never tested in court because Polanski threatened to use his fame to intimidate the girl and her mother. In fact the decision to accept the plea to avoid a court appearance was the mother’s, and she was not blameless in pushing her daughter into the dangerous situation, and could expect to be ripped to shreds by the press.

However those remaining allegations, made under oath to a grand jury, indicate that Polanski got a 13-year-old girl drunk, drugged her and then raped her vaginally and anally. He raped her anally because she was not on the pill, so he did not want to ejaculate in her vagina. While untested, there is no reason to believe those allegations are false.

OK so Woody Allen has been crawling up his own backside since Sleeper, and I never saw the point of much of David Lynch’s weirdness (I am not against weird per se, some of my favourites are very odd; it is Lynch I cannot grasp). However it is a racing certainty now that any film one could buy will benefit someone on that list.

Therefore I will from now on be embracing and encouraging film piracy at every opportunity. I still want to watch interesting films, but I don’t want that to benefit apologists for a child rapist.

Silencing Ben

It appears that there is an attempt to shut down the only voice of a serving convict in the blogosphere, Ben’s Prison Blog, about which I disagreed with A Tory. If you agree with me, or if you have not read it yet, please do visit the site to learn more about this potentially illegal effort to silence an intelligent, articulate voice.

Corruption in Left-Wing Pseudo Charity (updated 11:30 16/9)

There has been an undercurrent of grumbling about pseudo charities (non-profit organisations which are largely funded by government and use a significant proportion of those funds for political lobbying and campaigning) in the right-wing and especially in the libertarian blogosphere. Mostly the complaints are about political influence and the waste of tax-payers’ money.

In America they appear to have a problem that is at least a couple of orders of magnitude beyond that. ACORN (Association of Community Organisations for Reform Now) has been shown to have been willing to assist importation of children for the purpose of sexual slavery, for profit with the aim of political campaigning. Assistance went as far as advising how to buy a brothel and to cheat the taxes on the money earned, by claiming the child prostitutes as dependents. ACORN then requested a donation.

Really. I am not kidding. Tax evasion. Mortgage fraud. Children. Slavery. Sex. Selling actual children for sexual gratification. Then claiming tax benefits because they are children. Then using the money for a political campaign.

This happened in three different states. It could possibly be worse if they start advising on how to hide the bodies once they are too old to work, but I am not sure how else it could be. Yet there are rumours that the people exposing this have something devastating to release today. WTF?

To paraphrase the article linked above, once is a bad apple, twice is an unfortunate coincidence, thrice is systematic corruption resulting from policy.

There are two things that really strike me about the response to this.

Seven senators, six Democrat and one independent, voted to carry on funding ACORN.

This has not been a huge international news story; even in the US it has been remarkably quiet. Below is what the BBC considers to be world news and Americas news at 14:00 today (click to enlarge World News).

ACORN is an organisation that has strong connections with Barack Obama which looked like having significant political influence with the Democrats in power. They were at one-time a client of Obama’s. They helped elect him, in many cases breaking electoral law, in other alleged cases breaking employment law. He had arranged for them to work on the national census (risking a constitutional challenge, which should be a big deal to a former constitutional law professor). He had arranged for them to be in the stream for government funding that was potentially to total several billion dollars.

Is Patrick Swayze’s sad but not unexpected demise really more newsworthy? Is the entirely predictable anger of Islamic fascists really more important for us to know about than a charity supporting child sexual slavery in the USA? Can you imagine the headlines if Halliburton or any other organisation with real or alleged connections with Bush had been caught on tape giving illegal advice? Three times.

Update: note I did not mention which party’s candidate ACORN thought would gain from political donations they were advising on the laundering of. Do I need to?

Update: a fourth video has been released, of a similar nature, filmed in California. It’s a good one though, naming politicians, ACORN employee offering to kill anyone exposing the brothel, suggesting violence against the underage girl, admitting killing her husband. It’s … wow, just watch it.

One ellipsis here hints at more videos to come …

Oh, and it appears that Acorn was breaking the law even operating in Maryland where the first video was shot.

Update: Hot Air has more on the embarrassed silence of the media.

Update: The co-founder of ACORN Wade Rathke, has responded, claiming that this is a “…fake issue”. My response warranted a new post …

Thanks to Instapundit for some of the links.

Dehumanising the ‘Other’

I have been highly critical of the race 'equality' industry before. Reading a recent case of torture, rape and murder again brought its pernicious influence to mind.

Via Instapundit I came across an horrific story of a terrible crime in Tennessee. The crime itself is sufficiently covered in that blog post and the stories it links, so I will only recount the barest details relevant to my point.

A young couple, Chris Newsom and Channon Christian, were taken at gunpoint. He was tortured and killed , she was tortured, raped and killed over a period of 24 hours. During her captivity the young men involved left the house where Channon Christian was trapped and went about their daily business before returning to repeat their crimes. During this time at least one woman was present in the house, probably more than one, and knew that Channon Christian was there, although with no direct involvement in the crime.

Katie, the blogger who posted the Mamapundit story linked above, suggested that there was no evidence that  race played a role in the crime. I think that it is possible that on one level this is not about race, not about blacks killing whites per se.

I think that on some level this is about young blacks killing people of a different race, and how identity politics that make it increasingly likely that one race does not identify with another. The ‘equality’ industry has a vested interest in emphasising differences, in pulling communities further apart.

I don’t think that is why the men carried out vicious crimes. That was evil. What I think it explains is how they could be so sadistic, how they could go about their normal lives in between, and even more clearly I think it is how Vanessa Coleman, the woman who admitted to being in the house, could be there yet do nothing for Channon Christian.

Vanessa Coleman has been told over and again by the race industry, by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, even by the Democrat Party, that she is a black first. She has been told that whites are different and don’t care about her, in fact that white people are responsible for her problems (of course to socialists Miss Coleman certainly is not responsible, nor are her parents). With all that propaganda dehumanising both Miss Christian and Miss Coleman, why should Vanessa Coleman care?

I have written about the logical conclusions of the race industry, and these aspects of the case are, sadly, not entirely surprising to me. There are better responses to racism, and they can be very promising. We just need to defeat the lies behind Critical Theory before a rational response becomes normal.