Post: #26

I think you are too fast aquitting Woody Allen here, just because it fits some general theory about older men/younger women, exwife bitch etc.

Read the letter. This is a grown woman now 28 years old with a telling of DETAILED and specific occurences. What does she have to gain from this? Woody Allen's son is also estranged and has no contact, plus Allen wifed up his -officially at least - adoptive daughter.

Looking at the guy, the neurotic, secretive little man, yeah I can see a pedo there for sure.

Again, that is some letter she wrote, and you're just brushing it aside because of her mother?

Post: #27

(02-02-2014 12:41 PM)eastwest Wrote:  I think you are too fast aquitting Woody Allen here, just because it fits some general theory about older men/younger women, exwife bitch etc.

Read the letter. This is a grown woman now 28 years old with a telling of DETAILED and specific occurences. What does she have to gain from this? Woody Allen's son is also estranged and has no contact, plus Allen wifed up his -officially at least - adoptive daughter.

Looking at the guy, the neurotic, secretive little man, yeah I can see a pedo there for sure.

Again, that is some letter she wrote, and you're just brushing it aside because of her mother?

You are jumping to conclusions just like the feminists that are calling him a rapist without any evidence. Nobody here said anything about acquitting him, we are just hashing out the facts.

Post: #28

(02-02-2014 12:41 PM)eastwest Wrote:  I think you are too fast aquitting Woody Allen here, just because it fits some general theory about older men/younger women, exwife bitch etc.

Read the letter. This is a grown woman now 28 years old with a telling of DETAILED and specific occurences. What does she have to gain from this? Woody Allen's son is also estranged and has no contact, plus Allen wifed up his -officially at least - adoptive daughter.

Looking at the guy, the neurotic, secretive little man, yeah I can see a pedo there for sure.

Again, that is some letter she wrote, and you're just brushing it aside because of her mother?

To reiterate what Soup just said, you do sound like a feminist. Being a "neurotic, secretive little man" does not make one a pedo. Should his baldness incriminate him too?

Had you read my post above, you'd have seen the New York Times itself reported back in 1993 that doctors who investigated this case found Dylan's testimony both suspect and coached. I would believe the word of doctors tasked with a police investigation over a vindictive ex-wife.

And I'm saying this as someone who doesn't even like Allen. However, "I don't like him" does not equate to "he's guilty" (except in feminist circles and the school system).

Here, again, is the link to the New York Times article where the molestation claims were found to be without merit in 1993:
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/05/04/nyregi...ments.html

Post: #29

Edit: nevermind, Broken Arrows linked the exact point I was making.

Post: #30

The author of this article is getting calls for his death from the regular crowd and retweeting them. Sound familiar.

https://twitter.com/BobWeide

Post: #31

(02-02-2014 12:55 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 12:41 PM)eastwest Wrote:  I think you are too fast aquitting Woody Allen here, just because it fits some general theory about older men/younger women, exwife bitch etc.

Read the letter. This is a grown woman now 28 years old with a telling of DETAILED and specific occurences. What does she have to gain from this? Woody Allen's son is also estranged and has no contact, plus Allen wifed up his -officially at least - adoptive daughter.

Looking at the guy, the neurotic, secretive little man, yeah I can see a pedo there for sure.

Again, that is some letter she wrote, and you're just brushing it aside because of her mother?

To reiterate what Soup just said, you do sound like a feminist. Being a "neurotic, secretive little man" does not make one a pedo. Should his baldness incriminate him too?

Had you read my post above, you'd have seen the New York Times itself reported back in 1993 that doctors who investigated this case found Dylan's testimony both suspect and coached. I would believe the word of doctors tasked with a police investigation over a vindictive ex-wife.

And I'm saying this as someone who doesn't even like Allen. However, "I don't like him" does not equate to "he's guilty" (except in feminist circles and the school system).

Here, again, is the link to the New York Times article where the molestation claims were found to be without merit in 1993:
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/05/04/nyregi...ments.html

It does not change the fact that the letter in NY Post is very specific. I think it warrants further investigation. What you're doing is essentially totally discrediting the daughter's story on what basis? That her mother supposedly was a bitch, which she may have been, I don't follow celebrity gossip.

I've read the letter, it does not seem like it is motivated by something her mother imagined. The woman is married, why would she bring all of this on her, just for attention?

Have you read the letter at all?

Here it is:http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/01/an-open-letter-from-dylan-farrow/

His own son also slammed him and hasn't spoken to him for years.

Post: #32

Just read the letter. I was almost laughing from the first line. This reads completely like a trumped up cliche letter. It uses every basic rhetorical device in the book, and that too in a heavy handed hacky way.

First, starting and ending it in that stupid way. The whole "I can't see toy trains bit". Many other uses of pathos and ethos. The classic, watching my tormentor get awards year after year bit.

"But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily. There were experts willing to attack my credibility." - This should happen in any and every case. Sadly it doesn't.

Her tone in the first few paragraphs is that of an ignorant child, who feels strange about all her instances of "abuse" but isn't too worked up about them. Once she's come out with this to her mother she says "I also didn’t know the firestorm it would trigger." again playing confused. But then she is suddenly knowledgeable.

"That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up. I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls."

Doesn't this bother you? She goes form a girl who didn't know what was happening to her exactly, and how serious it was, to being HAUNTED by it. That only happens when you are constantly told and reinforced in your head [most likely by her crazy mother] that you are the victim. Sounds a lot like modern feminism and "rape victims" today, who are convinced by their girlfriends that last night's drunk sex was rape, cause "you deserve better than that loser"

Fin

Post: #33

(02-02-2014 09:47 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  But Woody Every man alive definitely likes younger woman

Fixed.

Post: #34

(02-02-2014 01:44 PM)Slim Shady Wrote:  Just read the letter. I was almost laughing from the first line. This reads completely like a trumped up cliche letter. It uses every basic rhetorical device in the book, and that too in a heavy handed hacky way.

First, starting and ending it in that stupid way. The whole "I can't see toy trains bit". Many other uses of pathos and ethos. The classic, watching my tormentor get awards year after year bit.

"But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily. There were experts willing to attack my credibility." - This should happen in any and every case. Sadly it doesn't.

Her tone in the first few paragraphs is that of an ignorant child, who feels strange about all her instances of "abuse" but isn't too worked up about them. Once she's come out with this to her mother she says "I also didn’t know the firestorm it would trigger." again playing confused. But then she is suddenly knowledgeable.

"That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up. I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls."

Doesn't this bother you? She goes form a girl who didn't know what was happening to her exactly, and how serious it was, to being HAUNTED by it. That only happens when you are constantly told and reinforced in your head [most likely by her crazy mother] that you are the victim. Sounds a lot like modern feminism and "rape victims" today, who are convinced by their girlfriends that last night's drunk sex was rape, cause "you deserve better than that loser"

Fin

No, nothing in that sounds odd, how much knowledge do you have with abuse victims?

Abused children often think it is normal - but not pleasent - because their abuser makes sure to keep it hidden. She makes it very clear that she didn't like it and attempted to hide.

She was 7 when this allegedly happened, do you think she had any clue who her father was in the public or what police was or anything?

Your case is essentially that she as a 28 year old married woman, with the support of her brother - Allen's own son - should make up thise story because Mia Farrow is some mastermind manipulator?

Allen's own son Ronan tweeted this during the award ceremony. What's in it for him, is he also just being manipulated?

Occams Razor.

Post: #35

So this stuff is about things that supposedly happened about 20+ years ago when she was something like 7? How clearly do you remember when you were 7?

How clearly would you remember what happened when you had been coached by a hysterical scorned woman teamed up with others even more doctrinaire around her ? Farrow in trying to revise the history of being dumped had convinced herself that this stuff was real?

Imagine being 6-7 years old, spending hours in a room with your mother and three feminist harpies asking you "He touched you, didn't he?"

And now how much professional editing and coaching was done with the current letter ?

It seems like extremely unreliable evidence, more probably a smear job by a Farrow who convinced herself at the time that Allen was a pedophine because he wanted a 19 year old, combined it with the fact he was "bad" because he ditched her, and then went on a classic irrational female vendetta.

Harpies of all SES would have had multiple status orgasms from associating with a famous woman and "helping" with the "serious abuse issues" in her family.

"I just was working with Mia the other day."

Post: #36

East west, of course she would have an understanding of how famous her was, unless she was retarded.

Post: #37

(02-02-2014 01:57 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  So this stuff is about things that supposedly happened about 20+ years ago when she was something like 7? How clearly do you remember when you were 7?

How clearly would you remember what happened when you had been coached by a hysterical scorned woman teaming up with others even more doctrinaire around her who in almost all certainly had convinced herself that this stuff was real?

How much professional editing and coaching was done with the current letter ?

It seems like extremely unreliable evidence, more probably a smear job by a Farrow who convinced herself at the time that Allen was a pedophine because he wanted a 19 year old, combined it with the fact he was "bad" because he ditched her, and then went on a classic irrational female vendetta.

I'm not going to pursue this into an argument, I can only tell you that there are many stories of abused children where the stories are very similar and they face exactly the kind of suspicion as she does here. It is after all a very serious allegation and of course needs to be treated very carefully to avoid convicting someone innocent.

I am well aware that false abuse stories are also common in divorce situations, but so are covering ups of abuse.

That she writes this 20 years on lends it more credit in my opinion. What does she stand to gain? What does her brother - Allen's own son - stand to gain. These are grown adults, I find it less likely that they are still under some spell of their mother.

We will see what, if anything, comes off this.

Post: #38

Also keep in mind that this is all timed to coincide with and create buzz for her brother (illegitimate bastard spawn) Ronan Farrow's new MSNBC show premiere.

Post: #39

(02-02-2014 02:07 PM)eastwest Wrote:  That she writes this 20 years on lends it more credit in my opinion. What does she stand to gain? What does her brother - Allen's own son - stand to gain. These are grown adults, I find it less likely that they are still under some spell of their mother.

We will see what, if anything, comes off this.

I think you raise some valid points. My impression is the "the spell" you mention are fake memories in the daughter, and understandable sympathy from the brother burnt in by harpies when they were about 7, and the mythology has continued "How tragic he was never prosecuted"

Farrow, AND the daughter still believe this shit was real, because they HAD to justify why a perfect, world-renowned woman was ditched.

I directly work with feminist mental health harpies, some are so stupid I can't believe they managed to pass the licensing tests. And this is after a decade or more of debunking "recovered memories" stuff. I heard one Harvard psychiatry professor argue that any memory from before 5 is completely unreliably. Recovered memories is totally fringe in the mental health field now.

Especially egregious is the extreme emotional reasoning these "clinicians" suffer from-- thinking something must be true because they "feel" it must be true or that in a "just world" it must be true.

Think about what's physically real and documented in 1993:

(1) medical exam found no evidence. Presumably no bruising, signs of abnormal sex.

(2) Psych exam says "victim" says first yes , then no. Experienced clinicians on the scene soon after the "events" or the coaching say something like she appears "coached." I think they used that specific word.

THAT'S Occam's razor stuff, not the claims of hysterical women, and a son who was subject to the same brainwashing that might have gone on.

OCCAM sez: When physical reality says one thing, and hysterical women say another, simplest explanation is to believe physical reality.

Say Allen gave his 2,3, or 5 year old daughter baths. Was he suppose to not wash her genital and anal area? Well if he did, now there's the fodder for this crap.

"Did Daddy ever touch you here?"

Of course I could be wrong, but this seems like the gyrations of a fanatically puritanical, feminist society that shrieks at the idea of sex.

Unless it's an age-appropriate woman with her billionaire Christian Grey so she can brag to her friends.

Post: #40

Woody Allen is a fucking pervert at best and a pedophile/rapist at worst. Manosphere aside any man that marries his fucking step kid has issues. I don't know if he raped or molested the younger daughter but him marrying his step kid raises all sorts of questions that will more than likely go unanswered just because he's apart of old hollywood.I've read a shit ton of books on hollywood and the freaky behind the scenes sex shit that's described and hinted at is mind blowing.I'm not talking about your everyday run of the mill kinky shit but stuff involving KIDS and the unwilling.Sex slavery,pedophila,homosexuality all the shit these liberal types are trying to convince the rest of the world is "Normal".There aint nothing normal about a man fucking his step daughter. There are some sick,sick people that get a complete get outta jail free card just because their rich or famous.

Post: #41

(02-02-2014 01:23 PM)rastignac Wrote:  The author of this article is getting calls for his death from the regular crowd and retweeting them. Sound familiar.

https://twitter.com/BobWeide

Make sure to stop by this chick's twitter and send her some love: https://twitter.com/nerdyjewishgirl

Post: #42

TheMachinist,

Did you read the initial article that I started this thread with? It sets the record straight so people like you (and feminists) will stop echoing the same slanderous mischaracterizations against Woody Allen.

Post: #43

(02-02-2014 02:35 PM)TheMachinist Wrote:  Woody Allen is a fucking pervert at best and a pedophile/rapist at worst. Manosphere aside any man that marries his fucking step kid has issues. I don't know if he raped or molested the younger daughter but him marrying his step kid raises all sorts of questions that will more than likely go unanswered just because he's apart of old hollywood.I've read a shit ton of books on hollywood and the freaky behind the scenes sex shit that's described and hinted at is mind blowing.I'm not talking about your everyday run of the mill kinky shit but stuff involving KIDS and the unwilling.Sex slavery,pedophila,homosexuality all the shit these liberal types are trying to convince the rest of the world is "Normal".There aint nothing normal about a man fucking his step daughter. There are some sick,sick people that get a complete get outta jail free card just because their rich or famous.

How is a guy who, by his own admission, gone over four years during his adult life without having sex in any position to lecture anyone on sexual deviance?

Post: #44

Farrow once broke up a marriage to an older man and the jilted wife wrote this song after undergoing electroshock therapy. "Beware of Young Girls."





So who is writing the ROK article for this saga, replete with so many Red Pill lessons? I think we have a title.

Post: #45

(02-02-2014 01:39 PM)eastwest Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 12:55 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 12:41 PM)eastwest Wrote:  I think you are too fast aquitting Woody Allen here, just because it fits some general theory about older men/younger women, exwife bitch etc.

Read the letter. This is a grown woman now 28 years old with a telling of DETAILED and specific occurences. What does she have to gain from this? Woody Allen's son is also estranged and has no contact, plus Allen wifed up his -officially at least - adoptive daughter.

Looking at the guy, the neurotic, secretive little man, yeah I can see a pedo there for sure.

Again, that is some letter she wrote, and you're just brushing it aside because of her mother?

To reiterate what Soup just said, you do sound like a feminist. Being a "neurotic, secretive little man" does not make one a pedo. Should his baldness incriminate him too?

Had you read my post above, you'd have seen the New York Times itself reported back in 1993 that doctors who investigated this case found Dylan's testimony both suspect and coached. I would believe the word of doctors tasked with a police investigation over a vindictive ex-wife.

And I'm saying this as someone who doesn't even like Allen. However, "I don't like him" does not equate to "he's guilty" (except in feminist circles and the school system).

Here, again, is the link to the New York Times article where the molestation claims were found to be without merit in 1993:
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/05/04/nyregi...ments.html

It does not change the fact that the letter in NY Post is very specific. I think it warrants further investigation. What you're doing is essentially totally discrediting the daughter's story on what basis? That her mother supposedly was a bitch, which she may have been, I don't follow celebrity gossip.

I've read the letter, it does not seem like it is motivated by something her mother imagined. The woman is married, why would she bring all of this on her, just for attention?

Have you read the letter at all?

Here it is:http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/01/an-open-letter-from-dylan-farrow/

His own son also slammed him and hasn't spoken to him for years.

Sigh. I read her letter. It's very convincing and well-written. I already said I don't like the guy.

But what she says now does not change the findings of a medical examiner -- nor the documentation of those findings, which was spelled out clearly in the New York Times in 1993. Just because someone makes accusations years later doesn't alter the record historically.

If she's to be believed, it throws all police records into question. It casts doubt on all medical examinations. If she's serious, she'll have the case reopened and have the medical examiner investigated for poor procedure and hiding evidence.

Why hasn't she done that? Why has she gone to the press before getting a lawyer to reopen the investigation and re-examine the evidence?

As for why his kids hate him, it still doesn't change the evidence. They could love him and it still wouldn't change the evidence.

Post: #46

(02-02-2014 03:50 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 01:39 PM)eastwest Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 12:55 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 12:41 PM)eastwest Wrote:  I think you are too fast aquitting Woody Allen here, just because it fits some general theory about older men/younger women, exwife bitch etc.

Read the letter. This is a grown woman now 28 years old with a telling of DETAILED and specific occurences. What does she have to gain from this? Woody Allen's son is also estranged and has no contact, plus Allen wifed up his -officially at least - adoptive daughter.

Looking at the guy, the neurotic, secretive little man, yeah I can see a pedo there for sure.

Again, that is some letter she wrote, and you're just brushing it aside because of her mother?

To reiterate what Soup just said, you do sound like a feminist. Being a "neurotic, secretive little man" does not make one a pedo. Should his baldness incriminate him too?

Had you read my post above, you'd have seen the New York Times itself reported back in 1993 that doctors who investigated this case found Dylan's testimony both suspect and coached. I would believe the word of doctors tasked with a police investigation over a vindictive ex-wife.

And I'm saying this as someone who doesn't even like Allen. However, "I don't like him" does not equate to "he's guilty" (except in feminist circles and the school system).

Here, again, is the link to the New York Times article where the molestation claims were found to be without merit in 1993:
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/05/04/nyregi...ments.html

It does not change the fact that the letter in NY Post is very specific. I think it warrants further investigation. What you're doing is essentially totally discrediting the daughter's story on what basis? That her mother supposedly was a bitch, which she may have been, I don't follow celebrity gossip.

I've read the letter, it does not seem like it is motivated by something her mother imagined. The woman is married, why would she bring all of this on her, just for attention?

Have you read the letter at all?

Here it is:http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/01/an-open-letter-from-dylan-farrow/

His own son also slammed him and hasn't spoken to him for years.

Sigh. I read her letter. It's very convincing and well-written. I already said I don't like the guy.

But what she says now does not change the findings of a medical examiner -- nor the documentation of those findings, which was spelled out clearly in the New York Times in 1993. Just because someone makes accusations years later doesn't alter the record historically.

If she's to be believed, it throws all police records into question. It casts doubt on all medical examinations. If she's serious, she'll have the case reopened and have the medical examiner investigated for poor procedure and hiding evidence.

Why hasn't she done that? Why has she gone to the press before getting a lawyer to reopen the investigation and re-examine the evidence?

As for why his kids hate him, it still doesn't change the evidence. They could love him and it still wouldn't change the evidence.

Seems like a big publicity stunt for that new show. If that's true, than they are truly disgusting people.

Post: #47

Eastwest might be the first member that paid for the VIP silver medal that got banned.

Is recovered memories coached by feminist shrinks admissible in court? This type of theory sounds rather dangerous and quite ridiculous. Making up abuse to soothe the hamster.

Post: #48

Hey guys. Can we be a little less quick on the trigger when banning people? EastWest was dropping some serious knowledge on another thread about starting your own business. This is a dream I am trying to put into practice so I can move out of this feminists society I currently find myself back in.

He clearly made some misguided statements but he didn't do it out of malice. He must be new to the red bill. I admit that. But at some point isn't it our responsibility to educate people rather than simply ban them???

Post: #49

(02-02-2014 02:24 PM)Dagonet Wrote:  Also keep in mind that this is all timed to coincide with and create buzz for her brother (illegitimate bastard spawn) Ronan Farrow's new MSNBC show premiere.

Calling Ronan Farrow "illegitimate bastard spawn" is actually giving him too much credit, and a possible better lineage. I'm a huge Sinatra fan and think that unless he is willing to take a DNA test, he needs to stop casting aspersions on Frank's widow Barbara and the rest of the Sinatra clan.

His resemblance to Sinatra can be explained by the photo I posted below. But read this first. I think he's saying this out of self-denial. He doesn't want to be Woody's son. And I think Mia spread the rumor to get back at Woody.

Here is some evidence. Ronan was born in Dec. 1987. He would have to have been conceived in April or May of that year. For most of that time Sinatra was on tour (itinerary here) with Dean Martin and Sammy Davis, Jr. playing in Vegas and Chicago.

Mia Farrow lived in both New York or Bridgewater, Connecticut. And while Frank's tour did stop over in nearby Jersey and Boston in early May, the tour was stressful and I doubt he'd have accommodated Mia, of all people, considering what could have filtered back to Barbara (who could have divorced him and ended up with millions). Frank might have been a player, but by 1987, he was 72 and even his detractors admit he'd calmed down: the death of his mother in plane crash ten years earlier knocked the wind out of him in a lot of ways.

So where, exactly, does Ronan Farrow get those dreamboat looks from, anyway?

Well, there's his mom. Oh, wait and his mom's brother. Who was that? It's John-Villers Farrow who went to prison for molesting boys (story here). Anyone see projection here?

A photo of convicted child molestor John Villers-Farrow (center) in his twenties, around the age of his lookalike nephew, Ronan Farrow:

Post: #50

What they really need to do is sure up false rape claims laws.

Does false rape qualify as libel, or is it in it's own category? Any legal people here that can chime in?