Posted on 05/25/2018 7:57:19 PM PDT by bitt
The U.S. government once wanted to plan false flag attacks with Soviet aircraft to justify war with the USSR or its allies, newly declassified documents surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy show.
In a three-page memo, members of the National Security Council wrote, "There is a possibility that such aircraft could be used in a deception operation designed to confuse enemy planes in the air, to launch a surprise attack against enemy installations or in a provocation operation in which Soviet aircraft would appear to attack US or friendly installations to provide an excuse for U.S. intervention."
The memo shows that the department, along with the CIA, considered buying Soviet aircraft to stage the attacks, even getting estimates from the Air Force on how long it would take and how much it would cost to produce the planes domestically and covertly. Costs ranged from $3.5 million to $44 million per plane, depending on the model, most taking several months to build.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
He just wanted to have it "on the record" that he wasn't a Communist, despite clearly being a Socialist (AKA Communism by the drink), so he could point out to the uninformed he wasn't REALLY a radical. I'm back to what I said about left-wingers lying about their intentions. You're trying to make logical sense of it, and it isn't worth doing so. It's like when Democrats lie about being mainstream and normal come election time. It's Taqiya.
"Fully agreed there. Nixon definitely didn’t deserve THAT kind of witch hunt (heck, he wasn’t even the guy who ordered for the breakin and if anything he didn’t even know it occurred until AFTER the fact). If anything, that kind of treatment DEFINITELY should have been reserved for the Clintons, at a bare minimum."
It was payback for all that Whittaker Chambers/Alger Hiss business. It didn't matter that Nixon was a liberal Establishment Republican, the leftist media was out to destroy him. Nixon wasn't paranoid as portrayed, because HE was right about these people. The derangement the leftist media had for Nixon has now probably been exceeded for Trump, although the anti-Nixon stuff went on for decades. The anti-Trump stuff has really only existed for 3+ years.
"Actually, that rationale is EXACTLY why they would not have tried to assassinate JFK, especially not when they have nothing to gain from it (even if they do get away with the murder, they’d still have to contend with the likelihood that the Soviets would further encroach on their territory). They may be evil, but they’re certainly not stupid."
But it was about revenge. They thought they were getting "protection" from the Kennedys by helping fix the '60 election. That was an audacious backstab by both JFK and RFK. As for stupid vs. evil, remember that the mafia wasn't a bastion of MENSA members. Most of these were street thugs and murderers who couldn't cut it in legit businesses and worked their way up the structure. Look at Capone. He was a syphilitic whose brain was likely rotting.
"I don’t know about speculating, at least in regards to the Soviets: Ion Mihai Pacepa has indicated he did have a pretty big role in the whole Operation Dragon disinformation campaign, and the Mitokyn Archives that got leaked to Britain did corroborate his claims. Heck, he even found, and documented, quite a bit of stuff in LHO’s belongings that pointed to him at the very least being under the KGB’s employ."
Trying to connect the dots is maddening, as far as I'm concerned. That's why I don't think we'll ever know the roles everyone played (or didn't). The Oliver Stone movie didn't help matters, either. But Stone and other left-wingers had this crazy notion of JFK being a great President when he was just a corrupt, sick, sex predator who was so far in over his head that he almost triggered WW3, propped up by an equally corrupt and craven media eager to exact revenge on Nixon. JFK may have ended up dead, but WE paid the price for everything that followed and have never recovered from the damage.
"I’ll be honest with you... I’m not exactly fond or trusting of a more secular nation in the Middle East. As far as I can tell, making it more secular will just make it more of a USSR type region, or, heck, even France currently where they persecute Christians and are atheist in all but name. I won’t settle for anything except for a Christian-dominated Middle East (Coptic Christian at the very least). Sure, maybe it would get rid of the yoke the Muslims had if we made it more secular, make the Muslims weaker, but then again, we made the same mistake with the Buddhists in the Vietnam War where we basically capitulated to their demands on getting rid of Diem and that led directly to them basically letting Marxism into Vietnam anyway."
You do have a point. I was stating that Ataturk at least moved a corrupt and atrophied former Ottoman Empire into a pro-Western and less Mohammadan-centered modern Turkey, which was as best as one could hope for. Of course, it's all being undone now. Truly enlightened leaders in these areas would be served to embark upon a plan for de-Islamification of every nation dominated by this Satanic totalitarian political death cult, even if it takes 100-200 years to do. It won't be done overnight, but slowly. Moving them back to Christianity, which most of them were at one point, would do wonders for these nations and their people. Whether it can be done without warfare is the big question.
"Yeah, we definitely need more viability there. Hopefully when that program becomes viable, we might have our own “Imperial Navy” from Star Wars (after Lucas’s infamous revelation that the Rebels were Vietcong members and the Empire were Americans, I definitely don’t intend to root for the Rebel Alliance anymore)."
If just to piss off Lucas. ;-D
"I know, but the problem is neither of those two were openly communist, even if left-wing, while de Blasio is in fact a communist, and those guys are infinitely worse. Heck, de Blasio has actually made anti-cop rhetoric in the city, even refusing to attend a wake."
Lindsay was a Socialist, his policies bore that out. De Blasio is a Communist, but he cannot willfully let the city go to absolute pieces as it did under Lindsay because the city residents simply would not tolerate it. Giuliani proved that the city didn't have to tolerate 2,000 murders per year. If the crime rate rocketed back up to those levels, de Blasio would be finished. But there's no denying he is a bad mayor.
"Yeah, I’m definitely no fan of Jeffrey Katzenberg, since he contributed more than anyone save for maybe Bob Iger for turning Disney into a left-wing enterprise. In fact, even though I’m not much of a fan of Michael Eisner either, I am nonetheless thankful that he at least fired that jerk after Pocahontas’s failure, even if it WAS for purely selfish reasons (in fact, my only complaint regarding his firing Katzenberg was that he took as long as he did to do that. If you ask me, he should have been fired after screwing up Black Cauldron with his “10 minute cuts”). And besides, at least Michael Eisner attempted to continue Walt’s legacy until his breakdown (his distasteful involvement in the creation of Gay Days nonwithstanding), while the likes of Katzenberg and Iger went out of their way to disrespect him from the get-go. Probably the only Disney Renaissance films during his tenure that I’m still a fan of: The Little Mermaid, The Lion King, and technically Toy Story, happen to be films where he had very minimal involvement. I hope for the day that Disney, to quote Trump, is made great again, gotten closer to Walt Disney’s vision. And quite frankly, after dealing with a horrible World History professor in College who claimed women couldn’t get an education or even be literate until they “took power” on the campuses during the 1960s, I’m not fond of Belle due to her and her film effectively pushing a similar claim, how she’s an outcast in the village due to her being literate, a bookworm even (and besides, seeing how Sartre despite his reputation fell for a mass-murdering psychopath makes me unsure whether Belle has any discernment, especially when she doesn’t come across as Christian, or even marrying into it via Adam in the film.)."
I'll readily admit I haven't watched any of those Disney movies you cited. I preferred the ones from the Golden Age where Uncle Walt still had a hand in them ("Mary Poppins" still remains a favorite, although a critical look at it will find that the mother was rather awful in it. An early feminist whose children took a distant second to her radical political activism. One wonders how the father would've ended up with such a woman instead of someone utterly devoted to their children. Sadly, the effects on female enfranchisement have resulted in the 20th century and to date being awash in democratically-elected leftism and all the disasters that have ensued. Had it not occurred, virtually no Democrat would've been elected President since (FDR might have in 1932, but not likely for 4 terms. Truman would've never ascended. JFK definitely would not have been elected either Senator or President. LBJ would never have ascended as a result. No Carter. Clintoon couldn't have scored a plurality victory. No Zero, either). It might not be fair to women, since many possess the discerning skills to elect the best people and some can be great leaders, but many more have no business participating in the political process (same with many males).
"Yeah, I hope you’re right. The last thing we need is something like 9/11."
Speaking of Laxalt, his grandson is due to be elected Governor of Nevada this evening, following in his footsteps (sadly, Paul Laxalt died early this year. I was hoping he'd live to see his grandson elected). He actually helped raise the grandson, who was a product of an affair between his daughter and the late Sen. Pete Domenici of New Mexico (which didn't come out until after Domenici retired). Adam Paul Laxalt has the potential to be a future contender for President, which should've been his grandfather's career capstone.
"Yeah, I know that. Really wish there was a way to ensure that there aren’t any way that people don’t do loopholes to keep leftists in while purge conservatives. Sheesh, this is about as bad as the Complete Monster trope nominations on TV Tropes (when someone like Maleficent from Sleeping Beauty isn’t even considered a Complete Monster despite the fact that she’s explicitly the mistress of all evil, you know the trope is utterly broken.)."
I mean, look what was done to the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, Roy Moore, not once but twice. He defiantly stood up for what was right, and was twice removed for it. He scared the pants off the left (and was hated, too, by the GOP political establishment), one reason they had to destroy him in his run for the Senate. Frankly, he ought to be the Chief Justice of the U.S.
"Yeah, I know. Unfortunately, I have to worry about getting good grades, and it didn’t help that a libertarian teacher in Middle School (one of my better teachers, I’ll admit) made it sound as though you needed to keep learning in order to avoid getting alzheimers, and the only way I could conceive of continuing to learn was to continue school, so I had to take in whatever is in it. I eventually learned otherwise in College, from the same teacher. I still try to learn everything I can, many times in the hope of finding a way to undo the legacy of the French Revolution and the Enlightenment (I have a personal investment in that because that was pretty much the start of atheist persecution of Christians.)."
Anything to demolish the leftist agenda is a positive.
"Must admit, I’m actually impressed with your resume there."
Thank you. Though that and $1.50 wouldn't get me a cup of overpriced swill at Starbuck's (not that I'd want any).
"Ugh... great. I also heard he was responsible for the Pod People remake (you know, the one where the kid when seeing his “mom” in bed witnesses her just deflate like someone who was denied any form of water for prolonged periods of time, rather than her simply “waking up” and showing she wasn’t herself anymore from her eyes.)."
Oh, the '93 Body Snatchers movie. I had a modest crush on Gabrielle Anwar.
"Well, that’s actually a very good reason not to buy any of his films (heck, even without that, Lucas’ table reads for Raiders of the Lost Ark basically ruined the film [to say little of how the ending effectively gave me a deeply disturbed view of God], especially considering the implication that God actually spared a pedophile as a result of what Lucas, Spielberg, and Kasdan were talking about. I’m sorry, but even during that period of time the film took place, him having a romantic relationship with an underaged child like Marrion Ravenwood would have been frowned upon at the very least. And I’m pretty sure pedophiles are about AS bad as the Nazis, at the very least.)."
I went to revisit that issue, though it didn't seem to be much touched upon in the films (Karen Allen was about 30 in the 1st film). What's considered to be appropriate/inappropriate with age today is not the same as it was a century ago. Girls at 14 were often considered to be "ready to marry", there wasn't this solid 18 rule now. Even into the 1970s, it was not scandalous for an older man and a girl of 17 (Woody Allen had this in "Manhattan", where his character was dating and sleeping with a nubile Mariel Hemingway, which looks creepy now, but wasn't seen as such at the time). I think it boiled down to the individuals, whether they were mature or not at that age. Although they'd charge Indy with being a pedo now, that would not have been shocking for a guy in his mid 20s being with a girl of 15-16-17. I got the impression Marion was VERY precocious at the younger age. Indy didn't give off a vibe of wanting to have sex with children.
"All I can say to them is “So, you want to chop your own limbs off and/or engage in BDSM that leaves you with extensive scarring? After all, if you adhere to “your body, your choice”, you shouldn’t have any problem scarring yourselves.” And quite frankly, scarring, amputating, or mutilating oneself by their own choice would come far closer to that phrase than abortion, since at least THAT actually is their own body unlike the unborn which isn’t actually a body part but a developing lifeform."
See, but you're trying to reason with them. They're not interested in being reasonable, only screeching tired, hackneyed phrases about murdering in the womb. You can't reason with crazies, you can only defeat them.
"Certainly not now, anyways, with the impending Red Wave (even several leftists are conceding that the Blue Wave fizzed out right now). If anything, I’d be deeply surprised if there IS a Blue Wave."
That's one of my biggest pet peeves. Ever since the media on Election Day 2000 pulled the Orwellian newspeak switcheroo of relabeling the party of the left "blue" to disassociate them from Communism, I just grit my teeth in anger. I never use that atrocious color scheme. The GOP, as a Conservative party, will always be blue and the Democrats REDS. I still try to get people not to use that backwards nonsense. It's so historically wrong and absurd. So I'm hoping for a GOP BLUE wave, not a Commie-Demonrat RED one.
“He just wanted to have it “on the record” that he wasn’t a Communist, despite clearly being a Socialist (AKA Communism by the drink), so he could point out to the uninformed he wasn’t REALLY a radical. I’m back to what I said about left-wingers lying about their intentions. You’re trying to make logical sense of it, and it isn’t worth doing so. It’s like when Democrats lie about being mainstream and normal come election time. It’s Taqiya.”
I’m familiar with the concept of Taqqiya (BTW, a little known fact is that the Talmud has its own form of Taqqiya, the Babylonian Talmud at least.). However, even Taqqiya has its limits since it specifically requires that, when lying to others not on your side, your lies MUST advance the cause your stealthily trying to promote. Claiming that Christianity and Communism can never comingle is NOT aiding the Communists in any way. In fact, if anything, that runs too much of a risk of massively backfiring on the liar and the cause he’s trying to promote to the masses. If anything, the Liberation Theology method or, heck, what Vladimir Putin did with his whole charade of being a “good Christian man” and then pushing that Lenin’s relics are similar to Christian relics, or that the Communist Manifesto is the same as the Ten Commandments, not to mention Pope Francis and how, despite his claims to be acting as the voice of God, is pushing for stuff God would NEVER condone, and even all but voicing support for leftist radicals from the pulpit, comes closer to Taqqiya in actual practice. Yes, they denied being Communists, but they didn’t deny that they could be comingled, which is the point.
“It was payback for all that Whittaker Chambers/Alger Hiss business. It didn’t matter that Nixon was a liberal Establishment Republican, the leftist media was out to destroy him. Nixon wasn’t paranoid as portrayed, because HE was right about these people. The derangement the leftist media had for Nixon has now probably been exceeded for Trump, although the anti-Nixon stuff went on for decades. The anti-Trump stuff has really only existed for 3+ years.”
Yeah, and they had similar distaste for George W. Bush as well, constantly trying to destroy and discredit him regardless of whether he actually was liberal establishment or not. Lucas even implied that, while he didn’t necessarily envision Bush when doing the trilogy, he was still comparable to Nixon.
“But it was about revenge. They thought they were getting “protection” from the Kennedys by helping fix the ‘60 election. That was an audacious backstab by both JFK and RFK. As for stupid vs. evil, remember that the mafia wasn’t a bastion of MENSA members. Most of these were street thugs and murderers who couldn’t cut it in legit businesses and worked their way up the structure. Look at Capone. He was a syphilitic whose brain was likely rotting.”
Yes, I agree that the mafia isn’t a bastion of MENSA members, but it doesn’t take someone who is MENSA to realize that trying to openly assassinate the President is NOT going to end well for you, especially not when the country is de-facto fighting against guys who are most likely going to ruin your racket with their ideology of Communism. Think of it along the lines of pragmatism. If it were me and I were in the mob, I’d most likely wait until after JFK loses the election, and he is sent back to his house in Massachusetts, and THEN organize a hit on him as revenge for backstabbing us. That, or otherwise arrange his death in office while making it look like an accident, like how they usually deal with people who rubbed them the wrong way. Heck, forget, Al Capone, Nikita Khrushchev was known to have erratic mood swings, even infamously whacking his shoe on the gavel when undergoing a tantrum at the UN (with it also being suspected that this may have contributed to his “early retirement” at the hands of the Politburo), and even HE had enough pragmatism to apparently attempt to call off LHO’s assassination after one of the assassins got caught in West Germany with the medal Khrushchev awarded to him.
“Trying to connect the dots is maddening, as far as I’m concerned. That’s why I don’t think we’ll ever know the roles everyone played (or didn’t). The Oliver Stone movie didn’t help matters, either. But Stone and other left-wingers had this crazy notion of JFK being a great President when he was just a corrupt, sick, sex predator who was so far in over his head that he almost triggered WW3, propped up by an equally corrupt and craven media eager to exact revenge on Nixon. JFK may have ended up dead, but WE paid the price for everything that followed and have never recovered from the damage.”
Maybe, but then again, I’m pretty sure those leaked Mitokin archives back up the Soviet angle quite a bit, containing quite a bit of documentation pointing to the Soviets being more than involved in various disinformation stuff relating to the assassination. I can’t think of any reason to pull such a stunt, ESPECIALLY something large enough for the Central Communist Party to directly organize and fund it, unless they had been responsible. Probably the only thing that’s in question is whether or not they actually intended by that time to have LHO kill him or not (there’s a lot of evidence that Khrushchev may have attempted to get LHO to abort the mission because one of his assassins not only got caught in West Germany, but also had a medal personally awarded by Khrushchev himself, and dealing with the resulting scandal).
“You do have a point. I was stating that Ataturk at least moved a corrupt and atrophied former Ottoman Empire into a pro-Western and less Mohammadan-centered modern Turkey, which was as best as one could hope for. Of course, it’s all being undone now. Truly enlightened leaders in these areas would be served to embark upon a plan for de-Islamification of every nation dominated by this Satanic totalitarian political death cult, even if it takes 100-200 years to do. It won’t be done overnight, but slowly. Moving them back to Christianity, which most of them were at one point, would do wonders for these nations and their people. Whether it can be done without warfare is the big question.”
At this rate, I’m not even sure it CAN be done without warfare. I do know that Pope Francis certainly isn’t even attempting to help the Coptic Christians out by any stretch.
“If just to piss off Lucas. ;-D”
Yeah, fully agreed there. And he definitely deserves to be ticked off by Trump, not to mention us, after his little sleight of hand by manipulating us into rooting for the Vietcong and against America by dressing them up as American Marines and Fascist uniforms.
“Lindsay was a Socialist, his policies bore that out. De Blasio is a Communist, but he cannot willfully let the city go to absolute pieces as it did under Lindsay because the city residents simply would not tolerate it. Giuliani proved that the city didn’t have to tolerate 2,000 murders per year. If the crime rate rocketed back up to those levels, de Blasio would be finished. But there’s no denying he is a bad mayor.”
Actually, I’m not even sure de Blasio would even CARE if the city went to absolute pieces even if it meant him being elected out, especially knowing his Communist views. He did skip town for a G24 conference he conveniently scheduled at the same time as a wake for NYPD officers slain on duty, after all, not to mention rooted for the BLM and other leftists groups while backstabbing the cops every day of the week, and besides, Karl Marx DID make it pretty clear after all that once Communists are at the helm, they are obliged to not only reenact Robespierre’s Reign of Terror, but if anything double down on the bloodshed. If I were de Blasio, heck, a Communist by any stripe and got myself elected, I wouldn’t even TRY to hide upon being elected that I’m going to instigate the Reign of Terror on New Yorkers, slaughter as many as I can, since after all, that’s exactly what Marx demanded. That’s how I know Communists are FAR more dangerous. But yes, he’s definitely a bad mayor.
“I’ll readily admit I haven’t watched any of those Disney movies you cited. I preferred the ones from the Golden Age where Uncle Walt still had a hand in them (”Mary Poppins” still remains a favorite, although a critical look at it will find that the mother was rather awful in it. An early feminist whose children took a distant second to her radical political activism. One wonders how the father would’ve ended up with such a woman instead of someone utterly devoted to their children. Sadly, the effects on female enfranchisement have resulted in the 20th century and to date being awash in democratically-elected leftism and all the disasters that have ensued. Had it not occurred, virtually no Democrat would’ve been elected President since (FDR might have in 1932, but not likely for 4 terms. Truman would’ve never ascended. JFK definitely would not have been elected either Senator or President. LBJ would never have ascended as a result. No Carter. Clintoon couldn’t have scored a plurality victory. No Zero, either). It might not be fair to women, since many possess the discerning skills to elect the best people and some can be great leaders, but many more have no business participating in the political process (same with many males).”
Well, I can tell you this much: The Little Mermaid, aside from it being the film that practically jumpstarted the Disney Renaissance, basically had Ariel basically desiring to become human, even before meeting Eric. King Triton was shown to basically be xenophobic against humanity, and was ultimately proven wrong about those views without demonizing him (this is especially a contrast to some liberal movies such as, say, the recent Plant of the Apes films where they actually DO paint humanity in a very bad light every time, that and capitalism, making the apes good and the humans largely bad). Ursula actually stands in for your usual liberal feminist, especially that who backstabs their own constituents while claiming to help them in a little con game for power, and overall was pretty close to the classic Princess movies in overall tone (ie, Snow White, Cinderella, and Sleeping Beauty). Heck, Ursula even briefly mentions a radical feminist line where she essentially claims men don’t tolerate women who talk, and that they only like women with “body language”, and since its during the deal she strongarmed Ariel into participating in, she clearly was lying about that bit. As far as the Lion King, basically, as the title indicates, it deals with the African savannah, and specifically a pride of Lions. Gets a bit biblical at times, honoring thy father via Simba and Mufasa and all of that, and the main villain Scar? He’s basically de Blasio in SPADES, or heck, even John Lindsay, where he, after murdering his brother Mufasa, he basically mixes hyenas and lions together, and causes a drought and mass starvation in the Pride Lands, also implicitly condemning the concept of open borders since the Hyenas were explicitly stated to live beyond the Pride Lands’ borders under Mufasa’s reign. Simba eventually stops his Uncle, especially after learning the latter’s role in his dad’s death, and the Hyenas turn on him after Scar pinned the blame on them in a last ditch effort to save his own skin. It’s actually even MORE impressive Lion King was such a success since Jeffrey Katzenberg didn’t think it would be successful due to there being talking animals, and if anything banked on that proto-Howard Zinn crap adaptation known as Pocahontas to be a success (which, BTW, did badly critically and even at the box office when it was released). As far as Toy Story, well, technically that’s Pixar instead of Disney, but Disney ultimately helmed the thing. Long story short, it’s about toys owned by a kid named Andy. The main protagonist is a sheriff doll named Woody, and he was considered Andy’s favorite toy and acts as the de-facto leader of the toys. Of course, Andy’s birthday comes around, and in a surprise move, Andy gets a new toy, Buzz Lightyear, space man as you might guess. Buzz quickly starts to rival Woody for the position of Andy’s favorite toy. Though various misadventures due to Woody’s growing jealousy, they ultimately end up at Sid’s house, though they eventually patch things up and make it back to Andy’s possession while the latter is moving out. And believe me, under Katzenberg’s direction, it nearly turned out to be a disaster. It has to be seen in order to be believed what nearly turned out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk8a_C0ao9Y It got so bad thanks to Katzenberg’s “advice” of making it more adult, cynical and edgy that they not only nearly shelved the project, but Pixar itself nearly ended up shut down. And to be fair regarding Mary Poppins and the mom, I don’t think the mom was meant to be painted in a positive light, since it was thanks to her actions that Mary Poppins’ role in raising the children was even remotely necessary.
“Speaking of Laxalt, his grandson is due to be elected Governor of Nevada this evening, following in his footsteps (sadly, Paul Laxalt died early this year. I was hoping he’d live to see his grandson elected). He actually helped raise the grandson, who was a product of an affair between his daughter and the late Sen. Pete Domenici of New Mexico (which didn’t come out until after Domenici retired). Adam Paul Laxalt has the potential to be a future contender for President, which should’ve been his grandfather’s career capstone.”
Well, at least his grandson can take care of that if at all possible.
“I mean, look what was done to the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, Roy Moore, not once but twice. He defiantly stood up for what was right, and was twice removed for it. He scared the pants off the left (and was hated, too, by the GOP political establishment), one reason they had to destroy him in his run for the Senate. Frankly, he ought to be the Chief Justice of the U.S.”
Yeah, no kidding there. There’s just no excuse for the witch hunt he underwent. There definitely needs to be a way to ensure something like that no longer happens, even if it means basically having machines act as the ones to run things.
“Anything to demolish the leftist agenda is a positive.”
Agreed there, and since the French Revolution is the literal start of the left as we know it, that makes exposing its horrors all the more necessary.
“Oh, the ‘93 Body Snatchers movie. I had a modest crush on Gabrielle Anwar.”
Not very familiar with her. But I do know I briefly saw that clip and it disturbed me a bit. Not sure why the deflation was even necessary.
“I went to revisit that issue, though it didn’t seem to be much touched upon in the films (Karen Allen was about 30 in the 1st film). What’s considered to be appropriate/inappropriate with age today is not the same as it was a century ago. Girls at 14 were often considered to be “ready to marry”, there wasn’t this solid 18 rule now. Even into the 1970s, it was not scandalous for an older man and a girl of 17 (Woody Allen had this in “Manhattan”, where his character was dating and sleeping with a nubile Mariel Hemingway, which looks creepy now, but wasn’t seen as such at the time). I think it boiled down to the individuals, whether they were mature or not at that age. Although they’d charge Indy with being a pedo now, that would not have been shocking for a guy in his mid 20s being with a girl of 15-16-17. I got the impression Marion was VERY precocious at the younger age. Indy didn’t give off a vibe of wanting to have sex with children.”
Yeah, I know that back then people tended to marry young back then, but the examples you cited are people who are at least within their teens when they had a sexual relationship. George Lucas’s original plan was specifically to have Marion lose her virginity to Indiana Jones when they were 11 and 42, respectively. In other words, lose her virginity before she even hit her teenage years. I’m pretty sure even that would not have been accepted back then (and believe me, I barely even batted an eye with Romeo and Juliet having a secret marriage and consummated it when they were barely even 13 years old, not to mention didn’t mind Ariel being 16 in her film and being somewhat scantily clad due to being a mermaid, oh, and also her marrying the prince, heck, didn’t even mind Snow White, a fourteen year old, marrying a prince, so if I called foul on his literally having sex with a pubescent girl, not even a teenager yet, and at most being a tween, I’m pretty sure it’s definitely not a good thing there regardless of time periods.). It was actually bad enough that Spielberg and Kasdan (sort-of) had to talk Lucas out of it and get her aged up so that she’s, while not quite ideal of an age to lose her virginity, at least at an age where it would have been somewhat plausible she would have done so at that time (making Marion and Indy 15 and 25, respectively). I’ve even got a copy of the transcript online: https://web.archive.org/web/20110204013449/http://ramascreen.com/indiana-jones-is-a-child-molester/
And here’s the incriminating quote:
“George Lucas: I was thinking that this old guy could have been the mentor. He could have known this little girl when she was just a kid. Had an affair with her when she was eleven.
Lawrence Kasdan: And he was forty-two.
George Lucas: He hasn’t seen her in twelve years. Now she’s twenty-two. It’s a real strange relationship.
Steven Spielberg: She had better be older than twenty-two.
George Lucas: He’s thirty-five, and he knew her ten years ago when he was twenty-five and she was only twelve. It would be amusing to make her slightly young at the time.
Steven Spielberg: And promiscuous. She came onto him.
George Lucas: Fifteen is right on the edge. I know it’s an outrageous idea, but it is interesting. Once she’s sixteen or seventeen it’s not interesting anymore. But if she was fifteen and he was twenty-five and they actually had an affair the last time they met. And she was madly in love with him and he … “
Yeah, based on the way they were talking, Lucas was intending to make Marion lose her virginity as a child, and only by making her 15 did he effectively make a compromise (and he if anything seemed to think girls who were 16 or 17 were too old to be of interest. ...errr…)
“See, but you’re trying to reason with them. They’re not interested in being reasonable, only screeching tired, hackneyed phrases about murdering in the womb. You can’t reason with crazies, you can only defeat them.”
I suppose you’re right. Too bad the only I can think of regarding defeating them involves quite a bit of bloodshed that not only would most likely turn people against me, but also most likely damn me by God’s hand as well. Then again, if I cave to them and give them what they want, I’m damned by God anyway.
“That’s one of my biggest pet peeves. Ever since the media on Election Day 2000 pulled the Orwellian newspeak switcheroo of relabeling the party of the left “blue” to disassociate them from Communism, I just grit my teeth in anger. I never use that atrocious color scheme. The GOP, as a Conservative party, will always be blue and the Democrats REDS. I still try to get people not to use that backwards nonsense. It’s so historically wrong and absurd. So I’m hoping for a GOP BLUE wave, not a Commie-Demonrat RED one.”
Fine, I’ll go with Republican-Blue Wave, then. Though, funnily enough, making the Democrats Blue actually has them unintentionally exposing their true colors of them being the heirs of the French Revolution (Blue was the standard color of the French Revolutionaries of various stripes), which acted as the progenitor of Communism (Reds), as even Marx admitted. Well, either way, let’s hope Conservativism wins tonight.
“He certainly took the Soviets more seriously than FDR did, where he if anything cozied on up with the likes of Stalin, far beyond what was necessary to win World War II and even compared him positively to Great Britain, claiming the USSR wasn’t Imperialist (well, gee, knowing what the USSR truly was like, I’d probably prefer an “Imperialist” country like the USSR to a Communist one).”
Sorry, my comment on imperialism was actually meant to be Great Britain, not the USSR.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.