I begin my article with facts that no one denies: In March 1977, the international film director Roman Polanski copulated with a young girl who was aspiring to become a fashion model, with the ploy that he wanted to take her pictures for the French version of Vogue Magazine. He gave her champagne and drugs, and then raped her in a grotesque manner. Polanski confessed to rape and then made a plea deal with the prosecution, something that is usually practiced in the U.S. The judge was expected to sentence him to 42 days in prison, the duration of his detention leading up to his trial, without him serving any additional sentence in prison for his crime. What happened is that Polanski was released on bail, and then travelled to Europe to finish working on one of his films. When the judge saw his picture with Nastassja Kinski, a 15 year old actress, he decided to reject the plea bargain, prompting Polanski to flee, and to not return to the United States. Polanski then remained a fugitive from the law until he was arrested in Switzerland, on the 26th of September. In fact, Polanski was 43 years old when he raped that 13 year old girl, (and perhaps did the same with Kinski, but consensually, and maybe with other girls). His victim testified in the court, giving an account of what the film director had done to her while she was expressly telling him “no”. The details of this crime are impossible to publish here owing to their horrid nature, but it should be mentioned here that none of the details mentioned in her testimony were ever denied. Moreover, Polanski said in an interview with the press in Europe that “everyone wants to ... young girls”. The blank dots here are to replace an obscene sexual word that Polanski used, as if he is talking about “coca-cola”. He also justified his flight from justice by claiming that the thorny trial brought back long-suppressed memories of Nazi Germany, which was so disturbing that he could not bear it. The girl then personally sued him, collected a settlement and publicly offered her forgiveness. All of the above are well-documented facts that are one hundred percent true and that are indisputable, and I continue: Roman Polanski is a human monster: While an ordinary rapist usually commits rape because he cannot find a woman who would accept him, Polanski is rich and famous, and some of the most beautiful women in the world would want to have a relationship with him, and yet, he chose to rape a little girl. Furthermore, the fact that he managed to justify his actions compounds his crime, because the view that he expressed would render every man a potential rapist, and also because he somehow associated all of this to the Nazi crimes. This is despite the fact that Polanski was a newborn when the Nazis seized power in Germany, and was only 12 when the Nazis were defeated. While the above is a crime that was committed by Polanski, this paved the way for another crime, this time committed by all those who spoke in his defence, and who demanded his release on the grounds that his case is old and is not “worth it” (although I believe that the worst possible crime is raping a child, be it a girl or a boy, as Polanski did, and then murdering the victim, as he did not do). Personally, I am opposed to capital punishment in all crimes including high treason, except when it comes to raping and murdering children. As such, I believe that Polanski deserves the life sentence, since he did not murder, and not only two or three years as the law stipulates. In any case, Hollywood is nothing but a pit of sin, and for this reason, Woody Allen, Harvey Weinstein, along with Whoopi Goldberg, Pedro Almodovar, Salman Rushdie and dozens others demanded that he be released. Furthermore, Weinstein actually started gathering e-mails to push the U.S State Department to put pressure on Switzerland, and release his friend whom he described as a “humanist”, and whom I insist is a “human monster”. What is even worse than what is exposed above - which is something one would expect in the world of Hollywood - is the French official position in defending their Jewish-French citizen, in the face of the charges he is facing. For instance, the foreign minister Bernard Kouchner said that Polanski's arrest was “evil”, while the French minister of culture Frederic Mitterrand described the arrest as “absolutely terrible”, and that Polanski's crime was “an old and meaningless issue”. But Mitterrand immediately fell in the trap that his own words have set, when he was immediately reminded of what he had mentioned in his own memoirs published in 2005, about him having had paid for sex with boys in Thailand; this means that he is a sexual pervert just like Polanski. What's also strange is that the minister tried to deny after that, what he had himself said about his own actions; no one believed him however, and calls for his resignation became even more resolute. This obscene French stance was further articulated by the alleged philosopher Bernard-Henri Levy, who defended Polanski in an article that I found to be as despicable as his former campaigns against the Egyptian culture minister Farouk Hosni, during the election campaign for the post of UNESCO's director-general. Levy said that this is a crime committed 32 years ago, and one that is neither a deadly crime nor a crime against humanity, and I say that is a horrible crime, and that its perpetrator and those who are defending him are equally horrible. Levy also said that the victim had withdrawn her complaint, that she was compensated and that what remains is the issue of public order in pursuing the perpetrator. He then said that he had decided a long time ago, that he [Polanski] was not a paedophile, and I say that Levy is [dishonestly] claiming this, since the film director had indeed raped a little girl and confessed to his crime. In the end, I want to ask Levy and each and everyone who is defending Polanski: would he have still done so if the little girl who was raped was his own daughter? I think what I will hear from them in response will be yet another lie.
