Due to walkout by virtue-signalling, know-nothing sub-mentals. You can read the truth about the allegation re: Dylan here:

https://ronanfarrowletter...en-part-i/

So what? Love his movies, have NO desire to know the "inner workings". Spare me and thank you!

"I don't think I'm the best, I simply like my voice..."

Ace said:

Due to walkout by virtue-signalling, know-nothing sub-mentals. You can read the truth about the allegation re: Dylan here:

https://ronanfarrowletter...en-part-i/

GOOD.

poppys said:

Love his movies

Ronan Farrow is the shit. It's his time. Maybe that's why estranged Dad suddenly decided to write a book.

thewrap.com

Hachette Book Group has dropped Woody Allen's autobiography, "Apropos of Nothing," a day after dozens of the company's employees staged a walkout in protest of the book's acquisition.

In a statement from Hachette sent to TheWrap, the publishing company said that it will not move forward with publishing Allen's memoir, which was scheduled for an April 7 release, and will return all rights to Allen...

[Edited 3/7/20 3:45am]

Ace said:

Due to walkout by virtue-signalling, know-nothing sub-mentals. You can read the truth about the allegation re: Dylan here:

https://ronanfarrowletter...en-part-i/

Robert Weide writes like a pompous jerk. I could care less about his bathroom breaks or his snide opinions. No one on the outside looking in knows what the truth is, and never will.

Not right, that is call out culture censorship. I want to make up my own mind and read it.

2freaky4church1 said:

Not right, that is call out culture censorship. I want to make up my own mind and read it.

Then you should petition a publishing company to publish it. At least 4 others turned it down before this one. It is their decision not to publish. Has nothing to do with you wanting to read it. It's not a government document.

poppys grr

2freaky4church1 said:

Not right, that is call out culture censorship. I want to make up my own mind and read it.

then some other publisher can pick it up. it is 100% up to the publisher. PERIOD.

and you agree with me but I doubt you will admit it!

poppys said:

Ronan Farrow is the shit.

There, I fixed that for you.

Ronan's a self-righteous SJW (redundant, I know - but worth it here) with Daddy issues. He's been directly challenged by Weide several times (with big money involved, even) and has never responded. Gee, wonder why that is?

poppys said:

Ace said:

Due to walkout by virtue-signalling, know-nothing sub-mentals. You can read the truth about the allegation re: Dylan here:

https://ronanfarrowletter...en-part-i/

Robert Weide writes like a pompous jerk. I could care less about his bathroom breaks or his snide opinions.

I believe this is what's known as an "ad hominem".

No one on the outside looking in knows what the truth is, and never will.

Two expert bodies, appointed by two different states (Connecticut and New York) examined this allegation inside and out and found it had zero merit. On the other hand, you have a woman (Mia) with a motive and her seriously messed-up daughter who's changed her story multiple times when the facts got in the way of what her mother drilled into her head at the age of 6.

Might I ask why you believe it?

[Edited to correct the spelling of "Connecticut". I'm Canadian. ]

[Edited 3/7/20 13:58pm]

2freaky4church1 said:

Not right, that is call out culture censorship. I want to make up my own mind and read it.

2freaky and I on the same page (no pun intended)?

I guess miracles do happen!

Ace said:

poppys said:

Ronan Farrow is the shit.

There, I fixed that for you.

Ronan's a self-righteous SJW (redundant, I know - but worth it here) with Daddy issues. He's been directly challenged by Weide several times (with big money involved, even) and has never responded. Gee, wonder why that is?

Haha, maybe because he doesn't have to? Virtue Signallers and especially Social Justice Warriors are some of my favorite labels. God forbid there should be Social Justice, lol. Ronan has grabbed the journalism spotlight and the old dog wants some.

Why do you only reply/quote only a few words of my posts anyway? Is that a tactic? It doesn't work.

Might I ask why you believe it?

Your reply box is messed up, but I said nothing about what I believe. I said we will never know. If that's a problem for you, I do not share it.

Ace said:

2freaky4church1 said:

Not right, that is call out culture censorship. I want to make up my own mind and read it.

2freaky and I on the same page (no pun intended)?

I guess miracles do happen!

it is not censorship as it is not the government doing it. it would be a violation of the 1st to force the publisher to publish the book.

poppys said:

Ace said:

There, I fixed that for you.

Ronan's a self-righteous SJW (redundant, I know - but worth it here) with Daddy issues. He's been directly challenged by Weide several times (with big money involved, even) and has never responded. Gee, wonder why that is?

Haha, maybe because he doesn't have to? Virtue Signallers and especially Social Justice Warriors are some of my favorite labels. God forbid there should be Social Justice, lol. Ronan has grabbed the journalism spotlight and the old dog wants some.

Why do you only reply/quote only a few words of my posts anyway? Is that a tactic? It doesn't work.

No, he doesn't respond because he knows he's busted.

Justice is everything to me (which is why I continue to set the facts straight about the Woody/Farrows thing wherever I can). "Social justice", on the other hand, is a nebulous concept that's usually wielded by...wait for it...virtue-signallers, with selective empathy who've apparently never heard of psychological egoism or read any Jung. Generally, I find it's angry people who won't admit what's really eating at them (often envy of power or other "privilege"). That's not to say that they don't have genuine empathy for the less fortunate, as well. We're all complex creatures.

I generally only quote the words that are pertinent to what I'm responding to. If you'd prefer, I can just bold them in your case (which I know some folk here do).

poppys said:

Might I ask why you believe it?

Your reply box is messed up, but I said nothing about what I believe. I said we will never know. If that's a problem for you, I do not share it.

Sorry. I should have said, "May I ask why you discount the findings of the Connecticut and New York experts, and why you discount the rather suspicious timing (and source) of an allegation leveled at a man who had zero prior allegations of sexual interest in children and zero since?"


[Edited to correct the spelling of "Connecticut". I'm Canadian. ]

[Edited 3/7/20 13:58pm]

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Ace said:

2freaky and I on the same page (no pun intended)?

I guess miracles do happen!

it is not censorship as it is not the government doing it. it would be a violation of the 1st to force the publisher to publish the book.

Well, of course censorship isn't strictly the domain of the government. And no one's trying to force the publisher to publish the book.

I'd say it's pretty clear that the phrase freaky uses here ("call-out culture censorship") refers to increasing SJW efforts in recent years to "de-platform" those whose words they don't like.

We could get into the semantics, but really isn't that just getting lost in the weeds?

Free speech is a principle.

2freaky4church1 said:

Free speech is a principle.

yep and in this case it belongs just as much to the publisher as it does to woody... and you agree with me... you may not be able to admit it but you do...

Ace said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

it is not censorship as it is not the government doing it. it would be a violation of the 1st to force the publisher to publish the book.

Well, of course censorship isn't strictly the domain of the government. And no one's trying to force the publisher to publish the book.

I'd say it's pretty clear that the phrase freaky uses here ("call-out culture censorship") refers to increasing SJW efforts in recent years to "de-platform" those whose words they don't like.

We could get into the semantics, but really isn't that just getting lost in the weeds?

yeah but here is the thing: the company will be judged for the books it publishes... if it was a pro-hitler book... would you say that a publisher that refused to publish it was anti-free speech?

Now one argument could be that they knew of his history and should have (if they are worried now) never agreed to publish it... and to change their mind now is uncalled for...

but remember someone will publish it...

or if they read a book and decide it sucked... what if the publisher if the book "IT" said he had to take out the child orgy or they would not print it... would that be so bad?

2freaky4church1 said:

Free speech is a principle.

Freaky, I'm liking you more and more these days! Like Biden and Bernie should, we should unite this party and fight the real enemy:

Encroaching heart disease and dentists who think that blinding-white veneers are appropriate for septuagenarians.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

yep and in this case it belongs just as much to the publisher as it does to woody

True 'nuff. But they should've just told these employees that they're taking the word of one single party (Mia) - who was highly motivated to exact "vengeance" on the accused - over the expert opinions of two separate, state-appointed bodies who investigated this accusation inside and out and concluded that it was mularkey.

Dylan's just a pawn in Mia and Ronan's game. And I feel horribly for her (as I do for everyone involved).

Ace said:

2freaky4church1 said:

Free speech is a principle.

Freaky, I'm liking you more and more these days! Like Biden and Bernie should, we should unite this party and fight the real enemy:

Encroaching heart disease and dentists who think that blinding-white veneers are appropriate for septuagenarians.

Free speech does not mean any private publishing company having to publish what you want them to. This has nothing to do with free speech - this is P&R lite. Woody has the freedom to self-publish just like anyone else.

poppys said:

Ace said:

Freaky, I'm liking you more and more these days! Like Biden and Bernie should, we should unite this party and fight the real enemy:

Encroaching heart disease and dentists who think that blinding-white veneers are appropriate for septuagenarians.

Free speech does not mean any private publishing company having to publish what you want them to. This has nothing to do with free speech - this is P&R lite. Woody has the freedom to self-publish just like anyone else.

seems they understand and agree... they just do not agree with how he was treated and on what basis.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Ace said:

Well, of course censorship isn't strictly the domain of the government. And no one's trying to force the publisher to publish the book.

I'd say it's pretty clear that the phrase freaky uses here ("call-out culture censorship") refers to increasing SJW efforts in recent years to "de-platform" those whose words they don't like.

We could get into the semantics, but really isn't that just getting lost in the weeds?

yeah but here is the thing: the company will be judged for the books it publishes...

As a Michael C. Moynihan tweeted:

"Still available from Hachette Book Group: the autobiography of Joey, a 'gripping' account of a mafia serial killer who copped to 38 murders. You'll be wowed by 'the frank intelligence of' the author!"

if it was a pro-hitler book... would you say that a publisher that refused to publish it was anti-free speech?

Well, there we're getting into issues of stirring up "race"-based hatred (Judaism is, of course, a religion, but tell that to Adolf and his disciples). I see your point, but wouldn't you agree that an autobiography by a man who's been cleared of a very suspicious allegation by (not one but) two expert bodies is...shall we say...somewhat different?

Now one argument could be that they knew of his history and should have (if they are worried now) never agreed to publish it... and to change their mind now is uncalled for...

but remember someone will publish it...

I hope you're right. Thanks for the civil discussion.

poppys said:

Ace said:

Freaky, I'm liking you more and more these days! Like Biden and Bernie should, we should unite this party and fight the real enemy:

Encroaching heart disease and dentists who think that blinding-white veneers are appropriate for septuagenarians.

Free speech does not mean any private publishing company having to publish what you want them to. This has nothing to do with free speech - this is P&R lite. Woody has the freedom to self-publish just like anyone else.

I'm aware of that, poppys. I was really just using his post as an excuse to try and broker peace with him (and to trot out my encroaching-heart-disease-and-veneers joke).