Comments by "Bluebelle51" (@Bluebelle51) on "On Demand News" channel.

  1. Black people are literally saying "Stop killing us" and there are people who are saying "but........"
    1
  2.  @rileyjamesmusic9333  so the boy's parents called the cops on him? If that isn't the case then STFU with that bullshit
    1
  3.  @analogdistortion  oh I understand it well, I used to live in Klan country, it's nothing new to me
    1
  4.  @analogdistortion  Between August 2014 and November 2014, there were 14 kids shot to death by police, of those killed, 9 were black, 2 were Hispanics. That's not even a whole year, and doesn't include beatings, strangulations, or using vehicles as weapons, cause yeah, that happens too. It has been reported on, caught on security cameras, body cams and cell phones. I can't help it if you weren't paying attention.
    1
  5.  @analogdistortion  I know they do, my uncle was a cop and used to brag about it. When I was being stalked by the ex boyfriend from hell, he tried to give me an "untraceable" I moved out of state instead
    1
  6.  @analogdistortion  um, that doesn't jive with the cops story, so which is it? According to the cops, the gun was found in FRONT of the fence, not behind it. Meaning that either the gun was planted or the cop was lying. So which is it?
    1
  7.  @kindzis1  yeah actually they do
    1
  8. exactly
    1
  9.  @Espiritu-o7x  coup governments are not populated with "normal folks"
    1
  10. it's not just you
    1
  11.  @shrekdonkey3683  no soldiers should fight for the empire ever
    1
  12.  @riaenkarhystnk6318  No one really wants the US to intervene ever We don't protect people, we murder them
    1
  13.  @sylviabeam9343  I already know
    1
  14.  @sylviabeam9343  *hell doesn't exist either
    1
  15.  @sylviabeam9343  aren't real either (fixed it for ya)
    1
  16.  @sylviabeam9343  I'm already better than God, I'm real
    1
  17. Prayers: when you care enough to do the very least
    1
  18. Myths don't come back, but they make great movies
    1
  19.  @wokemyarse4133  carbon trading defeats the purpose of limited carbon, it's a scam
    1
  20.  @wokemyarse4133  of course carbon taxing is a joke, no governments do it enough
    1
  21.  @markgraham7291  that doesn't even make sense
    1
  22. They didn't censor the far right whackos They put them on the channel so no "freedom of speech" issue exists It's also OUR freedom of speech to point and laugh at them
    1
  23. REMINDER: PG&E has started over 1500 fires through negligence since 2014. Killing over 100 people, causing homelessness for thousands of people and animals, destroying businesses, and creating more carbon release than 2 coal fired power plants. No one went to jail
    1
  24. is anyone really surprised that racists are violent tho?
    1
  25. In the US, we have guns lots of them I personally have 7
    1
  26.  @conahscreations  I'm wondering, were the BLM protests in England? The UK? they were in the US so completely irrelevant to the conversation in the first place
    1
  27.  @1-0-v6d  In the country that colonized India, Pakistan, Africa, and the Middle East, there's no such thing as "illegal immigrants"
    1
  28.  @terrybunch7313  What's "drastic"? I'm honestly never shocked by the terrorism inflicted by white British They've perfected it over centuries
    1
  29. maybe it took 54 years for them to understand the damage that was done to them when they were sexually exploited children
    1
  30.  @rft2001  Even Italy has age of consent laws (they in fact invented them, then it carried over to England in 1275 to become "common law", the US didn't enact laws before 1885.) There is never anything "tasteful" about child sexual exploitation
    1
  31.  @rft2001  The age of consent has been a staple of law since 1275 in England, and American law since 1885. So the "rules I quoted" have been established law for quite some time and certainly a long time before the movie was produced. I have no problems whatsoever with sex workers or pornography, as long as it's consenting adults, it's none of my business. I actually think sex work should be legal and regulated so that the workers and their clients are safer, and protect children from being exploited at the same time.
    1
  32.  @rft2001  It's not a matter of who finds it offensive, it's a matter of child sexual exploitation, (that should be offensive to anyone with more than 3 brain cells) but the victims themselves are offended, wounded and had life long trauma because of it. Also, I have yet to call for "banning" anything, I want to see the victims compensated, I would like to see the perpetrators jailed, but since most of them are dead, that's seriously unlikely
    1
  33.  @rft2001  Why did you delete your other comments?
    1
  34.  @rft2001  Romeo and Juliet doesn't offend me, child sexual exploitation does. Especially from an industry that's famous for exploiting children in all manner of disgusting ways, harboring and covering for rapists (I'm looking at YOU Harvey Weinstein) and even getting children killed filming.
    1
  35.  @rft2001  The sexual exploitation of minors (who can't even legally sign a contract, or open a bank account) when filmed for mass consumption is child porn. There's nothing "innocent" about it other than the children involved. You must be a real pervert if you can't understand that. They weren't old enough to even offer consent, (at that time, in particular, the legal age of consent was 21, it has since been lowered to 18)
    1
  36.  @kanhaibhatt913  I think that's the entire point of the lawsuit, child sexual exploitation is never legal
    1
  37.  @ilresole603  They wouldn't have a chance in hell in previous years, because the law wouldn't allow victims of child sexual abuse to go to court. That changed recently, because of the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic church. Victims didn't come forward for years after the statute expired and so had no recourse to seek justice for themselves. That law was changed to allow them to sue their abusers decades after the abuse occurred, because the criminal laws do not apply after the statute of limitations has passed (usually 15 years, but it varies state to state). Also, we're not talking about "two old men", we're talking about a woman and a man, and we're also talking about the sexual exploitation of children, because they weren't old when the abuse occurred. It can only be a "matter of money" at this point, because of the laws involved, so that's a moot point.
    1
  38.  @ilresole603  I know how the system worked then and how it works now. It hasn't changed for centuries. You sign a contract with a corporation on behalf of your child, you don't like how your child is treated so you complain, and threaten to break the contract. Then the corporation who has lawyers on stand by to sharpen their lawyers pencils, threaten YOU with constant legal actions. The lawyers know that a case against you won't stand up in court, but they also know that their client has more money so they can force you into court often enough to bankrupt you with legal bills trying to defend yourself. They don't just do it over the contract, they do this to send a message to anyone else who would also try to break their contract. Are you trying to tell me that you believe the parents had more money than Paramount?
    1
  39.  @ilresole603  Third parties are to blame, not the parents, or the victims. Such is the nature of the law. While I do not doubt that the parents saw the finished film, I also do not doubt they were told they consented to their children's sexual exploitation, without realizing that they could not consent to a criminal act being committed on their children. I will guarantee if they complained about it at the time, they were threatened with a lawsuit they could not defend against without a lawyer they could not afford. That's the way corporations work, and that hasn't changed in the centuries we've allowed corporations to exist.
    1
  40.  @ilresole603  We know that the abuse is true because it was filmed and left in the movie, so that's not up for debate. Whether the parents knew or didn't know isn't a question either as it was a closed set, meaning only people required to make the scene were allowed to be present. Also, let's not forget that the exploitation of children in movies wasn't really ever addressed until 1982 when John Landis got 2 children killed on set of the Twilight Zone movie.
    1
  41.  @ilresole603  I have no doubt they suffered further abuse because they waited. As minors, their parents would have to sign a contract for them, as minors cannot legally do so. This does not mean that the parents can consent to their children being sexually exploited, (because that's a criminal act) even though they did sign contracts obligating their children to perform in the movie. As minors they had no right to consent, so regardless of whether they willingly performed nude, or if they had a gun to their head, the law sees it as the same.
    1
  42.  @ilresole603  Thanks for the clarification on the "you two", it was a confusing sentence. Also, they were minors, underage people have no right of consent, this means that no one had to force them, it's still sexual exploitation of a minor, and because they were minors, they couldn't receive any funds from the movie until they were 21, and from what I know about the era, they probably never saw a dime.
    1
  43.  @ilresole603  that's only true for criminal cases, this is a civil case. The person responsible for the sexual exploitation can't be put in jail after 15 years, (even if he were alive) but he (or his bosses, meaning Paramount) can be sued for damages resulting from the sexual exploitation no matter how long ago it was.
    1
  44.  @ilresole603  The film is owned by Paramount, a California company, that's why the laws of Cali apply, also, there's no statute of limitation on civil complaints, so the amount of time that has passed is irrelevant. If it were a criminal case (as it should have been) there's a 15 year limitation (if I remember correctly). The plaintiffs current financial situation is also irrelevant to the case
    1
  45.  @satoro514sodox7  Also, it's written in Hieroglyphs in some of the Egyptian tombs that date back 2000 year before Rome existed
    1
  46.  @Tobyyy24  What would you like to know?
    1
  47.  @funnygamer678  Hi, Egyptologist here the name of a country called "Palestine" is written in hieroglyphs in tombs, and temples glad to help out
    1
  48. which east?
    1
  49. the first earthquake I was ever in was in Alabama If you have mountains, they were built by earthquakes, you're gonna love it when the New Madrid pops off It's gonna make the Loma Prieta earthquake look tame cause nothing in the northeast is built to withstand a quake
    1
  50.  @guest3384  they couldn't hide it like Obama and Bush did
    1