Anyone else notice that the alleged IMF rapist D Strauss-Kahn was featured in movie "Inside Job"?

[cascadiance]

I just watched it last weekend with my sister (who actually was an "insider" who worked at Countrywide and then BofA and is thankfully out of there now). While watching, it hit me over the head that one of the people the filmmaker was interviewing was this IMF head accused of rape. If you get the DVD, he even has some supplementary interview material on it too (I haven't had a chance/time to watch that part of it just yet).

This seems to be being kept quiet and not talked about much even by the filmmakers as noted here:

http://www.myfoxphilly.com/dpp/news/local_news/imf-head-was-in-lurie-produced-movie-051611

Just like Weiner's being set up now when taking on the PTB, I wonder if there's any kind of "setup" that happened with this guy too for his involvement in this film. Now he doesn't sound like a good guy, but I wonder if he's being exposed while many other banksters would be "covered up" with similar circumstances. Thoughts? It doesn't seem like we have the complete picture here yet.

[cascadiance]

1. Hmm... Already an unrec on this post...

Why is this a bad topic? I certainly think "Inside Job" was one of the best flicks made last year too. Not trying to tear it down at all. But I wonder why this isn't discussed more.

[cascadiance]

3. Now two unrecs... Hmm... Someone's pretty fast on the trigger here...

Feel free to comment on why you think its a bad thing to talk about. If those here don't talk about it, I'll be lead more to the assumption that these unrecs by certain individuals are more efforts to "keep this quiet". I wonder why.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

70. Got you to add the ''alleged''.

So they served a useful purpose. I'll bet the unrecs stopped after that.

[sabrina 1]

5. I rec'd it, although I do agree that

he is not convicted yet and the charges don't include actual rape, but attempted rape. Maybe that is why you are getting unrecs? Maybe if you added 'alleged attempted rapist'?

Anyhow, I have not seen Inside Job yet. However, he did have powerful Global enemies as well as French political enemies. He was on his way to meet Merkel and was urging a bail-out for Greece. Many 'speculators' were betting on the collapse of Greece, ghouls that they are. Although I don't think alone was why he had enemies.

Whether he is guilty or not remains to be seen, but one thing is for certain, if he was still on 'the inside' we probably never would have heard about the alleged crimes.

Edited to say, ignore my first couple of sentences ~

[Princess Turandot]

61. re: the charges

"charges don't include actual rape, but attempted rape"....

The reason the charges 'don't include rape' is because in NYS, forced oral sex is called 'criminal sexual assault'. (That may not be the exact term.) However, forced oral sex is a class B felony, exactly the same weight that vaginal rape is classified as.

[sabrina 1]

72. But accuracy is important, is it not?

And allegations are still different from convictions. Sentencing rules also differ depending on how the jury is presented with a case. The fact is the charge is 'attempted rape'. I imagine that is important to the lawyers on both sides of this case.

[joshcryer]

89. Why is it worthy of consideration? His statement is one of the shortest in the entire film.

Almost everyone else interviewed had much more comprehensive things to say.

[SpiralHawk]

92. A lot of paid occult Republicon black-ops stooges come here to try and hide

truth and reality. Sad that people can sink so low...

[TroglodyteScholar]

2. I believe you mean "alleged rapist"...

...that is, assuming you believe in the rule of law.

[cascadiance]

4. You're right. Fixed it.

That doesn't take away from this topic warranting some discussion though.

[cascadiance]

18. Ack, the greatest page shows the older title. Still has the editing "bug"...

Seems like every web site still has annoying bugs in it. Wish DU would fix this one. I guess they won't be forced to fix it like Yfrog will be likely forced to fix the security bug that allowed the hacker to go after Congressman Weiner.

[JDPriestly]

6. Of course. The accusations against Strauss-Kahn may simply be a means to silence

a political foe. Hard to say at this point. But it is possible that there is nothing or very little to them.

[cascadiance]

7. Interesting that his expected replacement, Christine Lagarde, was also featured in "Inside Job"...

That makes for an even more interesting connection to this film.

http://www.blogrunner.com/snapshot/D/4/3/french_minister_in_the_spotlight_for_imf_role/

[suffragette]

66. LaGarde is certainly being pushed strongly by Sarkozy and G8

Been searching for more info on her and she has some interesting connections and views.

She interned for a U.S Republican, William Cohen and was a member of CSIS, is a proponent of the free market and no friend to labor.


http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1374629/Christine-Lagarde

[cascadiance]

74. Interesting... I may have to watch this film again...

She came across earlier as wanting us to regulate our banking sector more and other things that I might think are less "free market" friendly. But I don't remember a lot of what she said. Will have to watch it again to see if there are more things between the lines she speaks that are worth listening to. What you note here seems to make this question even more interesting to examine closely.

[suffragette]

81. Found this aggregate of quite a few different articles

that show a different picture:
http://articlesofinterest-kelley.blogspot.com/2011/05/pro-bank-bailout-christine-lagarde-imf.html


I did move the film to the top of my queue, so hope to watch it next week.

[joshcryer]

87. Yeah, but she's thrown under the bus because she has the wrong connections...

...being an accused rapist is OK.

[Dreamer Tatum]

8. Or maybe he just tried to rape a woman and he got caught? nt

[cascadiance]

10. Whether he raped her or not to me is not as important as these connections...

As I note earlier, I think the guy perhaps likely is not a nice guy and though we still need to wait and see and not jump to conclusions (as we are told we MUST do with congressman Weiner), I think these connections and how they are kept quiet is an interesting topic that we should all try to understand whether or not he was guilty of rape or not.

As I also note, it makes you wonder if many of the other banksters that weren't becoming in effect "whistleblowers" are given more free reign to do this sort of thing and we never hear about it, which might be one reason why he felt he was able to do so as well without impunity.

And I don't want to dismiss a crime such as rape as not being "important". If he was guilty, then by all means punish him. As Thom Hartmann said, this maid coming out with what happened was made possible by her being a part of a strong union that supports her, which might not be the case in other hotels. And it is also encouraging others to take more courageous stands when confronted with similar situations. I say more power to people doing that. But that's a different topic.

[KittyWampus]

12. Linking Weiner's twitter getting hacked with a rapist is patently absurd.

If you were paying any attention at all, you'd have seen the threads discussing the MULTIPLE instances of this lech abusing/raping women.

[cascadiance]

15. Like I said, if the guy is guilty, then by all means put him away...

I'm not here to convict this guy or to dismiss the charges against him. My concern is how his work on "Inside Job" might have affected this whole situation, and if it is something we should think about when looking at other crooks on Wall Street now who are being kept immune from scrutiny from many crimes now.

[sabrina 1]

26. We saw 'discussions' of abuse.

I saw two 'allegations' both contradicted btw.

There are a lot of connections in this story that should cause people to wonder. And since Europe is far more aware of what has been going on over there, it was certainly understandable that their reaction was very different from that of the US which was responding to false and inaccurate statements, by eg, the NYPD spokesperson (more interesting connections there) and that false information disseminated through France's version of Karl Rove on twitter and in his, coincidentally, fairly new 'political' rag.

These issues concern millions of people. I want to know FACTS, not allegations and since so many of the early 'facts' have now been corrected and we have some actual facts, I will wait for credible information from credible sources. The NYPost is not a credible source nor is the NYPD many times, especially when they themselves may have an interest in this case.

[MicaelS]

19. If DSK was a Conservative.....

All these discussions about him being "set-up" wouldn't exist. But since he's a Socialist, and putatively on "our" side, then it's conspiracy city. From the evidence, I'd say he's just another wealthy powerful male who thinks he can have anything, or anyone, anytime he wants it. I don't care about his politics.

And I completely disagree with you, whether he raped her or not is MUCH more important to me than "these" connections.

[cascadiance]

21. Again, I'm not trying to say his raping her is NOT important...

... or even less important than what I'm discussing here. I think rape is a damn serious crime, and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law on this guy, no matter what his politics are if he's guilty.

I was just trying to not let this thread devolve in to just talking about whether he was guilty or not of rape and try to stay focused on how his involvement in this film might have affected those events. I'm trying to emphasize this discussion in this thread, not to dismiss the other topic as being "less important". I believe we should be talking about all of these different subjects. But lets keep focus and not hijack threads to avoid talking about other pieces of the puzzle.

[seabeyond]

24. you keep saying "not trying to say his raping her is NOT important..."

but it sure as hell keeps sounding like that is exactly what you are saying.

[cascadiance]

27. How else can we then talk about this subject without someone presuming what my feelings of rape are?

I'm VERY sensitive to the topic of rape, and I'm trying not to offend people here on this at all.

But how else would you suggest I frame this topic to talk about this movie connection in an intelligent fashion and not have us get distracted by whether we feel he's a rapist or not and how we feel about that crime. I think I share your opinions about it, but I also wonder about the coincidence of him being involved in this film. I do think that it is a topic worth discussing. Do you or don't you? If we can determine more the true facts of what happened with that rape, and perhaps what happens with other unreported rapes with these upper echelon by understanding what happened here, don't you feel that is worthwhile?

Sorry. I'm trying not to offend, but if you persist in trying to label me something I'm not, then I'm starting to take offense to that.

[seabeyond]

43. i dont know how you shift the blame of rape from the rapist to conspiracy without sounding offensive

a man rapes. a victim reports. the cops arrest.

how do you then shift it to, he was arrested for sticking his dick into a womans mouth and cumming in her mouth because he was not a friend to our govt.

[cascadiance]

60. You are putting words in to my mouth and continuing to hijack this thread...

I'm NOT trying to take issu with whether he's guilty or not guilty of rape. And I'm NOT trying to minimize the crime of that.

But just because we have someone that's been raped, doesn't mean that we can't talk about other tangential issues to the case. It does NOT mean we are trying to minimize that case. In fact I would say that by talking about these other issues, it makes us MORE looking for the truth than people like you that keep trying to dismiss these "conspiracies" and just get in to arguments about whether someone is trying to offend or not offend people about their feelings of rape.

YOU are the one that's trying to shift the topic of this thread to an area that it wasn't focused on. And that is what is called hijacking. Trying to insinuate what my feelings are on this hijacked direction are is what I'd call trolling.

I'm not going to respond to your attempts at churning up controversy any more. I'm going to focus on the topic I intended in this thread. I've already stated multiple times my feelings of rape on this thread and what I feel should happen to him if he's found guilty. I don't feel like I should have to explain it again.

[seabeyond]

62. you want people to ignore a rape, minimize rape, entertain a conspiracy theory dismissing rape

i am not willing to do that. it is too bad your thread does not go along your expectation for fellow duers, but it probably is not going to happen, as people oppose... rape.

[cascadiance]

65. This "conspiracy theory" does NOT dismiss it as a rape...

As sabrina also notes very eloquently where perhaps I've not been as clear. I'm merely trying to look at tangential facts to this case, that as we both have said are still relevant and worth looking at regardless of the outcome of the case. Pardon me for looking at these other pieces of information. I wasn't aware that was a crime itself or that looking at it makes one dismiss the crime of rape. I hope that those investigating this crime don't have that sort of thought process and get all of the relavent facts to make sure that justice is served.

Do you KNOW this guy is guilty of a rape? He very might well be and personally I think it is likely that he is. Even my first wording of the subject line, I made the mistake of leaving out "alleged" and in fact "convicted" with him with my own words which another poster properly corrected me on. If you are a true Democrat, whether or not you feel he's guilty of rape or not, you will respect the right everyone has to get a trial for a crime they are charged with. My statement to the effect shouldn't be mistaken for me trying to minimize the crime that's involved and how much I feel he should br punished if he's found guilty. The right are the usual suspects of people standing up for democratic process and labeling them for doing so when a controversial case like this happens where everyone wants to convict a person before the facts are laid out. Let's not go down their path please. That's what gets us all in to trouble.

Can we drop this?

I will acknowledge that you are someone very concerned about the importance of acts of rape, and I completely support that sentiment and commend you for your feelings and dedication to that effort that many of us share here. Can we both acknowledge that we want the right things and that rapists get punished? Thanks!

[Dreamer Tatum]

25. Actually, that's exactly what you said. nt

[cascadiance]

29. Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear that I was speaking in the context of this thread...

I should have made that more clear. I was trying to say that whether or not he was guilty of rape, that these questions still are relevant and not dismissed by the outcome of that decision.

[sabrina 1]

42. I understood clearly what Cascadiance meant.

And, FYI, he could be guilty of the charges against him, AND the victim of a global/French conspiracy. The point is, there are many reasons why the Global Corporate Capitalists PLUS the French President, a member of that nefarious group, wanted him gone.

To deny that for emotional reasons, is doing exactly what is expected of the public when they want to take down someone who is not going along with the New World Order. And since the public USED to react exactly as predicted, they generally have managed to control the world for quite some time, to the huge detriment of millions, maybe billions of people.

Far more important than these two individuals and which one is right or wrong, is the fact the Global Powers interested in the fall of DSK and/or anyone else who opposes their tactics, even minimally, have control over the lives of so many people. They can and have shattered lives, they have propped up brutal dictators who have encourage rape as a weapon of war.

This story is NOT just about two people, although there are many powerful people who would like us to think it is. I am very happy to see all over the place now, that we are not as easily distracted as we used to be. Or as gullible.

Cascadience's OP is an indication that we will NOT take anyone's story at face value anymore. Not without question. For me, I have already discovered some very interesting things about this case and when I have double-checked and am certain of my facts, I will post them.

[MicaelS]

28. OK, how's this?

I think he finally committed a crime in a place where such crimes are not overlooked, or brushed off as boys will be boys. I think the victim was smart, and reported the crime promptly. Her statement matches what she told the outcry witness. DSK ran and left evidence behind. I think the police did their jobs in an exemplary manner.

I don't think his appearance in a film had anything to do with him getting arrested. I think any attempt to link the two is woo-woo conspiracy crap.

[cascadiance]

31. It might be, or it might not be. That's the discussion I'm trying to start.

I'm not sold that these two events aren't just coincidental.

Also recall how Al Gore was accused of inappropriate behavior with a massage therapist.

Or Scott Ritter recently was arrested and convicted of trying to go after minors sexually on an online chat board.

Or Julian Assange being scrutinized for his sexual encounters as someone who's HIV positive.

In all of these cases, many of these individuals were guilty, and in some cases not. But the increased scrutiny they got was very likely due to their confronting the PTB on topics that the PTB don't want discussed. Whether people are guilty of these alleged crimes or not is not the point.

And to dismiss all of these as coincidence that shouldn't be looked at because one would be "conspiracy mongering" is a convenient way of helping them facilitate a coverup if indeed there were efforts to focus scrutiny on them.

[sabrina 1]

45. 'A place where such crimes are not overlooked'??

Are you referring to NYC? To the NYPD? Because if you are, you could not be more wrong. In an ongoing scandal concerning the NYPD, where crimes were routinely 'downgraded' to manipulate the statistics on NYC being 'safe', one of the crimes that was consistently down-graded was reports by rape victims. As a result of this practice by the NYPD, a serial would-be rapist attacked six women before someone finally found the other reports and saw what happened to them.

The six victims of that rapist would absolutely disagree with you. As all six of them DID report the crime.

The NYPD has a huge corruption problem. The Whistle-blower eg, who provided the two years of tapes exposing the latest corruption, was, in Soviet Union Style, dragged out of his home and put in a psychiatric ward for six days, and harrassed by his former fellow Police officers in his home.

He is now suing all involved, but the evidence he collected is pretty damning against the NYPD and certainly does not paint them as all that concerned about 'rape'. Unless, apparently you are a high profile target of Global interests and the Chief of the NYPD is best friends with your political rival, Sarkozy, back home.

This story will one day make for a great book and movie, and if the truth emerges about what is behind all of this, we will be the better for it.

Meantime, no one knows the facts of this case. Certainly NOT from the misleading statements early on, now debunked, by the NYPD
spokesperson, Paul Browne. A man who was implicated himself in the persecution of the Whistle-blower I mentioned above.

Facts are amazing things. You would think we would never again take any story coming from the 'authorities' without questions.

[seabeyond]

46. misleading statements like dks saying he wasnt even there nor looking at she wanted it. nt

[sabrina 1]

48. But you were there?

I will wait to see the evidence. I am not capable of seeing what goes on in places where I have not been. This is a rare gift apparently that some people have.

Since I am not gifted in that regard, I am awaiting evidence.

But no, what either party says at this stage is merely 'he-said, she-said'.

What I was talking about was actual statements made by the NYPD in the initial stages to the tabloids and then circulated around the world, breathlessly declared to be facts, that have now been totally debunked. Nothing to do with what either the woman or DSK have to say. I dismiss what both are 'saying' at this early stage of any crime.

But, we now know that eg, he did NOT 'flee' the country. Just one of the many wrong statements made by the NYPD spokesperson, Paul Browne until he was corrected by the facts, which he may or may not have known before misleading the tabloids the way he did. That too will be cleared up as the case progresses. I can wait, no need for me to jump to conclusions about anyone involved yet.

[seabeyond]

49. this is the hoot is the always, will wait to see, as you continue to throw out every defense

imaginable. and it is only imaginable. there is not about proof, fact or evidence

[sabrina 1]

53. I am throwing out facts. Who the facts will

support in the end, will be up to a jury.

As I said, I was not there, and I have never in my life pretended to know what might have happened in a place where I have never been. If you feel you have the powers to know with certainty what goes on in places you have never been, I envy you. I truly wish I could do that.

[sabrina 1]

56. Frankly I consider anyone who is involved with the IMF

to be suspect, regardless of whether they are supposedly 'socialist' or 'conservative'. Why do you assume that all of us are that disingenuous? Some of us actually care about facts regardless of party politics. I find it insulting, especially since many of those questioning THIS case, have also questioned their own party right here and THEIR motivations for what they do.

I'm surprised that someone who can see through the Breitbart scam, would so easily dismiss the actual facts surrounding this case which may or may not mean this man was set up. He could be guilty as charged btw, AND set up so I see nothing wrong with getting the facts before making decisions and learning nothing more about issues that will have a far greater impact on millions of people all over the world, than this one case will ever have.

[Dreamer Tatum]

23. Did you just say that whether he raped her or not isn't as important as a conspiracy theory?

Good heavens. Something that is an "interesting topic" to you is more important than a violent assault on a woman.

Wow.

[cascadiance]

32. AGAIN! What do I have to do to say that for THIS THREAD I want to say that topic is more important!

Sheesh! How many times do I have to say that I DO NOT CONDONE RAPE, and WANT RAPISTS PUNISHED!

And how do I say that I at times want to look at events that might be connected to a rape that might help us get more information about it, and not just have it dismissed as "not being important to talk about" which you seem to be implying is the case here when you try and dismiss this topic as somehow not being worthy of discussing, and that we should ONLY talk about whether he raped her or not and if he's guilty.

That topic has been talked about at length here. I'm sorry if earlier I didn't have time to participate in it. I think I fall in to line with most here that find it abhorrent what he is alleged to have done, and if he's guilty, should be prosecuted fully for it. How many times do I have to say that.

And how can I have a discussion about this without people getting upset about me somehow impugning that rape isn't important, which I've tried to over and over say is not the case.

Can't we have an intelligent discussion on this? Damn!

[Dreamer Tatum]

33. An intelligent discussion when all you have is a stupid fucking movie?

No, there can be no intelligent discussion. Unless, of course, you have something like evidence to present, other than the guy was in a movie. Wow. Big whoop. I mean, if there really are secret powers that be out there, they'd just have the guy killed, wouldn't they?

Wow...shadowy powers that secretly pull all the strings...except they would NEVER just kill someone...nooooo...so much the better than to see if maybe sexual assault charges will stick?

Do you see how silly that is?

[cascadiance]

36. If you don't want to watch this "stupid fucking movie" that WON last year's Oscar then don't!

But for those of us who have watched this movie, maybe we can have an intelligent discussion about what he said in it, and how subsequent events might be all connected, or might not be for that matter.

If you don't like this discussion, why don't you just go about looking at other threads that are of more interest to you. Sorry if I wasn't trying to focus on the already well discussed rape issue over everything else that you seem more interested in getting engaged in.

[Dreamer Tatum]

37. In other words, you have an appearance in a movie.

And that's it.

Wow.

[cascadiance]

39. And Al Gore had an appearance in "An Inconvenient Truth"...

And someone like you would say "and that's it. Wow." as if that shouldn't be discussed.

He was a featured interviewee, and there were so many parts of the film where "So and so wouldn't give us an interview" in it, including the likes of Summers and Geitner. For someone on a political board, you have a pretty low appetite for "political discussions" here.

[Dreamer Tatum]

40. Your discussion is more suited to IMDB. nt

[U4ikLefty]

91. lame.

[Skidmore]

52. Boy, does this conspiracy garbage seem familiar.

[seabeyond]

58. yup. nt

[KittyWampus]

9. He has a proven history of raping/abusing women. Not only was he not set up, those supporting him

look like fools.

From a European DU'er who posted this with links- if you want the live links go to the original DU thread at the bottom of this post:

The maid's version of events, on the other hand, is quite plausible. At first, it seems a bit surreal, but once you find out about DSK's background, it all starts to make sense.

+++DSK was well-known in France as a womanizer, one so pushy that his advances bordered on harrassment <1>.

+++When he was named chief of the IMF, he was warned by his colleagues that he had to be careful in the U.S., where sexual harrassment is taken more seriously than in France <1>.

+++DSK himself admitted that one of the three most important obstacles to his presidential candidacy was "les femmes" <2>.

+++A woman named Tristane Banon -- one of his daughter's friends -- has recently come forward and stated that he tried to rape her in 2002 <3>.

+++In 2008, at the IMF, he had an affair with one of his subordinates, Piroska Nagy -- the IMF found that he had made a "serious error of judgment", though they did not feel he had abused his position. Nagy, on the other hand, suggested that she had been put in a situation where she had little choice but to accept his advances <4>.

+++Now, we find out that he hired prostitutes in NYC who complained that he was "rough and angry". Various editorials and op-ed pieces in French newspapers have pretty much admitted that if the incident with the maid had happened in France, it would never have reached the media <5,6>.

It is therefore not a stretch to speculate that this guy had a huge sense of entitlement and could not imagine that he would get in trouble for sexually assaulting a black immigrant hotel maid in NYC.

Everything suggests that events happened exactly as the maid described them. The police likely recovered a ton of physical evidence to corroborate her claims. I only hope that he will be convicted and suffer the consequences of attacking someone much weaker and less powerful.

References:
<1> http://www.leparisien.fr/dsk-la-chute/dsk-seducteur-jus...
<2> http://m.sfr.fr/home/u/news/c/filinfo/s/politique/a/urn...
<3> http://www.liberation.fr/politiques/01012337844-tristan...
<4> http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2009/02/17/01003-2...
<5> http://www.liberation.fr/politiques/01012337647-primair...
<6> http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2008/10/18/01003-2...

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4856011#4858190

[seabeyond]

14. look like fools..... or worse. nt

[zeemike]

11. Well I think it is a valid point....We don't know

And have no real way of knowing because it is a big fucking club and we are not in it.
And they have centuries of experience with controlling the media and minds of most of us.
They have done it for decades passing the skill on from father to son along with the profound wealth that goes with power and control.
The rest of us are easily fooled and molded into doing all kinds of things like send our young to a foreign land to kill the colored men and are made happy with bread and circus.

[seabeyond]

13. unless the victim of rape is gotten to quick enough.... their is no stuffing genie

back in bottle.

he shouldnt have raped

he wouldnt be "exposed"

[cascadiance]

16. Like I said, this topic isn't here to convict or dismiss him on rape charges...

Yes, that issue IS important, and if he's found guilty, he SHOULD be put away and he deserves NO sympathy from any of us.

But one can put aside for a moment whether he's guilty or not, and discuss more how his involvement in this film might have affected the scrutiny given to him, even if deserved, and contrast that with others who might not be getting the scrutiny they also deserve, simply for the reason of him being involved in this film.

Maybe a better question to ask would be "If he wasn't involved with this film, would we hear about or even know about this alleged rape today?"

[seabeyond]

17. i answered by saying, if a rapist does not get to victim fast enough, cannot stop it. let me ask?

why isnt the question with past known history

why is this rich, powerful, white man able to buy off/excused away previous victims without paying a punishment for assaults and attempted rapes.

goes along perfectly with your question, only other side.

[cascadiance]

20. And maybe he was able to get away with it a lot more BEFORE he was involved with this film...

... and now he's dispensable, so instead of putting pressure on the hotel to silence this woman, they just stood back and allowed her to make her allegations known this time. Kind of fits with the way our oligarchy works now, don't you think?

[seabeyond]

22. working hard for your scenario and really kinda sick. the woman called police not knowing who raped

her

the police arrested not knowing how "important" this man was.

which absolutely goes against your theory, excusing.

in france, this behavior is not only allowed, but appreciated in the upper elite of society. that is why it was excused, allowed and flourished.

i sure which women abused had the same strident supporters as rapist men have

[sabrina 1]

30. The police knew well who he was. You need to do some research

on this story if you are going to continue to comment on it. The NYPD Chief of Police is BFF with DSK's arch political rival, Sarkozy, in France, among other things. The NYPD spokesperson, Paul Browne, best friends with Kelly for decades, made several inaccurate statements from the beginning that caused a lot of the false statements in the Tabloids. Iow, he misled on the initial reporting of this case and since been corrected. Was it deliberate? We will find out.

There is no question that the police knew who he was, and if I were to speculate, as so many here do, I could create a very interesting scenario myself based on what I have now learned about all the inter-connections here, the French Connection, I could call it, or at least one chapter of the story.

I wish people would at least stop spreading false information here on DU. It reduces the credibility of the site.

[cascadiance]

35. WHAT is the false information that you say I'm trying to spread?

The ONLY thing the original topic of this thread was that he was part of the film "Inside Job"! Are you saying that is false? I think YOU need to do more research if you are going to dismiss that FACT! Now in this country we assume people are innocent until they are tried and found guilty. I'm not taking issue with whether he's guilty or not. And someone corrected me to make sure I put in "alleged" in front of rapist to not make that he was guilty. I agreed that I should have and updated the thread title. It sounds like you've studied this a lot, and I respect your information on this. I don't think I've tried to take issue with it at all.

I only put up information that he (and his presumed French replacement in another post here) were both involved in the film "Inside Job" and asking for comments. I don't see how that's "spreading false information".

It is when people get all emotional and bent out of shape when someone isn't trying to do what they think they are doing that I think at times reduces the reputation of this site.

[sabrina 1]

38. My post was not directed to you. You have not spread false

information. It was directed to post #22, seabeyond, who made the inaccurate statement that the NYPD did not know who DSK was when they arrested him.

They knew exactly who he was. And interestingly, the NYPD Chief is close friends with Sarkozy. See my post again. I am going to write more about his case, but not until I am certain of all the information I have uncovered so far.

Thank YOU for your OP, I wish more people would not take things at face value, and/or allow emotions to cloud their judgement as is intended. DSK maybe have done what he is accused of, but what he was involved in on a global scale has far more impact on far more people around the world, including women and children, than this one case. I would like to know a lot more about it before making a decision.

So, thank you for being curious enough to ask questions. Some people have no questions, they are certain of THEIR facts, most of which came from tabloids and misinformation put out by Sarkozy's best friend's spokesperson, the NYPD Police Chief. There is so much about this story we do not know.

[cascadiance]

41. Sorry Sabrina, I'm getting caught in other unreasonable threads here...

I should have looked more closely. If you also look at my post here on the French minister, Christine Lagard, who was also well featured in the film, is coincidentally being thought of as Strauss-Kahn's replacement. That also seems to be curious too. I wonder if there's anything to look at here, or if that's just coincidence as well.

Thanks for trying to engage in a decent discussion I'd hoped for. For the record, I'm all for empowering workers like the woman at that hotel being protected by their unions (or some entity) to speak up on occasions like this and taking down people who engage in such awful acts. I say "alleged", because even if the facts really work against this guy which it sounds like they do, he still is entitled to a trial before we pronounce him guilty, and I will stand by that.

There's so much we don't know what these oligarchs do around the world now that need more light shed on them. How many people here knew that the Koch brothers were heavily funding the DLC earlier before it was taken down "coincidentally" around the time that Citizen's United case was decided on. I'm guessing there's more that connects those two issues that we also should know about too.

[sabrina 1]

82. Sorry for the delay in responding to your post cascadiance,

I was not familiar with Christine Lagard until you mentioned her. I agree, now that I know a little more about her that she is a very interesting choice! I think there is probably a lot to look at there which I will definitely do.

Thank YOU for attempting to have a rational discussion about what may become one of the most important cases for a long time.

It is amazing how the revelation of the DLC being funded by the Koch Bros has been barely noticed, at least for now. And the coincidence you pointed out re Citizen's United. I think you are absolutely right, that there is more that connects those issues than is apparent right now.

I really do appreciate your starting this thread and I will definitely have to watch the documentarty :-)

[seabeyond]

44. cause when police go after an accused rapist they talk to NYPD chief of police, first....

and the stupid, tired misreported first hours as if that is an issue is the only thing you have to hang onto in an unreasonable and illogical manner

i do with people would hold to facts

[sabrina 1]

47. Police spokesperson, Paul Browne, does NOTHING

without speaking to the NYPD chief. Absolutely nothing, they are legendary in NYC for their joined-at-the-hip relationship. And for you to say that the NYPD did not know who he was is ludicrous. Where did you get that information? From the Post, Atlantico?

Check your sources, they are leading to wrong conclusions. I think it's pretty well established by now that the NYPD knew very well who he was. I don't know why you are continuing to debate the issue. Really, try another argument, this one has been pretty much settled already.

[seabeyond]

50. that was after the arrest that had nothing to do with the statement i made. nt

[sabrina 1]

51. Do you know what time the arrest actually was?

[seabeyond]

54. ok, brought in off the plane for forensic investigation. nt

[sabrina 1]

57. Okay, so you don't. Well, that's fine.

As I said, do some research. You might be surprised how little we knew early on.

[seabeyond]

59. he was arrested in the morning. but that really has nothing to do with what we are discussing. nt

[sabrina 1]

68. Of course it does, but since you already know everything,

not much point in telling you anything. A mind that has closed, has closed. I like to keep doors open, as too many times I have had to admit how wrong I was about what appeared to be 'facts'.

[seabeyond]

69. see, that is the thing

i am almost never wrong. and i doubt i will be on this either. because i have an open mind. ergo, i can trust what i have concluded. when it is a matter of not knowing, i say, i do not know and dont find myself wrong, which ever way it goes.

[sabrina 1]

71. I truly envy your clairvoyance.

[seabeyond]

76. it is not a matter of clairvoyance. nt

[Forkboy]

73. "i am almost never wrong."

That's what everyone says. ;)

[seabeyond]

75. everyone

has nothing to do with me. i cant speak for e.v.e.r.y.o.n.e.

[Forkboy]

79. To me, you're part of everyone else, so it's in the eye of the beholder.

Anyways, just laughing at the arrogance of your statement. It was pretty funny, and I need some good chuckles.

[joshcryer]

88. I appreciate your convictions, so many people are too afraid to actually hold a position.

Many people seem to think "I don't know one way or another" is a valid position, nah, just shows ones on fear of taking a stand somewhere.

[joshcryer]

86. They knew when they arrested him, they didn't when they requested the warrant.

At that point the arrest was inevitable if he didn't get out of the country.

[suffragette]

34. I've been meaning to watch this and have it on my Netflix queue

Time to move it up.
Given the many references I've seen now to the film, looks like important, timely viewing.

[sabrina 1]

67. I haven't seen it either, but will be watching it also.

[ecstatic]

55. Thanks for the head up. I definitely won't be watching a rapist

I wouldn't be able to stomach that, no matter what he has to say. That's probably why the producers are keeping it secret, btw.

[cascadiance]

63. That's a good point. That might be the reason they are keeping quiet on this...

Since this is a very emotional issue, and I can completely understand when some may want to avoid seeing his comments. Each person has to decide how they want to deal with that. I'm glad I was able to prevent you from having to deal with that if you were unprepared seeing that film later.

For me, I want to understand more how such a mind thinks, if he is guilty of such a crime, so I perhaps will even watch the supplementary DVD material of him, which I haven't watched yet. That would help me perhaps when I look at others in the future accused of similar crimes to get a gut feeling then whether they are guilty or not of such crimes. I think its very important that we can have such insights in today's world where so much of what we get from media and other "official" sources are so questionable any more given how they are controlled.

[seabeyond]

64. interesting. and maybe

that is what you are coming up against. there are enough of us that have already gained that insight in many different ways adn we dont need to start working on it now.

as i said

interesting

[joshcryer]

85. He is barely shown on there and doesn't say anything ground breaking.

All he says is that the corps "wanted" regulation. Of course almost everyone "wants" regulation, doesn't mean that their bottom line does or that any sensible person can control it. Anti-regulation is a series of very big mistakes made by a very small number of people all of whom should be prosecuted.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

77. you mean he has been convicted already, whoa, thats some speedy justice n/t

[cascadiance]

78. Note that the title on the greatest page is no longer the title of the thread...

I have changed it to "alleged" as it should be. Unfortunately, a DU bug continues to not allow you to edit the title of a thread as it appears on the greatest page when you edit the title of the thread.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

80. I agreed with you, look a bit closer at the post i responded to :) n/t

[joshcryer]

84. He is featured twice and answers two questions totalling less than a minute total screen time.

He is by no means "featured" in any significant extent.

[cascadiance]

90. He's as featured as many other of the interviewees are here...

He's one of ten individuals that has supplemental "outtakes" in the DVD extras and has around 7 1/2 minutes of screen time there.

Another individual worth noting that's got a lot of presence here in the film is Eliot Spitzer, who also arguably was targeted for prosecution of his personal life antics too. Even though true they were focused on because of his efforts to go after the financial industry, which was the central theme of another documentary by oscar winning director Alex Gibney last year, "Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer"...



http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/13/entertainment/main7051609.shtml

Spitzer arguably was targeted the way possibly that DSK might have been targeted too. He also is one of the ten with around 15 minutes of outtakes in the "Inside Job" DVD.

[joshcryer]

83. His policies don't reflect his rhetoric. Greece's finance ministry in Athens has been taken over...

...today thanks to DSK's totalitarian policies. I wish the protesters the best of luck.

(And before anyone silly says that the US owns a good chunk of the IMF and it's the US's fault DSK's policies were implemented, I would have to beg to differ greatly, the US didn't donate any money to Greece by law and DSK's administration holds all of the cards, since member states can only vote on a few minor things. DKS's "reforms" aren't going into effect until 2014, if they happen at all.)