SoulAlive said:

You have to remember also, Michael already knew about strip clubs, he was performing in strip clubs in he was a little boy, so he had a "been there, done that" attitude about that.

Glindathegood said:

I think that's what people misunderstood about Michael the most, people telling him "you need to grow up", that's the point he was trying to make, he knew about being an adult when he was 11.

He had a full-time job and making money, traveling, being exposed to sex, etc., all this before he turned 14, hell before 9.

So everything Madonna was trying to "expose" him to, he already knew about it, it meant nothing to him.

yeah i think that's kind of tacky

going to a strip club is equated with adulthood, lol. i know plenty of grown straight men who do not like to go to strip clubs.

i agree obv he needed to grow up

but i think madonna's sex obsession isn't exactly the making of an adult either. an adult is somewhere in between.
[Edited 9/26/09 11:57am]

WaterInYourBath said:

You'd be surprised at how many women bring their men to strip clubs.Nothing strange or weird about it all It can be a sexy experience!

aww haha

SoulAlive said:

.... Yeah, everything is relative, so I can believe there are women who enjoy taking their men to strip joints. I don't get it though. It defeats the purpose of the date in my opinion, lol.

And to me, Disneyland as a date is not as childish as most may think. Like any amusement park, it seems to be a great place for a couple to have a good time together, and be close while walking around, watching shows, or playing the carnival games. I guess you need to be a youthful romantic in order to understand that kind of adult fun, lol.

PDogz said:

Hey,Madonna was a freak! At least she wasn't afraid to hide it.Like Rick James once said,"Let your freak flag fly!"

Arnotts said:

i know

dearmother said:

I think Madonna wanted to do "adult things",while Michael would have been happy hanging out at Disneyland or the zoo.It's obvious that they weren't compatible as a couple,lol.

[Edited 9/26/09 16:08pm]

That back-stabbing Rabbi will burn in hell!

I swear I will never understand how it was that MJ kept attracting these shady ass people into his life! What good where they? Its the same thing ovwer and over again.

Listening to the tapes, Mike was in so much pain and turmoil, how is it nobody could've found a way to help him? And its not like Mike had'nt been talking about this stuff for years, but the damn media just always had it in for him as he stated rightfully in those tapes.
\
His views on Madonna at that time was right on I'm sure, but from someone who has already pruchased the book, says that Mike made it clear that he was sure Motherhood had changed her for the better.

ReggaeQueen said:

How did the Rabbi stab Michael in the back? (...serious request for understanding)

PDogz said:

because he is "leaking" these things abt mj which the fankids absolutely hate cuz they feel like he violated mjs trust wen the rabbi said himself tht mj was often holding up the taperecorder and tht this was for a book they were working on

im not in totaal agreeance with how he went abt this cuz its SO soon after mjs death but other than tht i rly dont see the issue

ReggaeQueen said:

u cant help someone tht doesnt want it
u cant change someone tht doesnt want to change which is prly y schmuley ended the friendship. he said tht mj wasnt listening and tht shit hurts and gets tiresome to be constantly offering help and support to someone tht isnt listening and has no intentions on atleast trying

Moonwalkbjrain said:

Seems to me the Rabbi is following through with EXACTLY what Michael wanted him to do.

PDogz said:

yea thats the way i see it.
like i siad, my only issue is that it is SO soon after his death - it's coming cross as a kind of no respect for the dead type thing even though judging frmo their relationship it probably isnt, but yea.
i dont care tht he is releasing this, it seems that was to always be the plan

Moonwalkbjrain said:

Something I learned a long time ago: When you find yourself working harder at solving someone's problems than they are working to solve their own problems, that's when it's time to let it go. Seems to me the Rabbi did the right thing all along the way. And I can't see where anyone would be justified for condemning him to "burn in Hell" for shedding the light of understanding on Michael's life...that Michael requested him to do.

PDogz said:

what did he do right?

isn't this rabbi a con artist?

there was something about him and funds from a charity some years ago, either way i don't trust him
[Edited 9/26/09 17:53pm]

mimi07 said:

He published the transcripts that Michael recorded with the intention of being published.

mimi07 said:

I haven't come across any information to support that he's a con artist. If you have information that supports it, please share.

mimi07 said:

That's certainly possible, but again; I hadn't heard of that. But supposing that's true, how does it affect him conveying the message that Michael gave him to share? Wouldn't that be a different issue? I'm not supporting or condemning the Rabbi, just can't see where he's done anything wrong in releasing this material on Michael (...that Michael wanted released).

mimi07 said:

You're completely justified in drawing your own opinions based on what you feel.

i dont have any problems with him releasing it, i just thought it was shady of nbc to go on questioning michael and this and that and not the rabbi's bs story about how he cut off michael b/c he was losing him to drugs.

i love how all these people say that ex post facto!

PDogz said:

no i don't have a problem with him releasing the tapes if that's what michael wanted but couldn't he wait until after the investigation? he just wanted to cash in qucik and if he was a friend why didn't he publish these while michael was still alive...it's been years since they spoke and he is calling muchae;'s death an overdose from painkillers when it has been ruled a homicide and we know from propofol.all michael's "friends" seem to be ignoring this.

michael had to many shady people around, it's hard to tell who being for real when they're basically all cashing in

thatruth said:

Yeah, I have to go along with this, too. People didn't seem to get that Michael had 'been there, done that.' That he had grown-up, quite fast, in fact. He was trying to capture what he didn't have. He didn't have a childhood, his elementary years were sacrificed. For him, that was the huge price of his fame and I'm sure, he probably felt that he hadn't chosen it, at least in the beginning. I can relate to those kinds of feelings. He may have been Michael Jackson, but like most people, he only had a handful of real friends. Even if those friends didn't completely understand him, they accepted him. People just didn't get MJ. And it seems to me, that he cried out for help and it seems like some people did try to answer his cries, but that doesn't mean MJ didn't turn them away when he felt like he couldn't be bothered or if they weren't saying or doing what he would have preferred.

PDogz said:

Well it wasnt playboy that wrecked her image it was the rocker boyfriends, And 1993 when she burst on the scene she was dating her baywatch model co star. She really did have a sweet image when she first came out. Most people dont remember anything before Tommy Lee though

thatruth said:

YES!

Glindathegood said:

But like Madonna said she couldnt get over her own obsession with her mother. Traumas in childhood are hard to shake and tend to stick with you forever. She of all people should of known that, which it seems like she understands now

mimi07 said:

This book and supporting transcripts were just released THIS WEEK. The toxicology report is in, we know what killed Michael. What investigation is still pending that the Rabbi should have waited on?

mimi07 said:

From the time these recordings were made till the time of Michael's death was not a period where people were generally receptive to wanting to hear anything Michael had to say. In fact, the climate was generally hostile toward Michael. The Rabbi's response to that very question was that since Michael's death, people now are less harsh in their judgment of Michael, and more receptive to hearing what he had to say.

mimi07 said:

Perhaps Michael's "friends" know better than the general public. I don't think it should be overlooked the part Michael played in what happened; manipulating doctors to obtain the drugs he wanted, which resulted in his death. Homicide yes, because Michael did not inject himself with Propofol. But he certainly requested it, in fact begged for it, against the advice of many other people, and it killed him... just as he had been warned.

Incidentally, I miss Michael immensely and have been a fan of his since very early on, he was a very significant part of my world. May he be resting peacefully.

i think it was the ehal the world foundation schumley stole from in 2002 or something like that, if i can find my source i'll post it

PDogz said:

CO SIGN!

Very sad.
Michael had serious mental problems. Too bad everyone around him conveniently just found him as just "eccentric".
Never question the gravy train, lest they be left out of the loop.
The very thing he worried about the most,of people only befriending him for his money, his paranoia led those moochers feed off him in a frenzy.
[Edited 9/26/09 21:24pm]