herb4 said:

Prince, since his death, has been almost entirely universally praised and celebrated by everyone media outlet there is aside from the shitty tabloids. But the tabloids do that to EVERYONE. That's what they DO every day to EVERYONE.

For close to two decades, hardly anyone even CARED about Prince. He'd become a walking punch line due to the name change, he wasn't mainstream and not many people beyond his hardcore fan base even bought his records anymore. Even with "Baltimore", no one gave a shit about that, even FOX News and the usual right wing outlets didn't smear him for it.

Even Muhammad Ali, a GENUINE rebel, a world leader and figure, an outspoken black man that was GENUINELY devisive and very counter culture...a MUSLIM for crying out loud...didn't get "smeared" when he died. Quite the opposite in fact.

This idea that Prince was some dangerous, militant, rabble rousing revolutionary leader who had to be stopped or whose reputation had to be destroyed posthumously flies in the face of reality, every shred of evidence we have, the genuinely glowing and respectful treatment he received by 99% of the non-tabloid media, and is insane and paranoid in my view.

Shit, the guy's more universally respected and loved now than he EVER was, including the Purple Rain era, thanks largely to the YouTube embargo being lifted, the walls that were built around his music being torn down and the revelations of his charity and genorosity being more known.

If one is going to focus entirely on tabloid coverage and draw conclusions of negativity and conspiracy theories from that, you may as well apply the same standard to EVERY famous person, living or dead. What did you guys expect the National Enquire to do, run a front page story on Prince's charitable donations? Do they EVER run a positive headline about ANY famous person, living or dead?

No. So how is this evidence of singling out Prince for character assassination?

You don't have to make a big production out of a smear. The average person is thinking right now that Prince was a drug addict. We are the only ones that are concerned about what happened to him.

The rest of the world is like yeah all rock stars are addicts. No big deal.

The fans are like hold up that's very out of character.

You mentioned Muhammad Ali but please understand that MILLIONS didn't like him until he got sick and couldn't talk.His likeness was corporatized and Madison Avenue sanitized his image.

Most of the negative information in this case came from the lawyer of Lorna and Duane Nelson who helped Lorna sue Prince over U Got The Look and Duane who got left out of John L's estate. he has axes to grind. The first thing he throws out was drug addict for years and that's a smear.

Now you can believe what you want to but I put the Cointelpro Papers out there and the next black male star this happens to hopefully you will see what happens.

If not so be it.

herb4 said:

.

Lastly, why are you so convinced about Johnny Depp being guilty of smacking his wife around based on the affidavit of ONE person (and being protected b Hollywood) yet think Bill Cosby is somehow being framed by SIXTY-TWO different women?

You are gulity of being a victim click bait yourself if you believe that Cosby raped 62 women.

Go and look up the facts. The lastest so called victim has been proven to have been lying because she said that he raped her in the Payboy Mansion and Cosby hadn't been there in a year. Another woman comes out and said Cosby forced himself on her on the Tonight Show and Cosby wasn't hosting the show that week. 90% of the cases are out and out lies and the other 10% were from women who had sexual relationships with him.

YET you have producers in Hollywood who are raping kids and no one says a word. Cory Haim mentions it once and he's dead a couple of weeks later.

Everyone in Hollywood knows of the Casting Couch. It's a sick world but it happens and if you don't want to do it there is someone who will.

[Edited 7/27/16 4:39am]

muleFunk said:

herb4 said:

Prince, since his death, has been almost entirely universally praised and celebrated by everyone media outlet there is aside from the shitty tabloids. But the tabloids do that to EVERYONE. That's what they DO every day to EVERYONE.

For close to two decades, hardly anyone even CARED about Prince. He'd become a walking punch line due to the name change, he wasn't mainstream and not many people beyond his hardcore fan base even bought his records anymore. Even with "Baltimore", no one gave a shit about that, even FOX News and the usual right wing outlets didn't smear him for it.

Even Muhammad Ali, a GENUINE rebel, a world leader and figure, an outspoken black man that was GENUINELY devisive and very counter culture...a MUSLIM for crying out loud...didn't get "smeared" when he died. Quite the opposite in fact.

This idea that Prince was some dangerous, militant, rabble rousing revolutionary leader who had to be stopped or whose reputation had to be destroyed posthumously flies in the face of reality, every shred of evidence we have, the genuinely glowing and respectful treatment he received by 99% of the non-tabloid media, and is insane and paranoid in my view.

Shit, the guy's more universally respected and loved now than he EVER was, including the Purple Rain era, thanks largely to the YouTube embargo being lifted, the walls that were built around his music being torn down and the revelations of his charity and genorosity being more known.

If one is going to focus entirely on tabloid coverage and draw conclusions of negativity and conspiracy theories from that, you may as well apply the same standard to EVERY famous person, living or dead. What did you guys expect the National Enquire to do, run a front page story on Prince's charitable donations? Do they EVER run a positive headline about ANY famous person, living or dead?

No. So how is this evidence of singling out Prince for character assassination?

You don't have to make a big production out of a smear. The average person is thinking right now that Prince was a drug addict. We are the only ones that are concerned about what happened to him.

The rest of the world is like yeah all rock stars are addicts. No big deal.

The fans are like hold up that's very out of character.

You mentioned Muhammad Ali but please understand that MILLIONS didn't like him until he got sick and couldn't talk.His likeness was corporatized and Madison Avenue sanitized his image.

Most of the negative information in this case came from the lawyer of Lorna and Duane Nelson who helped Lorna sue Prince over U Got The Look and Duane who got left out of John L's estate. he has axes to grind. The first thing he throws out was drug addict for years and that's a smear.

Now you can believe what you want to but I put the Cointelpro Papers out there and the next black male star this happens to hopefully you will see what happens.

If not so be it.

1.While I might partially agree with you that the "average person is thinking right now that Prince was a drug addict", the fact is that the average person "may be" thinking that. How do we know what they are thinking? I don't think it is fair to assume that "we are the only ones that are concerned about what happened to him". There are millions of fans that care about what happened to Prince that dont participate in the forums, or believe he was a drug addict. That's a hard absolute to say we are the only ones that are concerned.

2. People didn't like Muhammad until he got "sick"? When would you say he got "sick"? He was suffering from Parkinson's for a very long time. I mean way before he couldn't talk properly he exhibited signs of it. I could remember watching the Ali-Cosell skits/ the roasts/his many speeches to several universities /colleges, etc, and this all seemed to be very well received not only by White Americans that were conscientious objectors/ anti-establishment, but by the world outside of America . This would number in the hundred of millions that did like him arond the globe .Were you around in the 70's? If you are referring to citizens who aligned themselves with a war mongering governemt at that time, or citizens who held firm racist beliefs at that time, then yes, I can agree. Theres' a big difference in what/who we are a classifying the" millions that didn't like him" ,as.

3. "Most of the negative information came in this case came from the lawyer".... Is that how it started? I am asking because I don't remember. I can tell you that when I saw him , I had no idea about any information concerning fentanyl, information that the lawyer for his siblings stated , or any other interviews that were done. It was a gut feeling. A personal feeling. This was before he even got on the plane. People were already talking about him being "sick" and I don't think they meant "sick" as in "chronic hip/knee pain" sick. It was hard to be specific but "speculation" was rampant way before that perilous day.. Have you ever seen him? Ever seen him close up? Spoke to him? Been backstage? You probably would have your own opinion if you did. I know I do.

4. "Cointel papers"...I hope you're not right, but it can happen, and has. I don't think this was the case concerning Prince.

This IDIOT! His comment after the Minnisota delegates declaired "We are the stateof Prince's Purple Rain." (to thunderous applause I might add)

*

*

My reply:

*

@Knight_Phantom seen the news lately. He was a drug addict terminally ill with AIDS and overdosed Keep living in you fan fantasy world

*

ASSHAT!

KnightPhantom said:

laytonian said:

KnightPhantom said:

This IDIOT! His comment after the Minnisota delegates declaired "We are the stateof Prince's Purple Rain." (to thunderous applause I might add)

*

MarioLanzia ‏@MarioLanziaUS 20h20 hours ago

@ABCPolitics a great musician but drug addicts who take their own lives are not good role models for anyone especially youth

*

My reply:

Knight Phantom ‏@Knight_Phantom 14h14 hours ago

@MarioLanziaUS @ABCPolitics Your comment has no basis in fact. It's people like you, who spread false rumors, that are a bad example.

*

@Knight_Phantom seen the news lately. He was a drug addict terminally ill with AIDS and overdosed Keep living in you fan fantasy world

*

ASSHAT!

The mindless sheeple will believe anything the media feeds them.

muleFunk said:

herb4 said:

.

Lastly, why are you so convinced about Johnny Depp being guilty of smacking his wife around based on the affidavit of ONE person (and being protected b Hollywood) yet think Bill Cosby is somehow being framed by SIXTY-TWO different women?

You are gulity of being a victim click bait yourself if you believe that Cosby raped 62 women.

Go and look up the facts. The lastest so called victim has been proven to have been lying because she said that he raped her in the Payboy Mansion and Cosby hadn't been there in a year. Another woman comes out and said Cosby forced himself on her on the Tonight Show and Cosby wasn't hosting the show that week. 90% of the cases are out and out lies and the other 10% were from women who had sexual relationships with him.

YET you have producers in Hollywood who are raping kids and no one says a word. Cory Haim mentions it once and he's dead a couple of weeks later.

[Edited 7/27/16 4:39am]

You don't know a thing about me. I don't follow "click bait" or tabloid stories, like, AT ALL, but congratulations for being a rape apologist I guess. So ALL 62 women are lying and "they" killed Cory Haim? Why haven't "they" just whacked Bill Cosby then? One or two opportunstic gold diggers I can see, sure, maybe. So you honestly believe Cosby's being framed but, conveniently, you never answered my questions about Depp and why you'll hang your hat on ONE accuser.

You excuse 62 allegations with a wave of your hand and believe ONE person who accused Johnny Depp. Hmm....I wonder what the difference could between the two (beyond "61" I mean)? Cosby and Johnny...Let me think on it...

laurarichardson said:

laytonian said:

.

^^^^^ THIS

.

-- The walking punchline who sold out the Oracle Arena doing a Piano and Mic show just a fee weeks before he died. You are so ignorant on Prince is it unreal.

Enlighten me then.

You have a weird habit of glossing over ENTIRE posts in order to create strawmen and generate drive-by posts exuding your own moral superiority. Yes, me, the single biggest Prince fanatic anyone in my circle has ever known, is "ignorant" about him. The entire bookcase I've collected dedicated to his work has rendered me unknowing. He WAS a walking punchline in the mid 90's. Do I have to dig up YouTube clips? The Artist Formerly Known As" was a god damned meme.

I never viewed it that way myself and I only brought it up to point out that no one considered him edgy or dangerous, nor in need of being murdered or some shit. Sure, he was popular, everyone knew who he was and he could sell out arenas but let's not pretend he wasn't the butt of a lot of jokes or that he was ever dangerous enough to the establishment to warrant any sort of character assassination.

First of all there are NOT 62 allegations!

There are about 5 cases that have barely met the standard to bring charges.

However you quote this like it's gospel.

muleFunk said:

First of all there are NOT 62 allegations!

There are about 5 cases that have barely met the standard to bring charges.

However you quote this like it's gospel.

.

Why do you think Kirk has a lawyer?

Why do you think you hear so little about these doctors?

Why do you hear so little form the relatives about the health situation of Prince before he died?

.

Not because it is simple, clear and legal.

I agree. There was a lot going on before he died that we didn't know about, and there is a heck of a lot right now going on involving the authorities. I tend to believe that if the autopsy report showed a "simple" overdose, the family would release it, but perhaps the investigators have asked that it not be released at this time. Yes, Prince took the Fentanyl, but I would bet my house that there were people around him for years (doctors and "civilians") who knew he was "self-medicating" and now some of them are on the very hot seat.

LBrent said:

this is purely my opinion, but I believe that people who insist that P died of AIDS are the same people, whether they liked his music or not, have always felt some type of way about his sxual ambiguity (and assumed he was either gay or at least bisexual thereby presumably high risk for getting HIV).

I believe they secretly hope that there will be an announcement that P died of AIDs so they can finally feel validated and be able to say, "Aha! I always KNEW it!"

I think that's it exactly. They want him to get the proper commupance for performing masculinity 'wrong,' and being such an utter badass about it. They deserve total side-eye.

LBrent said:

this is purely my opinion, but I believe that people who insist that P died of AIDS are the same people, whether they liked his music or not, have always felt some type of way about his sxual ambiguity (and assumed he was either gay or at least bisexual thereby presumably high risk for getting HIV).

I believe they secretly hope that there will be an announcement that P died of AIDs so they can finally feel validated and be able to say, "Aha! I always KNEW it!"

I seriously doubt whether we will ever hear anything "official" from the family about the AIDS claim nor any other health related issues. There's a legacy here, a lot of money, and there is no way they will risk one dime of it, truth or not.


While I have always felt there is much more to this story than a Fentanyl overdose, it doesn't matter to me if he did have AIDS nor any other disease, I still love him regardless.

Mumio said:

I seriously doubt whether we will ever hear anything "official" from the family about the AIDS claim nor any other health related issues. There's a legacy here, a lot of money, and there is no way they will risk one dime of it, truth or not.


While I have always felt there is much more to this story than a Fentanyl overdose, it doesn't matter to me if he did have AIDS nor any other disease, I still love him regardless.

I couldn't agree with you more!

muleFunk said:

1Sasha said:

I agree. There was a lot going on before he died that we didn't know about, and there is a heck of a lot right now going on involving the authorities. I tend to believe that if the autopsy report showed a "simple" overdose, the family would release it, but perhaps the investigators have asked that it not be released at this time. Yes, Prince took the Fentanyl, but I would bet my house that there were people around him for years (doctors and "civilians") who knew he was "self-medicating" and now some of them are on the very hot seat.

That's psychobabble. "They won't release it so they must be hiding something." Why would the family release it if he died of a "simple" overdose? Unlike most, it seems, his family understands and respects the fact that Prince didn't live out his private life in public. So they have and hopefully will continue to maintain that respect for him. I appreciate the fact that they and his associates haven't been blabbling about anything anywhere.

BTW, the same rag that ran with the HIV story from the beginning is now saying he definitely did not have it.

[Edited 7/29/16 2:57am]

The New York Times

Addiction is a Learning Disorder.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/26/opinion/sunday/can-you-get-over-an-addiction.html?_r=0

June 25, 2016

Credit James Gallagher

I SHOT heroin and cocaine while attending Columbia in the 1980s, sometimes injecting many times a day and leaving scars that are still visible. I kept using, even after I was suspended from school, after I overdosed and even after I was arrested for dealing, despite knowing that this could reduce my chances of staying out of prison.
My parents were devastated: They couldn’t understand what had happened to their “gifted” child who had always excelled academically. They kept hoping I would just somehow stop, even though every time I tried to quit, I relapsed within months.
There are, speaking broadly, two schools of thought on addiction: The first was that my brain had been chemically “hijacked” by drugs, leaving me no control over a chronic, progressive disease. The second was simply that I was a selfish criminal, with little regard for others, as much of the public still seems to believe. (When it’s our own loved ones who become addicted, we tend to favor the first explanation; when it’s someone else’s, we favor the second.)
We are long overdue for a new perspective — both because our understanding of the neuroscience underlying addiction has changed and because so many existing treatments simply don’t work.
Addiction is indeed a brain problem, but it’s not a degenerative pathology like Alzheimer’s disease or cancer, nor is it evidence of a criminal mind. Instead, it’s a learning disorder, a difference in the wiring of the brain that affects the way we process information about motivation, reward and punishment. And, as with many learning disorders, addictive behavior is shaped by genetic and environmental influences over the course of development.
Scientists have documented the connection between learning processes and addiction for decades. Now, through both animal research and imaging studies, neuroscientists are starting to recognize which brain regions are involved in addiction and how.
The studies show that addiction alters the interactions between midbrain regions like the ventral tegmentum and the nucleus accumbens, which are involved with motivation and pleasure, and parts of the prefrontal cortex that mediate decisions and help set priorities. Acting in concert, these networks determine what we value in order to ensure that we attain critical biological goals: namely, survival and reproduction.
In essence, addiction occurs when these brain systems are focused on the wrong objects: a drug or self-destructive behavior like excessive gambling instead of a new sexual partner or a baby. Once that happens, it can cause serious trouble.
Continue reading the main story


If, like me, you grew up with a hyper-reactive nervous system that constantly made you feel overwhelmed, alienated and unlovable, finding a substance that eases social stress becomes a blessed escape. For me, heroin provided a sense of comfort, safety and love that I couldn’t get from other people (the key agent of addiction in these regions is the same for many pleasurable experiences: dopamine). Once I’d experienced the relief heroin gave me, I felt as though I couldn’t survive without it.
Understanding addiction from this neurodevelopmental perspective offers a great deal of hope. First, like other learning disorders, for example, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder or dyslexia, addiction doesn’t affect overall intelligence. Second, this view suggests that addiction skews choice — but doesn’t completely eliminate free will: after all, no one injects drugs in front of the police. This means that addicts can learn to take actions to improve our health, like using clean syringes, as I did. Research overwhelmingly shows such programs not only reduce H.I.V., but also aid recovery.
The learning perspective also explains why the compulsion for alcohol or drugs can be so strong and why people with addiction continue even when the damage far outweighs the pleasure they receive and why they can appear to be acting irrationally: If you believe that something is essential to your survival, your priorities won’t make sense to others.
Learning that drives urges like love and reproduction is quite different from learning dry facts. Unlike memorizing your sevens and nines, deep, emotional learning completely alters the way you determine what matters most, which is why you remember your high school crush better than high school math.
Recognizing addiction as a learning disorder can also help end the argument over whether addiction should be treated as a progressive illness, as experts contend, or as a moral problem, a belief that is reflected in our continuing criminalization of certain drugs. You’ve just learned a maladaptive way of coping.
Moreover, if addiction resides in the parts of the brain involved in love, then recovery is more like getting over a breakup than it is like facing a lifelong illness. Healing a broken heart is difficult and often involves relapses into obsessive behavior, but it’s not brain damage.
The implications for treatment here are profound. If addiction is like misguided love, then compassion is a far better approach than punishment. Indeed, a 2007 meta-analysis of dozens of studies over four decades found that empowering, empathetic treatments like cognitive behavioral therapy and motivational enhancement therapy, which nurture an internal willingness to change, work far better than the more traditional rehab approach of confronting denial and telling patients that they are powerless over their addiction.
This makes sense because the circuitry that normally connects us to one another socially has been channeled instead into drug seeking. To return our brains to normal then, we need more love, not more pain.
In fact, studies have not found evidence in favor of harsh, punitive approaches, like jail terms, humiliating forms of treatment and traditional “interventions” where families threaten to abandon addicted members. People with addictions are already driven to push through negative experiences by their brain circuitry; more punishment won’t change this.
In line with the idea that development matters, research also shows that half of all addictions — with the exception of tobacco — end by age 30, and the majority of people with alcohol and drug addictions overcome it, mostly without treatment. I stopped taking drugs when I was 23. I always thought that I had quit because I finally realized that my addiction was harming me.
But it’s equally possible that I kicked then because I had become biologically capable of doing so. During adolescence, the engine that drives desire and motivation grows stronger. But unfortunately, only in the mid-to-late 20s are we able to exert more control. This is why adolescence is the highest risk period for developing addiction — and simple maturation may be what helped me get better.
Sign Up for the Opinion Today NewsletterEvery weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, The Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.

At the time, nearly all treatment was based on 12-step groups like Alcoholics Anonymous, which help only a minority of addicted people. Even today, most treatment available in rehab facilities involves instruction in the prayer, surrender to a higher power, confession and restitution prescribed by the steps.
We treat no other medical condition with such moralizing — people with other learning disorders aren’t pushed to apologize for their past behavior, nor are those affected by schizophrenia or depression.
Once we understand that addiction is neither a sin nor a progressive disease, just different brain wiring, we can stop persisting in policies that don’t work, and start teaching recovery.

Indeed, if the compulsive drive that sustains addiction is directed into healthier channels, this type of wiring can be a benefit, not just a disability. After all, persisting despite rejection didn’t only lead to addiction for me — it has also been indispensable to my survival as a writer. The ability to persevere is an asset: People with addiction just need to learn how to redirect it.

Maia Szalavitz is the author of “Unbroken Brain: A Revolutionary New Way of Understanding Addiction.”

[Edited 7/29/16 19:38pm]

muleFunk said:

herb4 said:

.

Lastly, why are you so convinced about Johnny Depp being guilty of smacking his wife around based on the affidavit of ONE person (and being protected b Hollywood) yet think Bill Cosby is somehow being framed by SIXTY-TWO different women?

You are gulity of being a victim click bait yourself if you believe that Cosby raped 62 women.

Go and look up the facts. The lastest so called victim has been proven to have been lying because she said that he raped her in the Payboy Mansion and Cosby hadn't been there in a year. Another woman comes out and said Cosby forced himself on her on the Tonight Show and Cosby wasn't hosting the show that week. 90% of the cases are out and out lies and the other 10% were from women who had sexual relationships with him.

YET you have producers in Hollywood who are raping kids and no one says a word. Cory Haim mentions it once and he's dead a couple of weeks later.

Everyone in Hollywood knows of the Casting Couch. It's a sick world but it happens and if you don't want to do it there is someone who will.

[Edited 7/27/16 4:39am]

Johnny Depp is Innocent his lesbian wife wants a pay day! Bill Cosby GULITY! 62 women are NOT lying, what is their motive? they are not asking for money! Cosby got involved in the Tawana Brawley rape case on the Al sharpton band wagon, (Tawana lied about the rape - case was dropped) to make himself look so anti rape. Give me a break, Not only did he rape them he drugged them he could have killed one of them if they had a bad reaction to the drugs. He will die in jail blind, and his wife is an idiot. Oh yeah and all the jails are full of innocent people.

[Edited 7/29/16 20:23pm]

[Edited 7/29/16 20:45pm]

muleFunk said:

herb4 said:

Prince, since his death, has been almost entirely universally praised and celebrated by everyone media outlet there is aside from the shitty tabloids. But the tabloids do that to EVERYONE. That's what they DO every day to EVERYONE.

For close to two decades, hardly anyone even CARED about Prince. He'd become a walking punch line due to the name change, he wasn't mainstream and not many people beyond his hardcore fan base even bought his records anymore. Even with "Baltimore", no one gave a shit about that, even FOX News and the usual right wing outlets didn't smear him for it.

Even Muhammad Ali, a GENUINE rebel, a world leader and figure, an outspoken black man that was GENUINELY devisive and very counter culture...a MUSLIM for crying out loud...didn't get "smeared" when he died. Quite the opposite in fact.

This idea that Prince was some dangerous, militant, rabble rousing revolutionary leader who had to be stopped or whose reputation had to be destroyed posthumously flies in the face of reality, every shred of evidence we have, the genuinely glowing and respectful treatment he received by 99% of the non-tabloid media, and is insane and paranoid in my view.

Shit, the guy's more universally respected and loved now than he EVER was, including the Purple Rain era, thanks largely to the YouTube embargo being lifted, the walls that were built around his music being torn down and the revelations of his charity and genorosity being more known.

If one is going to focus entirely on tabloid coverage and draw conclusions of negativity and conspiracy theories from that, you may as well apply the same standard to EVERY famous person, living or dead. What did you guys expect the National Enquire to do, run a front page story on Prince's charitable donations? Do they EVER run a positive headline about ANY famous person, living or dead?

No. So how is this evidence of singling out Prince for character assassination?

You don't have to make a big production out of a smear. The average person is thinking right now that Prince was a drug addict. We are the only ones that are concerned about what happened to him.

The rest of the world is like yeah all rock stars are addicts. No big deal.

The fans are like hold up that's very out of character.

You mentioned Muhammad Ali but please understand that MILLIONS didn't like him until he got sick and couldn't talk.His likeness was corporatized and Madison Avenue sanitized his image.

Most of the negative information in this case came from the lawyer of Lorna and Duane Nelson who helped Lorna sue Prince over U Got The Look and Duane who got left out of John L's estate. he has axes to grind. The first thing he throws out was drug addict for years and that's a smear.

Now you can believe what you want to but I put the Cointelpro Papers out there and the next black male star this happens to hopefully you will see what happens.

If not so be it.

Prince was not a drug addict? really? why did he receive a Narcan shot to save his overdose when the plane landed? and then died of an over dose 6 days later. It's not a smear its a fact. It was out of character for him but he obviously didnt make that public information that he was addicted to opiates. Nor did he decide to copy you in on a memo that he was addicted, Jamie Lee Curtis said she is in recovery for 17 years from opiates that was out of charcter for her as well, also a mother. Chaka Khan and her sister just went to rehab for opiates did she tell you she was on opiates? DO you think you are smarter than the Medical Examiner or the EMT that adminsitered the Naran shot when the plan landed? Or are you thinking the plane landed because he needed an emergency manicure. Accept it, he was an opiate addict. He looked tired it was in his eyes, look at photos of him since 2013, you don't need to be a Rhodes Scholar to figure it out. Thats right lets hear from the posters that are in denial, that will tell me I am mis informed, I don't kmow the facts, I have a hidden agenda, and the rest of your hirse sh*t YAWN. He was a drug addict for years you think that kind of addiction happend over night , you think???? that was years in the making.

In my eyes he was still a great artist performer entertainer and muscian. However I have accepted his addicition led to his young demise.

babet said:

muleFunk said:

You are gulity of being a victim click bait yourself if you believe that Cosby raped 62 women.

Go and look up the facts. The lastest so called victim has been proven to have been lying because she said that he raped her in the Payboy Mansion and Cosby hadn't been there in a year. Another woman comes out and said Cosby forced himself on her on the Tonight Show and Cosby wasn't hosting the show that week. 90% of the cases are out and out lies and the other 10% were from women who had sexual relationships with him.

YET you have producers in Hollywood who are raping kids and no one says a word. Cory Haim mentions it once and he's dead a couple of weeks later.

Everyone in Hollywood knows of the Casting Couch. It's a sick world but it happens and if you don't want to do it there is someone who will.

[Edited 7/27/16 4:39am]

Johnny Depp is Innocent his lesbian wife wants a pay day! Bill Cosby GULITY! 62 women are NOT lying, what is their motive? they are not asking for money! Cosby got involved in the Tawana Brawley rape case on the Al sharpton band wagon, (Tawana lied about the rape - case was dropped) to make himself look so anti rape. Give me a break, Not only did he rape them he drugged them he could have killed one of them if they had a bad reaction to the drugs. He will die in jail blind, and his wife is an idiot. Oh yeah and all the jails are full of innocent people.

[Edited 7/29/16 20:23pm]

[Edited 7/29/16 20:45pm]

Look the cases up.

I have been involved in prosecuting rapists. I'm using judicial standard here not he said/she said tabloid fodder.

Making accusations against people is easy until you stand face to face with them.

muleFunk said:

babet said:

Johnny Depp is Innocent his lesbian wife wants a pay day! Bill Cosby GULITY! 62 women are NOT lying, what is their motive? they are not asking for money! Cosby got involved in the Tawana Brawley rape case on the Al sharpton band wagon, (Tawana lied about the rape - case was dropped) to make himself look so anti rape. Give me a break, Not only did he rape them he drugged them he could have killed one of them if they had a bad reaction to the drugs. He will die in jail blind, and his wife is an idiot. Oh yeah and all the jails are full of innocent people.

[Edited 7/29/16 20:23pm]

[Edited 7/29/16 20:45pm]

Look the cases up.

I have been involved in prosecuting rapists. I'm using judicial standard here not he said/she said tabloid fodder.

On December 30, 2015, Cosby was charged with sexual assault in Pennsylvania and a warrant for his arrest was issued.^[3] Cosby reported to court and was arraigned on the charge. On May 24, 2016, a Pennsylvania judge ruled that there was enough evidence for the case to go to trial.^[

You think the Judge based this case on what he read in the tabloids? I supposed you think O.J. is innocent also.

muleFunk said:

Making accusations against people is easy until you stand face to face with them.

Maybe so, but not 62 women. I don't think anyone of them will have a problem being face to face with him.

What is their motive for saying so? they aren't seeking monetary payment, and they are too old for stardom.

He admitted it:

In his testimony, UNDER OATH Cosby admitted to casual sex, involving use of Quaaludes, with a series of young women, including an admission that his use of drugs in the 1970s was illegal.

babet said:

muleFunk said:

Making accusations against people is easy until you stand face to face with them.

Maybe so, but not 62 women. I don't think anyone of them will have a problem being face to face with him.

What is their motive for saying so? they aren't seeking monetary payment, and they are too old for stardom.

He admitted it:

In his testimony, UNDER OATH Cosby admitted to casual sex, involving use of Quaaludes, with a series of young women, including an admission that his use of drugs in the 1970s was illegal.

Do you understand....

Cosby was a MAJOR swinger . He was partying with Hugh Hefner at the Playboy Mansion.

They was getting sky high on Cocaine and the qualuudes were to come down to screw like rabbits.

Quaaludes were not illegal but the cocaine was.

LOOK up the HISTORIES of these women.

When the first stories of this was released in the late 1980s they were claiming to be his mistresses. Now a mistress isn't a shock. Now they were drugged.

The reality of this is that only 5 women are actually saying they were drugged and sex occurred.

They have discovered at least 20 of these women are out right lying. Another 25 say that he drugged them while they were together. Another group were from a "modeling agency" who woke up at the Playboy Mansion with him.

Of the 5 women who claimed rape 4 (including the criminal case) had a sexual relationship with him including a woman who has a child by him.

There are REAL cases out there that won't be investigated but we print wild allegations that are 20/30/40 years old that don't meet the criminal standard of prosecution.

Same in this Prince death investigation.

They saw Prince at the drug store BUT the Rx was not for pain medications.

Prince was reported to have 4 children but when the dust no babies.

See that's what I mean with smear.

Anything unverifiable doesn't need mentioning in the media or having CNN special about things that cannot be verified. Why do it unless you are smearing someone.

Superconductor said:

muleFunk said:

First of all there are NOT 62 allegations!

There are about 5 cases that have barely met the standard to bring charges.

However you quote this like it's gospel.

Off topic but it has to be said: you are a rape apologist.

How is someone a rape apologist because they said that many of these cases cannot be proven?

Look up the women and look at how many have been proven false.

muleFunk said:

babet said:

Maybe so, but not 62 women. I don't think anyone of them will have a problem being face to face with him.

What is their motive for saying so? they aren't seeking monetary payment, and they are too old for stardom.

He admitted it:

In his testimony, UNDER OATH Cosby admitted to casual sex, involving use of Quaaludes, with a series of young women, including an admission that his use of drugs in the 1970s was illegal.

Do you understand....

Cosby was a MAJOR swinger . He was partying with Hugh Hefner at the Playboy Mansion.

They was getting sky high on Cocaine and the qualuudes were to come down to screw like rabbits.

Quaaludes were not illegal but the cocaine was.

LOOK up the HISTORIES of these women.

When the first stories of this was released in the late 1980s they were claiming to be his mistresses. Now a mistress isn't a shock. Now they were drugged.

The reality of this is that only 5 women are actually saying they were drugged and sex occurred.

They have discovered at least 20 of these women are out right lying. Another 25 say that he drugged them while they were together. Another group were from a "modeling agency" who woke up at the Playboy Mansion with him.

Of the 5 women who claimed rape 4 (including the criminal case) had a sexual relationship with him including a woman who has a child by him.

There are REAL cases out there that won't be investigated but we print wild allegations that are 20/30/40 years old that don't meet the criminal standard of prosecution.

Same in this Prince death investigation.

They saw Prince at the drug store BUT the Rx was not for pain medications.

Prince was reported to have 4 children but when the dust no babies.

See that's what I mean with smear.

Anything unverifiable doesn't need mentioning in the media or having CNN special about things that cannot be verified. Why do it unless you are smearing someone.

What about the the women that were in his Manhattan Brownstone, when his wife was upstairs sleeping, he had had women there he was playing pool with with then drugged them, that is big balls. Just because they were at drug fueled parties all taking drugs, it doesn't mean the girls consented to sex, he took advantaged of thier drugged state, thats rape if it was not consentual.

[Edited 7/30/16 15:10pm]

muleFunk said:

Superconductor said:

muleFunk said: Off topic but it has to be said: you are a rape apologist.

How is someone a rape apologist because they said that many of these cases cannot be proven?

Look up the women and look at how many have been proven false.

Because you are claiming that these women are lying.

Because you justify sexual assault by blaming the victims.

Because you claim that only a successful prosecution in court would mean that a rape has actually occurred.

These are typical rape apologist arguments.

Superconductor said:

muleFunk said:

First of all there are NOT 62 allegations!

There are about 5 cases that have barely met the standard to bring charges.

However you quote this like it's gospel.

Off topic but it has to be said: you are a rape apologist.

O/T yes but it did need to be said, and I thank you for saying it.

Bebop17 said:

Superconductor said:

muleFunk said: Off topic but it has to be said: you are a rape apologist.

O/T yes but it did need to be said, and I thank you for saying it.

.

Concur.

.