New topic
PrintableLuv4oneanotha said: lol
no thats been there recently, he never used to have that, i've been trying to figure out what it was for a while now, Notice its like a gold coloration, its like he was masturbating with a bottle of glitter  wtf? | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
lilgish said:
Maybe he had those band aids on for so long they left permanent marks. Some say he's trying to bleach the pigment under his nails, but can't, thus the need for those finger band aids. lol no thats been there recently, he never used to have that, i've been trying to figure out what it was for a while now, Notice its like a gold coloration, its like he was masturbating with a bottle of glitter You guys are too much!  "When Michael Jackson is just singing and dancing, you just think this is an astonishing talent. And he has had this astounding talent all his life, but we want him to be floored as well. We really don´t like the idea that he could have it all." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
dag said: 1. The state is gonna have a real hard time getting past the mother's cred problem.
2. MJ is gonna have as tough if not tougher time with the dumb stuff he did and said in his documentary.. I don´t think so. Sharing a bed ain´t a crime if you don´t prove you were molested, but lying under the oath is. Don't believe me? Follow these steps. 1. Sleep in the same bed with a prepubescent child of the same sex. 2. Hold his/her hand, coo in his ear, and admit to a close relationship with him. On national television. 3. Also declare on national television that it is a loving thing to sleep in a bed with young children of the same sex. 4. Wait patiently for the department of human services and or local law enforcement to darken your door. Because they will. Did you commit a crime? Probably not. Did you do something monumentally stupid? Absolutely. But does that mean you won't catch a case> Hell. No. Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016
Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
dag said: 
He looks sooooo good in this picture!  He looks sooooo ugly in this pic.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: dag said: I don´t think so. Sharing a bed ain´t a crime if you don´t prove you were molested, but lying under the oath is. Don't believe me? Follow these steps. 1. Sleep in the same bed with a prepubescent child of the same sex. 2. Hold his/her hand, coo in his ear, and admit to a close relationship with him. On national television. 3. Also declare on national television that it is a loving thing to sleep in a bed with young children of the same sex. 4. Wait patiently for the department of human services and or local law enforcement to darken your door. Because they will. Did you commit a crime? Probably not. Did you do something monumentally stupid? Absolutely. But does that mean you won't catch a case> Hell. No.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: dag said: I don´t think so. Sharing a bed ain´t a crime if you don´t prove you were molested, but lying under the oath is. Don't believe me? Follow these steps. 1. Sleep in the same bed with a prepubescent child of the same sex. 2. Hold his/her hand, coo in his ear, and admit to a close relationship with him. On national television. 3. Also declare on national television that it is a loving thing to sleep in a bed with young children of the same sex. 4. Wait patiently for the department of human services and or local law enforcement to darken your door. Because they will. Did you commit a crime? Probably not. Did you do something monumentally stupid? Absolutely. But does that mean you won't catch a case> Hell. No. I agree to disagree, Essentially it is his fault, But the bias documentery is in turn the documetarian itself, He did all the editing, he made the close-up of the holding hands segment, MJ was trying to clear his tarnished image when he agreed to the documenery, i suppose he was trying to as honest as possible (minus the plastic surgery questions) The Documentery gave a distorted version of the truth hence he is not the only one at fault, Perhaps where he went wrong was when, he accepted to do it, Being naive, Sure it was stupid, but he had reason to do it! anybody who has heard their name being spoken negatively over and over and over again would do anything to stop it, You have to look at it through his point of view as well. perhaps if the documentery never aired, this case would have never happened. Then again maybe it never would have happened if MJ didn't decide to befriend that paticular family... Maybe it wouldn't have happened if he didn't decide to kick them out of neverland. The Documentery is just a means of evidence, its not exactly what bolted an investigation... It may have bolted a friendship between the D.A. and the accusers, thats possible, But anyway, i still understand what your saying | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Luv4oneanotha said: namepeace said: Don't believe me? Follow these steps. 1. Sleep in the same bed with a prepubescent child of the same sex. 2. Hold his/her hand, coo in his ear, and admit to a close relationship with him. On national television. 3. Also declare on national television that it is a loving thing to sleep in a bed with young children of the same sex. 4. Wait patiently for the department of human services and or local law enforcement to darken your door. Because they will. Did you commit a crime? Probably not. Did you do something monumentally stupid? Absolutely. But does that mean you won't catch a case> Hell. No. I agree to disagree, Essentially it is his fault, But the bias documentery is in turn the documetarian itself, He did all the editing, he made the close-up of the holding hands segment, MJ was trying to clear his tarnished image when he agreed to the documenery, i suppose he was trying to as honest as possible (minus the plastic surgery questions) The Documentery gave a distorted version of the truth hence he is not the only one at fault, Perhaps where he went wrong was when, he accepted to do it, Being naive, Sure it was stupid, but he had reason to do it! anybody who has heard their name being spoken negatively over and over and over again would do anything to stop it, You have to look at it through his point of view as well. perhaps if the documentery never aired, this case would have never happened. Then again maybe it never would have happened if MJ didn't decide to befriend that paticular family... Maybe it wouldn't have happened if he didn't decide to kick them out of neverland. The Documentery is just a means of evidence, its not exactly what bolted an investigation... It may have bolted a friendship between the D.A. and the accusers, thats possible, But anyway, i still understand what your saying | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Luv4oneanotha said: namepeace said: Don't believe me? Follow these steps. 1. Sleep in the same bed with a prepubescent child of the same sex. 2. Hold his/her hand, coo in his ear, and admit to a close relationship with him. On national television. 3. Also declare on national television that it is a loving thing to sleep in a bed with young children of the same sex. 4. Wait patiently for the department of human services and or local law enforcement to darken your door. Because they will. Did you commit a crime? Probably not. Did you do something monumentally stupid? Absolutely. But does that mean you won't catch a case> Hell. No. I agree to disagree, Essentially it is his fault, But the bias documentery is in turn the documetarian itself, He did all the editing, he made the close-up of the holding hands segment, MJ was trying to clear his tarnished image when he agreed to the documenery, i suppose he was trying to as honest as possible (minus the plastic surgery questions) The Documentery gave a distorted version of the truth hence he is not the only one at fault, Perhaps where he went wrong was when, he accepted to do it, Being naive, Sure it was stupid, but he had reason to do it! anybody who has heard their name being spoken negatively over and over and over again would do anything to stop it, You have to look at it through his point of view as well. perhaps if the documentery never aired, this case would have never happened. Then again maybe it never would have happened if MJ didn't decide to befriend that paticular family... Maybe it wouldn't have happened if he didn't decide to kick them out of neverland. The Documentery is just a means of evidence, its not exactly what bolted an investigation... It may have bolted a friendship between the D.A. and the accusers, thats possible, But anyway, i still understand what your saying I'm sorry but Bashir certainly didn't splice MJ's words together for him. No matter how you edit the things MJ said were still by his own admission and they were still majorly fucked up. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Moderator
|
Michael Jackson Trial Cheat Sheet
Fri Feb 25, 8:45 PM ET Entertainment - E! Online Gossip/Celeb By Joal Ryan It's been two years in the making. Potential guest-star appearances by Elizabeth Taylor and Macaulay Culkin. A showdown between a pair of old foes. Even in a media age flush with celebrity trials, and trials that make celebrities of its defendants, the Michael Jackson case stands alone. Opening arguments are scheduled for Monday in Santa Maria, California, in the music legend's child-molestation trial. Here's a synopsis of the drama and its players. The Defendant: Michael Joseph Jackson, 46, father of three, ex-husband of two, winner of 13 Grammys, including one for Best Recording for Children in honor of his narration for the storybook album E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial. The Accuser: A boy, identified in court documents as John Doe, now 15, from Los Angeles, who, at age 11, had his left kidney and spleen removed because of cancer. The Charges: A 10-count grand-jury indictment was handed down against Jackson on Apr. 21, 2004. In it, the singer was accused of committing lewd acts with the boy, then 13 (five counts), serving him alcohol (four counts) and conspiring to hold the child and his family against their will (one count). The indictment superseded a nine-count criminal complaint filed against Jackson on Dec. 18, 2003. Jackson's Charge Against the Charges: The singer and his team have branded the allegations a "big lie," "disgusting," "totally false" and the criminal probe the result of a D.A. "blinded by zeal." Jackson formally pleaded innocent to the indictment on Apr. 30, 2004, and pleaded innocent to the earlier criminal complaint on Jan. 16, 2004. He is free on $3 million bail. Jackson's Most Metaphorical Charge Against the Charges: "Lies run sprints, but the truth runs marathons," as excerpted from a Jackson statement of Nov. 20, 2003. The Stakes: If convicted on all 10 counts, Jackson faces upward of 20 years in prison. The Prosecutor: Thomas W. Sneddon Jr., 63, married father of nine, district attorney of Santa Barbara County, California, since 1983. Known as "Mad Dog" to courtroom adversaries, "Snuffy" to friends and "Dom Sheldon" to Jackson, who serenaded the D.A. in the 1995 song, "D.S.," featuring the lyrics "Dom Sheldon is a cold man," although as sung, the refrain sounds suspiciously like, "Tom Sneddon is a cold man." The Bad Blood Between Jackson and Sneddon Explained: Sneddon led the 1993-94 child-molestation investigation against Jackson. That case was based on allegations made by a 12-year-old boy. Sneddon dropped the case when the child stopped cooperating with his office. The Defense Attorney: Thomas A. Mesereau Jr., 54, namesake partner in the Los Angeles law firm of Collins, Mesereau & Reddock. At Harvard, boxed and earned his undergraduate degree. Previously helped pugilist Mike Tyson fend off a 2001 rape allegation and represented murder defendant Robert Blake (news) for three months before parting ways with the actor in February 2004 and signing up with Jackson, who parted ways with Mark Geragos in April 2004. The Judge: Rodney S. Melville, 63, presiding over Department SM2 in the Cook Division of the Santa Barbara County Superior Court in Santa Maria. The anti-Judge Ito, Melville has ordered all participants in the Jackson case to shut up or be held in contempt, banned cameras from the courtroom, sealed grand-jury testimony and resisted releasing documents to the public and press until they've been Sharpie'd beyond comprehension. The Jury: Eight men, four women, ranging in age from 79 to 20. The majority of the jurors appear to be white and Hispanic. There is one Asian and no blacks, although an African-American man is among the eight alternates. (Santa Barbara County, where Jackson's Neverland Ranch is located, is predominately white, with just a five percent African-American population.) Work-wise, Jackson's designated peers include a pair of store clerks, a pair of retirees, a horse trainer, a wheelchair-bound man who once visited Neverland as a child and an employee with the county's Social Services Department. The Guest Stars: Names broached as potential defense witnesses include: Elizabeth Taylor, Eddie Murphy, Chris Tucker, Rush Hour director Brett Ratner, Thriller producer Quincy Jones (news), Jay Leno, basketball star Kobe Bryant, illusionist David Blaine (news - web sites), 60 Minutes stalwart Ed Bradley and former child stars Macaulay (Home Alone) Culkin and Emmanuel (Webster) Lewis. Corey Feldman (news), a former child star in his own Goonies right, has been subpoenaed by the prosecution. Feldman told ABC News that Jackson showed him naked pictures of women when he was a teen. In the courtroom seats, look for a sizable number of Jacksons, from parents Joseph and Katherine to siblings Janet and Jermaine. The Bystanders: The Santa Maria courthouse is flanked most days by reporters and a hard-core mix of Michael Jackson fans, Michael Jackson impersonators, Michael Jackson button-selling entrepreneurs and children's-book author and anti-child-abuse activist Diane Hansen, of Redondo Beach, California, who wears a yellow rain slicker and shouts, "Those are my private parts!" over and over again thereby vexing Michael Jackson fans, impersonators and button-selling entrepreneurs. Trial Moment to Watch For: The day Jackson's accuser takes the stand. Per Judge Melville's ruling, the boy must testify in open court and face the man he once called "Daddy Michael." Trial Moment to Possibly Skip Altogether: The day Jackson's accuser takes the stand. If his trial testimony is anything like the grand-jury testimony, it will be full of squirm-inducing details. According to documents posted by the Smoking Gun, the boy has said Jackson got him drunk, masturbated him and then showed him the hamper in which to deposit his stained Hanes. The Comedy Club Connection: Jackson and his accuser were hooked up by Jamie Masada, owner of Los Angeles' Laugh Factory. Masada was trying to bolster the spirits of the then ill child by introducing him to celebrities. Jackson first spoke to the boy by telephone while the child was hospitalized and undergoing chemotherapy, the accuser told the grand jury. The TV Special That Started It All: Living with Michael Jackson, a British-produced documentary by journalist Martin Bashir. The two-hour program aired on ABC on Feb. 6, 2003, and attracted an audience of 27.1 million. In it, Jackson holds hands with his future accuser and talks of how he sleeps with children--in an innocent and nonsexual way. The Allegation Timeline: Within a week of its broadcast, social workers in Los Angeles launch a Jackson investigation. The case is closed and charges of sexual abuse declared "unfounded" when the boy and his family insist Jackson has done nothing wrong. The Santa Barbara Sheriff's Department, which later led the charge against Jackson, initially reaches a similar conclusion, according to Celebrity Justice. But then, per the indictment, the molestation and under-age-alcohol-imbibing occurs between Feb. 20 and Mar. 12, 2003--weeks after Living with Michael Jackson first aired. The conspiracy plot allegedly was carried out from Feb. 1 to Mar. 31, 2003. The Day All Hell Broke Loose: On Nov. 18, 2003, police swarmed Jackson's Neverland Ranch, seizing 300 items. A day later, Santa Barbara County authorities issued a warrant for Jackson's arrest. The Underpants Raid: Items reputedly seized at Neverland and other locations for potential use as evidence include: adult magazines, books and DVDs, which, per a ruling by Judge Melville, must be referred to as "sexually explicit" and not pornographic during trial; two pairs of Jackson-worn Calvin Klein briefs; and letters from Jackson to members of his Rubberhead Club for boys. The Porn, Sorry, Sexually-Explicit Connection: The prosecution is expected to argue that Jackson enticed the boy at the center of the case by showing him pictures of naked women. The Libation Allegation: According to the accuser's grand-jury testimony, Jackson got him woozy on "Jesus Juice" (white wine in a Diet Coke can), Skyy vodka and Jim Beam. A former Jackson flight attendant told the grand jury that the entertainer indeed preferred his vino served in soda cans and his vineyard of choice was "yucky Kendall Jackson." The Mugshot: After flying in from Las Vegas (a chartered excursion that resulted in lawsuits and a criminal probe when it was discovered a hidden video camera had been rolling), Jackson surrendered to police on Nov. 20, 2003. He was handcuffed, fingerprinted and seated for a booking photo that quickly proved itself a must-click and helped crash the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department's Website. The Matter of "Doo-Doo": In a Dec. 28, 2003, interview on 60 Minutes, Jackson told Ed Bradley he was "manhandled" by sheriff's deputies and locked in a "doo-doo"-smeared restroom on the day of his arrest. Later, California's attorney general's office said Jackson's claims couldn't be proved. The Distinction Between "Doo-Doo" and "Doo-Doo Head": Per Jackson, "doo-doo" is bad when smeared on walls. According to his accuser's grand-jury testimony, "doo-doo head" is a term of endearment as used by Jackson toward the boy and others. The phrase was coined by Macaulay Culkin. The Arraignment-a-Go-Go: Jackson's first courtroom appearance, on Jan. 16, 2004, was more party-like than procedural. In rock-star fashion, Jackson arrived 20 minutes late and, after pleading innocent to the original criminal complaint, boogied atop his stretch SUV. Later, he bussed fans to Neverland for "refreshments." Something You Didn't Know About the Santa Maria Courthouse: It's adjacent to a children's ball field. Potential Prosecution Problem: The accuser, his family--and their credibility. The singer's camp has long portrayed the Does as being on the make for money. Items the defense seem certain to mention in court: the 1999 lawsuit against JC Penney in which the accuser's mother alleged she was fondled by a security guard while being investigated for shoplifting (the $3 million case was settled out of court); and the 1996 claim by the accuser, then seven, that his mother beat him--an allegation MSNBC reported later was recanted by the boy. Potential Defense Problem: The $25 million Jackson paid out in the 1990s to "buy peace" and settle two molestation claims. Under California law, jurors can be informed of prior child-abuse allegations against a defendant, even if the allegations were never proved. Items the prosecution seem certain to mention in court: the $23 million settlement with the family of the boy from the 1993-94 case; and the $2 million offered to the family of a former Neverland worker whose son said Jackson touched him. What Geraldo Thinks: Fox News correspondent Geraldo Rivera, who conducted a TV interview with Jackson this month, said he believes the entertainer is "innocent" and the case against him "fatally flawed." Rivera is so certain Jackson will be cleared that the fair and balanced telejournalist has vowed to shave his mustache if his pal is convicted. Where LaToya Stands: Like Rivera, LaToya Jackson (news) thinks her sibling is "innocent." Per an interview with 20/20, she also thinks he's "sweet" and "misunderstood." What the Former Mrs. Jacksons Have to Say: Ex-wife number one, Lisa Marie Presley (news), told an Australian talk show in 2004 that she ended their 1994-96 marriage because she was "seeing things going on that I couldn't do anything about." She later clarified her remarks, noting she was not referring to Jackson acting inappropriately with children. Meanwhile, ex-wife number two, Debbie Rowe, has declined all comment on the case. The mother of two of Jackson's three children, though, is said to be gearing up for a custody battle with her former husband and is on the list of potential prosecution witnesses. Why R. Kelly Probably Won't Be Spotted in Court: In January 2004, R&B singer R. Kelly, facing his own child-pornography case, was granted court approval to go to Los Angeles for the Grammy Awards--provided he didn't meet up with Jackson while he was in town. Kelly and Jackson collaborated on a song for Jackson's Number Ones release, "One More Chance," but Kelly's attorney said his client had no intention of trading notes with the pop star at the awards show. Why Edward Moss Will Be Spotted in Court: Moss is the 27-year-old actor and Michael Jackson stand-in hired by E! and British Sky Broadcasting to portray the entertainer in a series of trial reenactments, beginning with opening arguments. The Michael Jackson Trial, brought to you in part by Judge Melville's no-cameras-in-the-courtroom edict, is scheduled to air on E! on weeknights at 7:30 p.m. (ET/PT), with a weekend wrap-up show airing each Saturday. (E! Online is a division of E! Networks.) |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
moderatorVoicesCarry said: Luv4oneanotha said: I agree to disagree, Essentially it is his fault, But the bias documentery is in turn the documetarian itself, He did all the editing, he made the close-up of the holding hands segment, MJ was trying to clear his tarnished image when he agreed to the documenery, i suppose he was trying to as honest as possible (minus the plastic surgery questions) The Documentery gave a distorted version of the truth hence he is not the only one at fault, Perhaps where he went wrong was when, he accepted to do it, Being naive, Sure it was stupid, but he had reason to do it! anybody who has heard their name being spoken negatively over and over and over again would do anything to stop it, You have to look at it through his point of view as well. perhaps if the documentery never aired, this case would have never happened. Then again maybe it never would have happened if MJ didn't decide to befriend that paticular family... Maybe it wouldn't have happened if he didn't decide to kick them out of neverland. The Documentery is just a means of evidence, its not exactly what bolted an investigation... It may have bolted a friendship between the D.A. and the accusers, thats possible, But anyway, i still understand what your saying I'm sorry but Bashir certainly didn't splice MJ's words together for him. No matter how you edit the things MJ said were still by his own admission and they were still majorly fucked up. I didn't say that voices, i simply said that the documentery was biased, with the voice overs, the editing, (leaving out several parts) Bashir was just trying to focus on what specific part, and created a sinister background, I agree everything Jackson said was by his own volition, im not saying it wasn't! and perhaps he was being too honest, but thats his perogative, but their was no need for the voice overs, telling jackson he was a great parent than saying the opposit on a voice over, Even the journalist in europe where appalled at the documentery... perhaps thats an X-factor why he isn't too liked in europe anymore But Bashir took advantage of jacksons participation, | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
TheOrgerFormerlyKnownAs said: Luv4oneanotha said: I agree to disagree, Essentially it is his fault, But the bias documentery is in turn the documetarian itself, He did all the editing, he made the close-up of the holding hands segment, MJ was trying to clear his tarnished image when he agreed to the documenery, i suppose he was trying to as honest as possible (minus the plastic surgery questions) The Documentery gave a distorted version of the truth hence he is not the only one at fault, Perhaps where he went wrong was when, he accepted to do it, Being naive, Sure it was stupid, but he had reason to do it! anybody who has heard their name being spoken negatively over and over and over again would do anything to stop it, You have to look at it through his point of view as well. perhaps if the documentery never aired, this case would have never happened. Then again maybe it never would have happened if MJ didn't decide to befriend that paticular family... Maybe it wouldn't have happened if he didn't decide to kick them out of neverland. The Documentery is just a means of evidence, its not exactly what bolted an investigation... It may have bolted a friendship between the D.A. and the accusers, thats possible, But anyway, i still understand what your saying Your correct... i don't disagree, But nobody is willing to tell him that everybody around him are just a bunch of mindless Sycophants and Yes Man Hell he's spoiled brat, I mean nobody will tell him what he should do! and the people he does listen to usually just take advantage of him. But your correct, how is he going to get the message? he's been on a destructive passage since he left the Jacksons a destructive path that has lead him to a disinigrating face, and a distorted view of the world... What can we do? Is Jail the answer? especially for a crime he just stumbled stupidly on? Perhaps he needs psychiatric help? but who would dare utter that to him? If he comes out innocent its just going to be this all over again... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
TheOrgerFormerlyKnownAs said: One of the sweetest sounds on the org!  Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016
Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Luv4oneanotha said: Sure it was stupid, but he had reason to do it! anybody who has heard their name being spoken negatively over and over and over again would do anything to stop it, You have to look at it through his point of view as well. Even so, by your own admission, he is a little off. So his behavior is, like I said, treading a very thin line b/w eccentricity and sexual deviancy. One can't ever try to make abnormal and potentially criminal behavior appear normal. But MJ did because he has bought into the perception that He Is Michael Jackson And Conventional Standards of Conduct Don't Apply To Him(TM). If you're wrong for what you do with children (be it inappropriate or criminal) and you want to try to justify it by going on TV, I have NO sympathy for you. Because you know you're being exploited from jumpstreet and you had the arrogance to believe that you could exploit the exploiter. I mean nobody will tell him what he should do!
and the people he does listen to usually just take advantage of him. And he may very well go to jail for it. But your correct, how is he going to get the message?
he's been on a destructive passage since he left the Jacksons a destructive path that has lead him to a disinigrating face, and a distorted view of the world... TOFKA hit on it. If this were the first time that he was facing a criminal charge, I'd feel a little more sympathy for him. But if the close call and massive settlement in 1993 didn't scare him straight, then it IS his own damn fault. What can we do?
Is Jail the answer? especially for a crime he just stumbled stupidly on? Perhaps he needs psychiatric help? but who would dare utter that to him? I don't buy that. I would feel for him if he were convicted, but if the allegations are proven true then he deserves whatever he gets. He was warned time and time again to stay away from kids and he didn't because . . . He Is Michael Jackson And Conventional Standards of Conduct Don't Apply To Him(TM). If he comes out innocent its just going to be this all over again...
Three strikes and he is definitely out. I saw a special about an innocent man who served 5 years for false allegations of pedophilia. He says he won't go near kids again. Truly innocent people won't even dare to put themselves in a position to be accused of the same thing again. MJ needs to heed that warning if he's lucky enough to beat the rap. Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016
Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
What are Conventional Standards of Conduct? I hope you don't mean common sense. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
lilgish said: What are Conventional Standards of Conduct? I hope you don't mean common sense.
Actually, yes. I'd love to hear you explain how and why MJ's sleeping with prepubescent boys comports with common sense. Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016
Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: I'd love to hear you explain how and why MJ's sleeping with prepubescent boys comports with common sense. It doesn't, neither does consenting MJ to sleep with your prepubescent son. If you believe in common sense than apply it to all parties. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
lilgish said: namepeace said: I'd love to hear you explain how and why MJ's sleeping with prepubescent boys comports with common sense. It doesn't, neither does consenting MJ to sleep with your prepubescent son. If you believe in common sense than apply it to all parties. Come on, now. The fact that the mama might have thrown her son to MJ as bait doesn't mean MJ didn't commit a crime. Even if all the stuff they say about the mother of the alleged victim is true, MJ didn't have to take the bait. Honestly, the mother doesn't have much to do with it. If the mother convinced her son to lie about abuse then she does. But if MJ actually abused the child then it doesn't matter what the mother did. Good night, sweet Prince | 7 June 1958 - 21 April 2016
Props will be withheld until the showing and proving has commenced. -- Aaron McGruder | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Don't believe me? Follow these steps.
1. Sleep in the same bed with a prepubescent child of the same sex. 2. Hold his/her hand, coo in his ear, and admit to a close relationship with him. On national television. 3. Also declare on national television that it is a loving thing to sleep in a bed with young children of the same sex. 4. Wait patiently for the department of human services and or local law enforcement to darken your door. Because they will. Did you commit a crime? Probably not. Did you do something monumentally stupid? Absolutely. But does that mean you won't catch a case> Hell. No. I know what you´re saying and of course the way the documentary came out makes most people think this way. The question though is how would it come out IF Bashir edited it in another way, cause to me interesting thing about that holding-hands scene is that he won´t show you who took whose hand. You may think it´snot important, but it is. Cause at the end of the interview, during Miami interview, where they come back to meeting Gaving at NEverland, Bashir plays that holding part again, saying it was the most "disturbing" thing and he actually playes the moment showing how did that holding-hands thing came about. You can´t hear the question, but if you listen to MJ´s answer he says: "Well he deserved all the joys of life like any other kid." And at saying this Gavin lleans against Michael and grabs his hand. Maybe it´s just me trying to justify everything, but with all this it looks all of sudden more natural to me. Bashir just fucked up this thing so much and got with it everybody. I don't buy that. I would feel for him if he were convicted, but if the allegations are proven true then he deserves whatever he gets. He was warned time and time again to stay away from kids and he didn't because . . .
He Is Michael Jackson And Conventional Standards of Conduct Don't Apply To Him(TM That would mean also not ever coming into contact with a child again, because ppl are sick and they see sickness in everything nowadays. I believe that it´s not as much the problem of MJ´s but sociaty. Has anyone seen a movie with Mel Gibson where he playes a guy who lives aside, because after an accident, he looked terribly and he starts teaching one little boy who will become his only friend and eventually he´s also accused of molesting him? MJ´s situation is no different. And also look at it other way round. Imagine you were accused falsely of shop-lifting, will that make you never to go shopping again? "When Michael Jackson is just singing and dancing, you just think this is an astonishing talent. And he has had this astounding talent all his life, but we want him to be floored as well. We really don´t like the idea that he could have it all." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: lilgish said: What are Conventional Standards of Conduct? I hope you don't mean common sense.
Actually, yes. I'd love to hear you explain how and why MJ's sleeping with prepubescent boys comports with common sense. Do you think homosexuality is conventional? Cause half of the world thinks is a deviation of common sense. It doesn't make it a crime . | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I'd love to hear you explain how and why MJ's sleeping with prepubescent boys comports with common sense.
We should learn not to judge ppl for their differences (as long as they´re not hurting anyone), cause that´s the rout of all the wars and hatred in this world. "When Michael Jackson is just singing and dancing, you just think this is an astonishing talent. And he has had this astounding talent all his life, but we want him to be floored as well. We really don´t like the idea that he could have it all." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Luv4oneanotha said: TheOrgerFormerlyKnownAs said: Michael Jackson, at the very least, is mentally unstable. People need to tell him that and keep telling him that. When he was accused in '93, why in the fuck didn't he learn his leson? If he was innocent and thought people were after him for money, why did he keep letting folks bring their kids over and sleep in the same room/bed with them, particularly unsupervised? Everything that is happening to MJ right now is nobody's damn fault but his own. Instead of folks supporting him blindly, he fans and supporters ought to be telling him to get help. God knows if this was just Joe Blow down the street, everyone would be thinking the guy is a pedophile and would be calling for him to be locked up.
Your correct... i don't disagree, But nobody is willing to tell him that everybody around him are just a bunch of mindless Sycophants and Yes Man Hell he's spoiled brat, I mean nobody will tell him what he should do! and the people he does listen to usually just take advantage of him. But your correct, how is he going to get the message? he's been on a destructive passage since he left the Jacksons a destructive path that has lead him to a disinigrating face, and a distorted view of the world... What can we do? Is Jail the answer? especially for a crime he just stumbled stupidly on? Perhaps he needs psychiatric help? but who would dare utter that to him? If he comes out innocent its just going to be this all over again... Micheal Jackson thinks he is a normal guy, and thinks that he doesn't need help... This is the main problem... Only his family can help him, but he's definitely not in our world.... [Edited 2/27/05 5:58am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
krayzie said: Micheal Jackson thinks he is a normal guy, and thinks that he doesn't need help... This is the main problem... Only his family can help him, but he's definitely not in our world.... [Edited 2/27/05 5:58am] Define "normal" 4 someone else. U can't. What's deemed "normal" 4 u isn't gonna b the same 4 any1 else. No one has seen everything u've seen, or experienced everything u've experienced. If u have 2 try 2 b "normal", then u're not being urself. If everyone were "normal", how would things b? No one knows, because we all have different perceptions of what's "normal" and what's not. Michael Jackson is being severly criticized 4 being himself, and being portrayed as some1 he is not. That's the problem. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
scorp84 said: Define "normal" 4 someone else. U can't. What's deemed "normal" 4 u isn't gonna b the same 4 any1 else. No one has seen everything u've seen, or experienced everything u've experienced. If u have 2 try 2 b "normal", then u're not being urself. If everyone were "normal", how would things b? No one knows, because we all have different perceptions of what's "normal" and what's not. Michael Jackson is being severly criticized 4 being himself, and being portrayed as some1 he is not. That's the problem. co-sign BlueNote | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
scorp84 said: krayzie said: Micheal Jackson thinks he is a normal guy, and thinks that he doesn't need help... This is the main problem... Only his family can help him, but he's definitely not in our world.... [Edited 2/27/05 5:58am] Define "normal" 4 someone else. U can't. What's deemed "normal" 4 u isn't gonna b the same 4 any1 else. No one has seen everything u've seen, or experienced everything u've experienced. If u have 2 try 2 b "normal", then u're not being urself. If everyone were "normal", how would things b? No one knows, because we all have different perceptions of what's "normal" and what's not. Michael Jackson is being severly criticized 4 being himself, and being portrayed as some1 he is not. That's the problem. A normal guy knows that sleeping with little kids in the same bed is WRONG, MJ doesn't... And if MJ is potrayed as someone he is not, it's only because he tries so hard through the years to be what he is not ... A white man... [Edited 2/27/05 7:39am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
dag said: Don't believe me? Follow these steps.
1. Sleep in the same bed with a prepubescent child of the same sex. 2. Hold his/her hand, coo in his ear, and admit to a close relationship with him. On national television. 3. Also declare on national television that it is a loving thing to sleep in a bed with young children of the same sex. 4. Wait patiently for the department of human services and or local law enforcement to darken your door. Because they will. Did you commit a crime? Probably not. Did you do something monumentally stupid? Absolutely. But does that mean you won't catch a case> Hell. No. I know what you´re saying and of course the way the documentary came out makes most people think this way. The question though is how would it come out IF Bashir edited it in another way, cause to me interesting thing about that holding-hands scene is that he won´t show you who took whose hand. You may think it´snot important, but it is. Cause at the end of the interview, during Miami interview, where they come back to meeting Gaving at NEverland, Bashir plays that holding part again, saying it was the most "disturbing" thing and he actually playes the moment showing how did that holding-hands thing came about. You can´t hear the question, but if you listen to MJ´s answer he says: "Well he deserved all the joys of life like any other kid." And at saying this Gavin lleans against Michael and grabs his hand. Maybe it´s just me trying to justify everything, but with all this it looks all of sudden more natural to me. Bashir just fucked up this thing so much and got with it everybody. I don't buy that. I would feel for him if he were convicted, but if the allegations are proven true then he deserves whatever he gets. He was warned time and time again to stay away from kids and he didn't because . . .
He Is Michael Jackson And Conventional Standards of Conduct Don't Apply To Him(TM That would mean also not ever coming into contact with a child again, because ppl are sick and they see sickness in everything nowadays. I believe that it´s not as much the problem of MJ´s but sociaty. Has anyone seen a movie with Mel Gibson where he playes a guy who lives aside, because after an accident, he looked terribly and he starts teaching one little boy who will become his only friend and eventually he´s also accused of molesting him? MJ´s situation is no different. And also look at it other way round. Imagine you were accused falsely of shop-lifting, will that make you never to go shopping again? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
krayzie said: scorp84 said: Define "normal" 4 someone else. U can't. What's deemed "normal" 4 u isn't gonna b the same 4 any1 else. No one has seen everything u've seen, or experienced everything u've experienced. If u have 2 try 2 b "normal", then u're not being urself. If everyone were "normal", how would things b? No one knows, because we all have different perceptions of what's "normal" and what's not. Michael Jackson is being severly criticized 4 being himself, and being portrayed as some1 he is not. That's the problem. A normal guy knows that sleeping with little kids in the same bed is WRONG, MJ doesn't... And if MJ is potrayed as someone he is not, it's only because he tries so hard through the years to be what he is not ... A white man... [Edited 2/27/05 7:39am] A normal man doesn't kill people and don't go to war. I guess americans are the most abnormal people on earth and should all be prosecuted for most of them voted to re-elect Bush. Under the rule of law, Michael Jackson's actions (even if they don't fit well to American societies' standards) are not criminal. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
krayzie said: A normal guy knows that sleeping with little kids in the same bed is WRONG, MJ doesn't... And if MJ is potrayed as someone he is not, it's only because he tries so hard through the years to be what he is not ... A white man... [Edited 2/27/05 7:39am] And there it is again... normal. What is normal? Anything legal, anything you prefer or anything the majority does? Get this 'normal' out of your head for once, will ya? I always thought, people who like music are more open minded, especially Prince fans but this normal, conservativ narrow minded talk here is so lame.
Sorry, i haven't read your whole post, cause after reading your 'white man' statement... always wasting my time answering the unimportant ones. 
BlueNote | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
 [Edited 2/27/05 10:06am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
namepeace said: Come on, now. The fact that the mama might have thrown her son to MJ as bait doesn't mean MJ didn't commit a crime.
Even if all the stuff they say about the mother of the alleged victim is true, MJ didn't have to take the bait. Honestly, the mother doesn't have much to do with it. If the mother convinced her son to lie about abuse then she does. But if MJ actually abused the child then it doesn't matter what the mother did. I'm not saying MJ hasn't committed an unlawful crime, but you should make a distinction between a crime and what you feel Conventional Standards of Conduct are. Is not being conventional a crime? When does someone cross the line from unconventional behavior to a crime? But if MJ actually abused the child then it doesn't matter what the mother did
A mother giving her son to someone for the purpose of molestion would be an unlawful crime. Why doesn't it matter? cause she's not famous? Why are you not giving her the Three strikes and she is definitely out. policy.
he is definitely out Out of what exactly? Some commercial celebrity reality in which they live perfect moral and ethical lives?
It's impossible to analyze events in this world using "Common Sense". This situation is very complex. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
TheOrgerFormerlyKnownAs said:
What's natural about holding hands with a thirteen year old child that isn't yours?
You think that's unnatural? So you would never hold a childs hand that wasn't yours? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |