raven
New Member
Posts: 1
|
Michael
Nov 21, 2003 20:23:46 GMT -5
Post by raven on Nov 21, 2003 20:23:46 GMT -5
it is a shame when you have to be molested by a movie star in order to get any legal action going, when right here in town there are under age prostitutes, homeless children because of abuse ,and nobody says a word. Unless there is political, social, or monitary benefit to the powers that be, nothing gets done. A good example is the two bush boys from vernon. what made them different from any of the hundreds homeless, and starving on our streets tonight?
|
|
|
Michael
Nov 22, 2003 2:45:58 GMT -5
Post by MyParentsHouse on Nov 22, 2003 2:45:58 GMT -5
The last thing that I heard was that their story was discredited because they weren't telling whole truths or something like that. They actually lived in a cabin in the woods and had been homeschooled. They were kicked out of their home or something like that....do you have a link that I could read?
|
|
|
Michael
Nov 22, 2003 14:00:02 GMT -5
Post by Laurel on Nov 22, 2003 14:00:02 GMT -5
Michael Jackson is as guilty as the fox in the chicken coop. It's time his BS was brought to an end. Will he plead insanity? That man , and I use the term loosely, is a few bricks short of a load as far as I'm concerned
|
|
sheera
Junior Member
Posts: 22
|
Michael
Nov 22, 2003 16:58:19 GMT -5
Post by sheera on Nov 22, 2003 16:58:19 GMT -5
I search my internet news daily but I missed the court and jury selections decision that convicted Mr. Jackson.Could any-one tell me which news service to dial-up to find this verdict of conviction? or does to much money and an excentric priveliged way of life make a person automatically guilty?Presumed innocent until proven guilty still applies.I play devils advocate only to warn DO NOT JUDGE in haste,lest you to will be judged in haste. My opinion only---Have a great day forum fans. ;D
|
|
|
Michael
Nov 22, 2003 19:15:02 GMT -5
Post by nohairleft on Nov 22, 2003 19:15:02 GMT -5
I second that.
|
|
|
Michael
Nov 22, 2003 20:18:42 GMT -5
Post by EGO on Nov 22, 2003 20:18:42 GMT -5
Gimme a break! The guy is a freak. And the parents that let their kids go to his twisted little ranch should have their heads examined.
|
|
sheera
Junior Member
Posts: 22
|
Michael
Nov 22, 2003 22:52:51 GMT -5
Post by sheera on Nov 22, 2003 22:52:51 GMT -5
Mr. Ego by your three post's I have judged you. You go to a restaurant that has the best looking waitresses that have big mammeries for scenery, while their you sit and judge people by appearance.SORRY these are your word's, what my point is that Ihave no right to judge you without knowing you .Iwould be wrong?How well do you know Jackson? must be really well if you are willing to judge by media report's.BUT of course we all know the media only tell's the truth, RIGHT?
|
|
|
Michael
Nov 23, 2003 5:58:24 GMT -5
Post by EGO on Nov 23, 2003 5:58:24 GMT -5
It'sOK, I don't mind being judged. I have a fairly strong ego, I can take it. I really mean no offence, but I think there should be a little wriggle-room in your judging rule. On a normal day, I would agree, it's not fair to judge people without a balanced representation of the facts. It's easy to take things out of context when sound-bites and video are reported through the media. Like the time I saw Michael Jackson dangling an infant over a balcony. I'm sure if I knew the whole story on that incident, there would probably be a very reasonable explanation. I mean, most people have at one time had the urge to hang their loved ones from great heights for the amusement of the crowds below. Or then there was the time I saw an interview with him, where he said he thought it was normal and OK to have sleep overs with children. After all, he was ONLY sleeping with them. Honestly, I can over-look the fact that he has transformed from a pretty normal looking guy into a shiny plastc pez-dispenser. I am not judging him for his plastic surgery, it's these other activities that were concerning me. So in this case, I am feeling fairly confident that somewhere, in that shiny little plastic head of his, there is something broken. And I still think the parents who let their children sleep over at his fun-palace should have their heads examined as well. They are all broken, and I feel sorry for the kids who were put into that situation. Even if they were not molested, they now have to go to court, testify, get dragged through the mud, and will probably end up broken themselves. All because this guy thinks it's more fun to have sleep-overs with children than to be with people his own age.
So, is he a misunderstood eccentric musician getting a bad rap from the media, or a Freak? You can wait and get to know him, or gather more information if you need to, but I have made my judgement.
|
|
|
Michael
Nov 23, 2003 6:12:39 GMT -5
Post by EGO on Nov 23, 2003 6:12:39 GMT -5
PS:
I actually don't go to restaurants for "big mammaries." I am more of a "butt" man. (Just a small point of clarification).
|
|
|
Michael
Nov 23, 2003 15:14:45 GMT -5
Post by BEAVER on Nov 23, 2003 15:14:45 GMT -5
MyParentHouse.....You are right it's very quiet and I heard nothing lately,but when it comes to the homeless and underprivileged let's face it folks"no money or glory" in it,only around X-mas time loal politions and the "well- todo" crawl out of their fancy 'caves' and pretend "how much they care",yeah,i bet,the REAL glory goes to the hundreds of peoples and some organisations with limited finances doing a sometimes'impossible'job,they are the onces saving people from starving to death in the streets. Lets NOT forget Mike Roberts and the CHBC gang with their "Baercampaigne",thumbs up!! As for Michael Jackson(the gloved one) I have to side with 'sheera', my feeling is whatever the media will do for or against him will decide his guilt or innocence, they make and break people.That topic(media) I will address in soon.
|
|
|
Michael
Nov 23, 2003 17:06:05 GMT -5
Post by EGO on Nov 23, 2003 17:06:05 GMT -5
No, the media can't decide his guilt or innocence. The media will have a hand in public opinion, that's all. His guilt or innocence will be determined in court eventually. And he will have the best lawyers money can buy backing him up.
|
|
|
Michael
Nov 24, 2003 12:13:44 GMT -5
Post by Laurel on Nov 24, 2003 12:13:44 GMT -5
I agree with that, but with him being over 200 mil in debt . the lawyer who defends him is going to be in it for the exposure. So if M.J. can't pay his lawyer,he's going to have his name out there and every one with money will be looking for him to defend them . Win or lose, it's win win for the lawyer
|
|
|
Michael
Nov 26, 2003 0:12:40 GMT -5
Post by screamingbanshee on Nov 26, 2003 0:12:40 GMT -5
Hi, I just wanted to get my opinion in here.... Sure, Michael is a bit of an odd ball...and maybe it does seem un-natural to the general public to be so childlike and interested in children. However, I would like to think that his intentions with said children are innocent and would assume so unless PROVEN not to be. I think the media should really take a look at the way they are sensationalizing this child molestation case and perhaps initiate a little bit of discretion for the sake of all parties involved. Thats my bit said.
|
|
okanog
Junior Member
Posts: 35
|
Michael
Nov 26, 2003 16:33:39 GMT -5
Post by okanog on Nov 26, 2003 16:33:39 GMT -5
I can't imagine the cost of Michael's plastic surgery but if I was him I'd sue whom ever did such a botched up mess, perhaps the exaggerated make-up doesn't help.
As far as the parents letting their children sleep over, shame on them for being so foolish. Would not the parents have insisted on a chaperon?
I say Michael is innocent until proven guilty, in a court of law.
|
|
|
Michael
Nov 26, 2003 19:46:27 GMT -5
Post by EGO on Nov 26, 2003 19:46:27 GMT -5
Foolish....exactly.....even more than foolish. A complete lack of judgement. I'll give all of you the "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" stuff, I'm not arguing that part. The courts should be, and generally are immune to the media and the court of public opinion. But just lookat him, and you know he is different. Any parent who does not get suspicious when an adult goes to the lengths he does to have children sleep over, in the same bed, should have their judgement and capabilities as parents questioned. This guy shows an un-natural interest in kids. Even if these charges never happened, I personally would not send my kid over there for a sleepover based on what I know about Michael Jackson. Too many red flags. Parents should protect their kids from harm, and the potential from harm. The difference here, the justice system is reactive. People are charged after an offence, or alleged offence has occured. It's too late then. Parents have to use judgement, be pro-active, and look after ther kids. Not always possible, but in this case the red flags should have been there.
|
|