Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 210
  1. #161
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    The Bunny Ranch
    Posts
    2,680
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009


  2. #162
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,391
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by tinkerbell View Post
    Ya know..I think this thread really should be split.. I am sure many of us find it offensive some continue to slandar MJ and crap all over this mans memory...
    This thread was meant as a farewell...If you do not respect him, that is fair. Do not understand why so many, mourn him..I get it...But, at least respect the other members that would like a place to say goodbye, pay tribute and share memories of how MJ played a role in our life.
    The problem, and this will be my last word out of so-called respect, I feel this worship/mourning for the man is disrespectful to the children whom (IN MY OPINION) he has severely harmed.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  3. #163
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    The Bunny Ranch
    Posts
    2,680
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009


  4. #164
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,625
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by tinkerbell View Post
    Ya know..I think this thread really should be split.. I am sure many of us find it offensive some continue to slandar MJ and crap all over this mans memory...
    This thread was meant as a farewell...If you do not respect him, that is fair. Do not understand why so many, mourn him..I get it...But, at least respect the other members that would like a place to say goodbye, pay tribute and share memories of how MJ played a role in our life.

    There are plenty of MJ fan sites and other ways to say farewell without risking arguments or supposed slander of the deceased. This is a debate site, and the Op made the assertion "The world has lost someone special today." Debating that claim made here is completely appropriate and should have been expected.

  5. #165
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    The Bunny Ranch
    Posts
    2,680
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by evensaul View Post
    There are plenty of MJ fan sites and other ways to say farewell without risking arguments or supposed slander of the deceased. This is a debate site, and the Op made the assertion "The world has lost someone special today." Debating that claim made here is completely appropriate and should have been expected.

    Not if it has become a separate topic and distracts from it's original purpose..

  6. #166
    Banned Indefinitely
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Somewhere, USA.
    Posts
    711
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by tinkerbell View Post
    Speculate to break the one you hate
    Circulate the lie you confiscate
    Assassinate and mutilate
    As the hounding media in hysteria
    Who's the next for you to resurrect
    JFK exposed the CIA
    Truth be told the grassy knoll
    As the blackmail story in all your glory
    It's slander
    You say it's not a sword
    But with your pen you torture men
    You'd crucify the Lord
    And you don't have to read it, read it
    And you don't have to eat it, eat it
    To buy it is to feed it, feed it
    So why do we keep foolin' ourselves

    Just because you read it in a magazine
    Or see it on the TV screen
    Don't make it factual
    Though everybody wants to read all about it
    Just because you read it in a magazine
    Or see it on the TV screen
    Don't make it factual, actual
    They say he's homosexual

    In the hood
    Frame him if you could
    Shoot to kill
    To blame him if you will
    If he dies sympathize
    Such false witnesses
    Damn self righteousness
    In the black
    Stab me in the back
    In the face
    To lie and shame the race
    Heroine and Marilyn
    As the headline stories of
    All your glory

    It's slander
    With the words you use
    You're a parasite in black and white
    Do anything for news
    And you don't go and buy it, buy it
    And they won't glorify it, 'fy it
    To read it sanctifies it, 'fies it
    Then why do we keep foolin' ourselves

    Just because you read it in a magazine
    Or see it on the TV screen
    Don't make it factual
    Everybody wants to read all about it
    Just because you read it in a magazine
    Or see it on the TV screen
    Don't make it factual
    See, but everybody wants to believe all about it

    Just because you read it in a magazine
    Or see it on the TV screen
    Don't make it factual
    See, but everybody wants to believe all about it
    Just because you read it in a magazine
    Or see it on the TV screen
    Don't make it factual, actual
    She's blonde and she's bisexual

    Scandal
    With the words you use
    You're a parasite in black and white
    Do anything for news
    And you don't go and buy it, buy it
    And they won't glorify it, 'fy it
    To read it sanctifies it, 'fies it
    Why do we keep foolin' ourselves
    Slander
    You say it's not a sin
    But with your pen you torture men
    Then why do we keep foolin' ourselves

    Just because you read it in a magazine
    Or see it on the TV screen
    Don't make it factual
    Though everybody wants to read all about it
    Just because you read it in a magazine
    Or see it on the TV screen
    Don't make it factual
    See, but everybody wants to read all about it

    Just because you read it in a magazine
    Or see it on the TV screen
    Don't make it factual
    Just because you read it in a magazine
    Or see it on the TV screen
    Don't make it factual
    Just because you read it in a magazine
    Or see it on the TV screen
    Don't make it factual, actual
    You're so damn disrespectable
    Hey tink when did he make this song?

  7. #167
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,716
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by Aspoestertjie View Post
    Nice try Damantjie, but no cigar.


    None of the quotes you provided stated that I give my opinion as FACT.
    Aspo, it doesn't matter if it's "stated to be a fact". The question of whether it's a fact or an opinion depends on the context and not on you saying "this is my opinion". The idea is to protect people's reputation. And there are legal tests to establish if something is fact or opinion for defamation purposes.

    Eg, in MILKOVICH V. LORAIN JOURNAL, 497 U. S. 1 (1990) the US Supreme Court*** said the following:

    *** Milkovich was a case that focused mostly on the 1st Amendment and whether a statement would be blanketly protected as "opinion" by that Amendment. The Court found against such a blanket protection (thereby reversing, or "clarifying" as their Honours cautiously put it, the previous decision in Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.). I mention this here because you have made a reference to the 1st Amendment in an earlier post.

    Quote Originally Posted by Milkovic vs Lorain Journal
    Simply couching a statement -- "Jones is a liar" -- in terms of opinion -- "In my opinion, Jones is a liar" -- does not dispel the factual implications contained in the statement.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ibid
    "[It] would be destructive of the law of libel if a writer could escape liability for accusations of [defamatory conduct] simply by using, explicitly or implicitly, the words 'I think.'"
    Quote Originally Posted by Ibid
    Thus, unlike the statement, "In my opinion Mayor Jones is a liar," the statement, "In my opinion Mayor Jones shows his abysmal ignorance by accepting the teachings of Marx and Lenin," would not be actionable.
    So what is the legal test?

    Well, in Potomac Valve & Fitting Inc & ors (a lower court's case on defamation expressly stated by the Supreme Court in Milkovich to address the issue appropriately; in effect Milkovich said that "opinion" is well enough defined by the lower courts and this provides adequate protection even if the Constitution doesn't blanketly apply) the US Court of Appeals - Fourth Circuit, applied the so called "Ollman test" (Developed in a previous case of Ollman vs Evans). That test is as follows:

    Quote Originally Posted by Ollman test of opinion
    (1) consider the author or speaker's choice of words;21 (2) decide whether the challenged statement is "capable of being objectively characterized as true or false";22 (3) examine the context of the challenged statement within the writing or speech as a whole;23 and (4) consider "the broader social context into which the statement fits".
    However, the Court in Potomac also qualified the scope*** of the Ollman test. It said the following:

    Quote Originally Posted by Potomac Case
    Even when a statement is subject to verification, however, it may still be protected if it can best be understood from its language and context to represent the personal view of the author or speaker who made it.26 Thus we reject the suggestion, advanced by the plaintiffs in this case, that any "question of fact" which can be decided by a jury can be actionable as defamation.
    The qualification, in the words of the Court, depends on the question of whether "a reasonable reader or listener would recognize its [the statement's] weakly substantiated or subjective character--and discount it accordingly."

    *** Whether the statement was a qualification of the scope of the Ollman test or a simple restatement of the 1st, 3rd and 4th limbs of the test is arguable. However, the distinction is of no importance here. It might be the case that courts prior to Potomac had taken to a tendency to only look at the 2nd limb (in bold above) - or at least to give it undue weight while to some extent ignoring the other limbs - and the Judges in Potomac basically reaffirmed the importance of the remaining 3 limbs, while restating the same in one simple sentence.

    By this I'm not saying that your statements about MJ are statements of fact and not of opinion. I'm also not saying that there could be a lawsuit against you. I don't think there could be; MJ is dead and dead people (to my knowledge) can't be defamed because defamation is an attack on character; and dead people no longer have one.

    But what I'm saying is that the sole fact that you say "this is my opinion" is not enough to protect you against a lawsuit in defamation. The question of whether a statement is an opinion or not is an objective question and doesn't depend on mere intention and CERTAINLY NOT on whether you label it as an opinion (an easy way to escape liability, wouldn't it be?).
    Last edited by Allocutus; July 8th, 2009 at 05:51 AM.
    "I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world" - Richard Dawkins

    "If you could rationalize with Religious people there would be no more Religious people" -Gregory House

  8. #168
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Venus
    Posts
    3,908
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by Allocutus View Post
    Aspo, it doesn't matter if it's "stated to be a fact". The question of whether it's a fact or an opinion depends on the context and not on you saying "this is my opinion". The idea is to protect people's reputation. And there are legal tests to establish if something is fact or opinion for defamation purposes.
    Okay, which is of course fair.

    So for us we need to look at the context of this whole thing.

    First, we look at what website this is, right? We come to the conclusion that this site is in fact for people to actually debate about issues. Sometimes even issues that they might not like.

    The site says "Battleground for Truth".

    I personally believe if this site for instance was a National News Outlet. If this site was a site that propagands hate speech, then yes, legal action can/might be taken against people.

    Now, lets look at it a little bit further, shall we?

    However, the Court in Potomac also qualified the scope of the Ollman test. It said the following:

    The qualification, in the words of the Court, depends on the question of whether "a reasonable reader or listener would recognize its [the statement's] weakly substantiated or subjective character--and discount it accordingly."
    So, let's for argument's sake say that MJ was still alive and he saw what I wrote on a debate site where people argue and give their personal opinions about topics. He does decide to take me to court. He then needs to actually provide proof that.

    1. I actually state what I stated as being fact, even though it is the opinion, not only of me but many other people as well.
    2. Also, that this statement alone can cause him incredible harm and that it have a very deep impact on his character.
    2. That you, Tinker, Daman, Tarja and everybody else reading what I wrote actually is unable to recognise that it is a WEAK SUBSTANTIATED/SUBJECTIVE CLAIM, and subsequently is not in the possession to actually discount it accordingly.

    Am I right?

    If I am right for instance, and he does take me to court, it will be one hell of a task to prove that. Wouldn't you agree? Especially considering all of you are very intelligent people, who are all able to actually differentiate between fact and opinion most of the time.

    And we all can agree there is enough evidence on ODN alone that will support my claim that you all are indeed intelligent and that you definitely have enough brains to see the difference between fact and opinion.

    Also, the fact that such a statement is nothing new to the media and that a good number of other people also expressed the same sentiments as I did, will make it indeed very difficult for any case. If I was maybe one person out of millions who actually said something like this, and it was a statement or accusation a very small number of persons ever heard of and that it can cause millions of people to actually change their minds and opinions about MJ, then yes, his case is very solid. Do you agree?

    I do agree that simply giving your opinion and claiming it as opinion will not get you off easily. But again, context like you said needs to be considered.
    >>]Aspoestertjie[<<

    ODN Rules

    Join our Facebook Page here!

  9. #169
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,716
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by Aspoestertjie View Post
    Okay, which is of course fair.

    So for us we need to look at the context of this whole thing.

    First, we look at what website this is, right? We come to the conclusion that this site is in fact for people to actually debate about issues. Sometimes even issues that they might not like.
    Ok. This doesn't matter. If I were to say in this site that a hypothetical debater named I_Love_Elvis_and_I_Hate_MJ has drowned both of his children and dissolved their bodies in acid, would that make me immune from legal attack simply because I stated it on a debate website?

    The site says "Battleground for Truth".
    Again, I don't think "forum" can save the day.

    I personally believe if this site for instance was a National News Outlet. If this site was a site that propagands hate speech, then yes, legal action can/might be taken against people.
    As above. And you can be sure that defaming someone in a non-news-forum is actionable. As I said before, there are legal tests. The context and WHERE you make a statement of course do matter. So, if the debate was about "is MJ guilty?" and you were giving all your reasons for why you believe he's guilty, that would probably be opinion.

    Now, lets look at it a little bit further, shall we?
    We shall.



    So, let's for argument's sake say that MJ was still alive and he saw what I wrote on a debate site where people argue and give their personal opinions about topics. He does decide to take me to court. He then needs to actually provide proof that.

    1. I actually state what I stated as being fact, even though it is the opinion, not only of me but many other people as well.
    No. "Opinion" is a defence. All he'd have to show is that you made a statement that was defamatory in nature. Then YOU would have to prove on the balance of probabilities that what you were stating was mere opinion.

    2. Also, that this statement alone can cause him incredible harm and that it have a very deep impact on his character.
    Firstly, it's not "incredible harm". Just harm will do.

    Secondly, I'm not too sure about yours above. It depends on the jurisdiction. And I haven't looked at what STATE'S law he could sue under and what the law is there on the issue. And what issue would that be? Well, in many jurisdicions no actual harm needs to be proven if the attack on character involved an allegation of criminal conduct.


    2. That you, Tinker, Daman, Tarja and everybody else reading what I wrote actually is unable to recognise that it is a WEAK SUBSTANTIATED/SUBJECTIVE CLAIM, and subsequently is not in the possession to actually discount it accordingly.
    No. The quesiton is whether a Reasonable Person would be unable to recognise it as such. Reasonable Person is not me or Tarja or anyone here or any specific individual at all. It's an abstract fellow. "Reasonable Person" is a legal test that is applied by the courts whenever an objective standard is being considered. "What would a hypothetical reasonable person think?" And again, it's not for him to prove. Opinion is a defence. He just has to prove that you made the statement and that it was defamatory. You have to prove the defence.


    If I am right for instance, and he does take me to court, it will be one hell of a task to prove that. Wouldn't you agree? Especially considering all of you are very intelligent people, who are all able to actually differentiate between fact and opinion most of the time.
    No, that doesn't matter. Reasonable person is an objective standard in law. All he has to show is that you made a statement and that it's defamatory. Depending on the jurisdiction, he might have to prove actual harm.


    And we all can agree there is enough evidence on ODN alone that will support my claim that you all are indeed intelligent and that you definitely have enough brains to see the difference between fact and opinion.
    Yes, but that's irrelevant for the above reasons.


    Also, the fact that such a statement is nothing new to the media and that a good number of other people also expressed the same sentiments as I did, will make it indeed very difficult for any case. If I was maybe one person out of millions who actually said something like this, and it was a statement or accusation a very small number of persons ever heard of and that it can cause millions of people to actually change their minds and opinions about MJ, then yes, his case is very solid. Do you agree?
    Yes, that's another possible defence. But my post was about opinion. I can of course do some research on this issue. But what I was trying to say to you is that nothing is ever very simple when it comes to law. As Dickens said (via his character, Mr Bumble), "the law is an ass" LOL.
    "I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world" - Richard Dawkins

    "If you could rationalize with Religious people there would be no more Religious people" -Gregory House

  10. #170
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Venus
    Posts
    3,908
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    So, in your expert opinion Allo.

    Does MJ have a strong case here IF he was alive?
    >>]Aspoestertjie[<<

    ODN Rules

    Join our Facebook Page here!

  11. #171
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,716
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by Aspoestertjie View Post
    So, in your expert opinion Allo.

    Does MJ have a strong case here IF he was alive?
    I haven't formed my opinion yet. I'd have to look into the other issues. So far I've only covered the defence of opinion. I could tell you what it would be like under Victorian (Australian State) law. But that wouldn't do the situation much justice, would it?

    My gut feeling (educated guess) is that he couldn't succeed against you.
    "I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world" - Richard Dawkins

    "If you could rationalize with Religious people there would be no more Religious people" -Gregory House

  12. #172
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    What I don't understand is that there's probably millions of people out there whom we should hate on infinitely more than Michael Jackson, yet just because he's a celebrity, the papers have to follow him everywhere.

    Would you like your father to be called out, branded, and disgraced even until after his death for charges he wasn't even found guilty on?
    Nun, Volk, steh' auf, und Sturm, brich' los!

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    ..:: ( Comtesse ) ::..

  13. #173
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,220
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by Comtesse View Post
    Would you like your father to be called out, branded, and disgraced even until after his death for charges he wasn't even found guilty on?
    Exactly. I doubt that Ibel or Aspo would like to hear people claim their deceased father was a pedophile, despite there being no evidence to the contrary.

    I think we all (those who are going after Jacko) need to consider this: No matter WHAT you thought about Jackson, no matter what he did, what he said, three children lost their FATHER. Those kids could hear what people are saying about him. His daughter was so brave, to take the stage at that memorial, and tell the world that she loved, and missed her daddy. To her, her daddy was the best daddy in the world. How would she feel, knowing that there are people saying these sick things about the father she loved, and misses?

    Just remember that. Three kids lost their father, and they dont need to hear any of the crap people are saying. Have a little sympathy for the poor kids.
    Frozen In Time Yearning Forbidden Wishes Damned And Divine
    Scars Of My Broken Kisses What Will Follow If Tomorrow's Blind? My Eternal Night.

  14. #174
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Venus
    Posts
    3,908
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    I will say this.

    His music was good and will continue to live. Thanks to technology. Just imagine what will happen if no recording equipment existed. Have you ever thought about that?

    I don't however mourn his death (so shoot me for it), but I do hope he will rest in peace. I do hope that he never did the things he was accused of, because IF he did, I hope it comes back to haunt him.
    >>]Aspoestertjie[<<

    ODN Rules

    Join our Facebook Page here!

  15. #175
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pacific NW (for now)
    Posts
    1,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by Comtesse View Post

    Would you like your father to be called out, branded, and disgraced even until after his death for charges he wasn't even found guilty on?
    No, but I wouldn't want the guy who molested my kid to be praised by the nation and the world after his death when it was known that he had been accused of such crimes just because he could sing and dance.

    That's the way the world works. Sucks for the kids. (All of them.)

    Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.

  16. #176
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by AliceLiddell View Post
    No, but I wouldn't want the guy who molested my kid to be praised by the nation and the world after his death when it was known that he had been accused of such crimes just because he could sing and dance.

    That's the way the world works. Sucks for the kids. (All of them.)
    IF thus SUPPOSED molestation which was DENIED by Jackson ON TELEVISION PUBLICLY AROUND THE WORLD, ACQUITTED OF IN COURT, AND ALL CHARGES DROPPED, did indeed occur, it's one goddam person. I'm sorry, I don't think one person's supposed and overreacted grief is enough to ruin/stop the mourning of MILLIONS around the world. For the b!tch who's screaming all this sh!t about it is insane. Just drop it, and if you need to, just sit in a corner and DON'T DO SH!T. THERE'S NO need TO HECKLE HIM. Great, pretend this SUPPOSED, DENIED, ACQUITTED, and DROPPED topic of molestation did indeed occur - I see no reason why it should be screamed across the nation on top of a mountain with a bullhorn. You know what? Why no go and scream about all the Janjaweed over in Africa? Why not go complain about the random rapists, OTHER PEDOPHILES, and much other cruller people in the world? He was probably one of the most inspirational people in the world for years and years! JUST DROP THE GODDAM CASE! HE'S DEAD! LISTEN TO A COUPLE OF HIS SONGS, APPRECIATE IT, AND MOVE ON. IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING AGAINST HIM, THEN COMPLAIN BY YOURSELF. IT'S NOT LIKE WE CAN PROSECUTE HIS DEAD BODY - NOR CAN WE CARRY HIS DEAD CORPSE AROUND AND BURN IT. THE GUY'S DEAD. HAS THAT BURNED THROUGH YET?

    MOVE ON.
    Nun, Volk, steh' auf, und Sturm, brich' los!

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    ..:: ( Comtesse ) ::..

  17. #177
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pacific NW (for now)
    Posts
    1,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by Comtesse View Post
    IF thus SUPPOSED molestation which was DENIED by Jackson ON TELEVISION PUBLICLY AROUND THE WORLD, ACQUITTED OF IN COURT, AND ALL CHARGES DROPPED, did indeed occur, it's one goddam person.
    That we know of... Perhaps there were others who for whatever reason didn't come out.

    I'm sorry, I don't think one person's supposed and overreacted grief is enough to ruin/stop the mourning of MILLIONS around the world.
    You are right, it's not enough. Those who are in "true mourning" and don't believe anything happened will not stop mourning because of the grief of any victims.

    For the b!tch who's screaming all this sh!t about it is insane.
    All the media attention this guy is getting over his death is insane. Do we have no better heroes?

    THERE'S NO need TO HECKLE HIM.
    That is, of course, a matter of opinion.

    Great, pretend this SUPPOSED, DENIED, ACQUITTED, and DROPPED topic of molestation did indeed occur - I see no reason why it should be screamed across the nation on top of a mountain with a bullhorn.
    Why should the mourning of Michael Jackson be screamed across the nation on top of a mountain with a bullhorn?

    You know what? Why no go and scream about all the Janjaweed over in Africa? Why not go complain about the random rapists, OTHER PEDOPHILES, and much other cruller people in the world?
    Because they are not being heralded on national television for their accomplishments.

    He was probably one of the most inspirational people in the world for years and years!
    Inspirational =/= Good

    JUST DROP THE GODDAM CASE! HE'S DEAD! LISTEN TO A COUPLE OF HIS SONGS, APPRECIATE IT, AND MOVE ON. IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING AGAINST HIM, THEN COMPLAIN BY YOURSELF.
    Or perhaps if you have something against those who dislike him, you could complain by yourself?

    IT'S NOT LIKE WE CAN PROSECUTE HIS DEAD BODY -
    Who wants to?

    NOR CAN WE CARRY HIS DEAD CORPSE AROUND AND BURN IT.
    Well, technically...

    THE GUY'S DEAD. HAS THAT BURNED THROUGH YET?
    Apparently not since you are so concerned about how he is treated.

    Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.

  18. #178
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Actually, what I'm trying to say is that people don't have to run in on his funeral screaming he's a pedophile. However, he is dead. Therefore, pretty much by custom, we review what he has done GOOD for the world. What are people supposed to do, hang his body and recite a list of all his sins and spit on him?
    Nun, Volk, steh' auf, und Sturm, brich' los!

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    ..:: ( Comtesse ) ::..

  19. #179
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pacific NW (for now)
    Posts
    1,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by Comtesse View Post
    Actually, what I'm trying to say is that people don't have to run in on his funeral screaming he's a pedophile.
    I agree, it's quirky and inappropriate, but perhaps no more inappropriate than all the fame and praise he received at his memorial service (if he did molest a child, which is presumably what the screamer believes).

    However, he is dead. Therefore, pretty much by custom, we review what he has done GOOD for the world.
    Unless the person had done significant bad.

    What are people supposed to do, hang his body and recite a list of all his sins and spit on him?
    Why the hyperbole? How about he just die and go away without all the attention and fanfare? If you are ok with the fanfare, then you should expect the detractors. The two go hand in hand.

    Contrariwise, if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.

  20. #180
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,625
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RIP Michael Jackson 1958-2009

    Quote Originally Posted by Swindall View Post
    The world has lost someone special today.
    10 Undeniable Facts About Michael Jackson
    The author, who spent more than a decade covering the scandal for V.F., shares the key revelations and insights that viewers of the new HBO documentary Leaving Neverland need to know.

    1. There is no dispute that, at age 34, Michael Jackson slept more than 30 nights in a row in the same bed with 13-year-old Jordie Chandler at the boy’s house with Chandler’s mother present. He also slept in the same bed with Jordie Chandler at Chandler’s father’s house. The parents were divorced.

    2. So far, five boys Michael Jackson shared beds with have accused him of abuse: Jordie Chandler, Jason Francia, Gavin Arvizo, Wade Robson, and Jimmy Safechuck. Jackson had the same nickname for Chandler and Arvizo: “Rubba.” He called Robson “Little One” and Safechuck “Applehead.”

    3. Jackson paid $25 million to settle the Chandlers’ lawsuit, with $18 million going to Jordie, $2.5 million to each of the parents, and the rest to lawyers. Jackson said he paid that sum to avoid something “long and drawn out.” Francia also received $2.4 million from Jackson.

    4. Michael Jackson suffered from the skin discoloration disease vitiligo. Jordie Chandler drew a picture of the markings on the underside of Jackson’s penis. His drawings were sealed in an envelope. A few months later, investigators photographed Jackson’s genitalia. The photographs matched Chandler’s drawings.

    5. The hallway leading to Jackson’s bedroom was a serious security zone covered by video and wired for sound so that the steps of anyone approaching would make ding-dong sounds.

    6. Jackson had an extensive collection of adult erotic material he kept in a suitcase next to his bed, including S&M bondage photos and a study of naked boys. Forensic experts with experience in the Secret Service found the fingerprints of boys alongside Jackson’s on the same pages. Jackson also had bondage sculptures of women with ball gags in their mouths on his desk, in full view of the boys who slept there.

    7. According to the Neverland staff interviewed by the Santa Barbara authorities, no one ever saw or knew of a woman spending the night with Michael Jackson, including his two spouses, Debbie Rowe or Lisa Marie Presley. Rowe, the mother of two of Jackson’s children, made it clear to the Santa Barbara authorities that she never had sex with Jackson.

    8. The parents of boys Jackson shared beds with were courted assiduously and given myriad expensive gifts. Wade Robson’s mother testified in the 2005 trial that she funneled wages through Jackson’s company and was given a permanent resident visa. Jimmy Safechuck’s parents got a house. Jordie Chandler’s mother got a diamond bracelet.

    9. Two of the fathers of those who have accused Jackson, Jordie Chandler and Jimmy Safechuck, committed suicide. Both were estranged from their sons at the time.

    10. In a 2002 documentary, Living with Michael Jackson, Jackson told Martin Bashir there was nothing wrong with sharing his bed with boys.

    https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood...se-allegations
    "If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

 

 
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Michael Jackson goes to the Middle East
    By Montalban in forum Current Events
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: February 14th, 2007, 10:17 AM
  2. Black Jackson. The Man. The Myth. The Demigod Popstar.
    By Mr. Hyde in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: July 6th, 2006, 02:22 PM
  3. Michael Jackson found Not Guilty
    By Fyshhed in forum Current Events
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: April 16th, 2006, 07:21 AM
  4. Michael Jackson
    By Eva in forum Current Events
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: February 1st, 2005, 10:25 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •