Random News Items

[The Unknown Poster]

1 minute ago, Rich said:

I don't know if you have children or not, but here is the bottom line question....

If he were still alive today, given all that you have read and researched, would you let your kids (or nephews or nieces or whoever) sleep over at his house unsupervised?

I sure know my answer.

Would you let your children sleep over at the home of any adult you didnt know very well?  I know my answer.  Has nothing to do with his celebrity or accusations.  Most parents would be more protective of their children than that.

[Rich]

2 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Would you let your children sleep over at the home of any adult you didnt know very well?  I know my answer.  Has nothing to do with his celebrity or accusations.  Most parents would be more protective of their children than that.

Nice dodge.

So to be clear on this, you still believe Jackson was not a pedophile and was only extorted?

[The Unknown Poster]

1 minute ago, Rich said:

Nice dodge.

So to be clear on this, you still believe Jackson was not a pedophile and was only extorted?

I do not believe Jackson was a pedophile.  I do believe he was very reckless.  There was simply too much evidence that pointed to ulterior motives on the part of the accusers.  In fact it really painted any "evidence" against him with a grain of simply not being able to be believable.

This is not to say I dont think jackson had deep-rooted issues.  He clearly did. 

I read a great book about this, but too long ago to remember details to counter every argument.  If we continue to discuss this, Ill review the book...lol 

Also, its not a dodge Rich.  Would you let a stranger in your neighborhood have your child for sleep overs?  Its really a silly question actually...would you let your child sleep over with Jackson.  It implies you'd let your child sleep over with any number of strangers.  Most parents would not.  And in the case of Jackson, my worry would not be him abusing my child but in being irresponsible in managing the safety of my child.  Obviously, anyone accused of child abuse would raise the flag of caution to any parent.  But prior to any accusations being made, would you have let your child sleep over?  I wouldnt.

[Brandon]

45 minutes ago, Rich said:

I don't know if you have children or not, but here is the bottom line question....

If he were still alive today, given all that you have read and researched, would you let your kids (or nephews or nieces or whoever) sleep over at his house unsupervised?

I sure know my answer.

I sadly will have to agree with Unknown Poster.    We have a little one and my wife was paranoid and terrified when she started daycare at a highly rated and well controlled facility.   Most parents won't let anyone watch their children aside from their closest family members or friends.  Who in the world would allow a child to stay at any strangers house unsupervised?

I'm not completely in the know of MJ's past,  but I do remember two kids who visited him were Macaulay Culkin and Corey Feldman.   Both kids who had super bad parents who tried exploiting their child's fame and fortune.  Both kids ended up with severe drug addictions.

Look at MJ himself,  his parents were messed up and clearly he grew up with a complete disaster of an upbringing.  The guy was terrible with his money and was an easy target to exploit.    If the police would of found something they wouldn't of been scared to charge the guy.

I think the best representation of MJ is what they did in South Park.... 

 

 

 

[The Unknown Poster]

Agreed Brandon.  The thing is like fruit of the poisonous tree.  I posted information from the first accuser and it was 100% extortion.  Jackson's advisers said pay him off and then suddenly you're wide open to it.  And partially due to Jackson's own reckless behavior.  Even after multiple accusations he didnt seem to change the position he put himself in with children.  Its like the accusations were so silly in his mind he didnt consider it could happen again and again.  Ultimately, the issue is so clouded by the extortion and whatnot that who can say.

Ultimately, I wasnt there so I cant bet my life.  But to me, I wasnt there to see OJ kill Ron and Nicole but I know he did it.  I'd say my belief in Jackson's innocence would be somewhat less than my belief in OJ's guilt for obvious reasons but the point is somewhat the same.

[Fatty Liver]

6 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Agreed Brandon.  The thing is like fruit of the poisonous tree.  I posted information from the first accuser and it was 100% extortion.  Jackson's advisers said pay him off and then suddenly you're wide open to it.  And partially due to Jackson's own reckless behavior.  Even after multiple accusations he didnt seem to change the position he put himself in with children.  Its like the accusations were so silly in his mind he didnt consider it could happen again and again.  Ultimately, the issue is so clouded by the extortion and whatnot that who can say.

Ultimately, I wasnt there so I cant bet my life.  But to me, I wasnt there to see OJ kill Ron and Nicole but I know he did it.  I'd say my belief in Jackson's innocence would be somewhat less than my belief in OJ's guilt for obvious reasons but the point is somewhat the same.

And yet Jackson continued to seek out these unsupervised arrangements with children, even after a couple of them went sideways.  Either he had a predilection to pedophilia and accepted the cost as a part of "his thing" or he was deeply delusional to think that he would not be accused and have to defend  his behavior. 

I for one can believe he wasn't stupid enough to physically molest any of these kids or the gloves would have been thrown off and he would have been tried.  Nowadays they lock people away just for looking at kiddie-porn on the Web so the definition of a pedophile is fairly broad, MJ was swimming in dangerous waters. 

[iso_55]

8 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I missed where it said he was pedophile.  Also, that's the same information posted earlier, is it not?  Hey Iso, do you think Jackson was extorted or is that evidence not relevant?

I think both. He committed the sexual crimes against kids & paid off the parents. People found out & they deliberately sent their kids to see him hoping to make easy money off of him.

[Brandon]

3 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

And yet Jackson continued to seek out these unsupervised arrangements with children, even after a couple of them went sideways.  Either he had a predilection to pedophilia and accepted the cost as a part of "his thing" or he was deeply delusional to think that he would not be accused and have to defend  his behavior. 

I for one can believe he wasn't stupid enough to physically molest any of these kids or the gloves would have been thrown off and he would have been tried.  Nowadays they lock people away just for looking at kiddie-porn on the Web so the definition of a pedophile is fairly broad, MJ was swimming in dangerous waters. 

I am glad they lock away guys and girls who look at kiddie porn that's terrible.    As for vintage porn... their is a niche market for that and he's not the only one who collects that.   

I honestly think that South Park best captured what he truly was.  A little boy in a disfigured freakish adult body.  Even back then if they had any real proof that he did anything I am positive they would of put him in jail.    MJ was a moron no questions asked.. (dangling the baby over the balcony for example).   But just because you are a moron, you looked hideously disfigured,  you collect vintage porn,  you build a weird amusement park.... all of this doesn't mean you are a child molester.     

Just because you hang out with children doesn't also make you a child molester... I would hope you wouldn't think that every volunteer at the Big Brother foundation are not all child molesters?  Those people go out alone with little boys and take them to amusement parks and whatever else for fun. 

Now Jared Fogle on the other hand who admitted to raping boys,  who was caught with real child porn at his house, and all that other evidence.... clearly he is a child molester.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

Led Zeppelin not guilty of stealing Stairway to Heaven!

[Fatty Liver]

20 hours ago, iso_55 said:

I think both. He committed the sexual crimes against kids & paid off the parents. People found out & they deliberately sent their kids to see him hoping to make easy money off of him.

Pretty hard to believe that there are parents who would risk their children like this for any amount of money.

[The Unknown Poster]

20 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

And yet Jackson continued to seek out these unsupervised arrangements with children, even after a couple of them went sideways.  Either he had a predilection to pedophilia and accepted the cost as a part of "his thing" or he was deeply delusional to think that he would not be accused and have to defend  his behavior. 

I for one can believe he wasn't stupid enough to physically molest any of these kids or the gloves would have been thrown off and he would have been tried.  Nowadays they lock people away just for looking at kiddie-porn on the Web so the definition of a pedophile is fairly broad, MJ was swimming in dangerous waters. 

I definitely think he had issues.  I think he likely thought the accusations were so absurd as to not even take precautions in the future.  Keep in mind, he was surrounded by people and kept in a "bubble".  He really shouldnt have paid off the initial extorter but he did and that was one of the issues.  But being surrounded by people telling him he's right, doesnt help.

He had many issues, stemming from his own awful childhood.  But far too much evidence of set ups and extortion to ever take any of it seriously. 

[The Unknown Poster]

6 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Pretty hard to believe that there are parents who would risk their children like this for any amount of money.

Yeah, Iso's remarks are asinine.  Parents sending their kids to see Jackson and then asking for money.  Hmmmm, whats more likely, that they knew he was an abuser and wanted cash or they knew he wasnt but knew he'd pay?  Let's use some common sense. lol

[Rich]

17 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Yeah, Iso's remarks are asinine.  Parents sending their kids to see Jackson and then asking for money.  Hmmmm, whats more likely, that they knew he was an abuser and wanted cash or they knew he wasnt but knew he'd pay?  Let's use some common sense. lol

 

On June 22, 2016 at 9:01 AM, The Unknown Poster said:

Would you let your children sleep over at the home of any adult you didnt know very well?  I know my answer.  Has nothing to do with his celebrity or accusations.  Most parents would be more protective of their children than that.

These two posts of your really contradict one another.

First you say that most parents are so protective of their children, they wouldn't let them sleep over at any adult they didn't know very well.  Makes sense.

Then you suggest that parents would send their kids to a stranger for money because he was only accused, not an abuser, but would pay up.

The reasonable thing ... The common sense thing ... Would be not to send your kid at all.  So we can throw common sense out  

It seems to me, if we used common sense, if a parent really cared so little about their kid as to send them to a stranger for the sole purposes of extorting them, even with there being rumours and suggestions of abuse, they didn't really care either way if their kids were abused.  They were only interested in the money.

 

[iso_55]

44 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Pretty hard to believe that there are parents who would risk their children like this for any amount of money.

I don't. There are sicko parents out there that would this unfortunately.

Edited June 23, 2016 by iso_55

[iso_55]

34 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Yeah, Iso's remarks are asinine.  Parents sending their kids to see Jackson and then asking for money.  Hmmmm, whats more likely, that they knew he was an abuser and wanted cash or they knew he wasnt but knew he'd pay?  Let's use some common sense. lol

Assinine? Look at the crimes committed against children everyday in the news by parents.

[The Unknown Poster]

4 minutes ago, Rich said:

 

These two posts of your really contradict one another.

First you say that most parents are so protective of their children, they wouldn't let them sleep over at any adult they didn't know very well.  Makes sense.

Then you suggest that parents would send their kids to a stranger for money because he was only accused, not an abuser, but would pay up.

It seems to me, if we used common sense, if a parent really cared so little about their kid as to send them to a stranger for the sole purposes of extorting them, even with there being rumours and suggestions of abuse, they didn't really care either way if their kids were abused.  They were only interested in the money.

 

Common sense tells is that there is a difference between letting your kids do something you deem (correctly or otherwise) safe with the intent of gaining financially and maliciously putting your kids in harm's way for the same end result.

Most responsible parents would think twice about letting their children stay with any stranger.  That was the loaded question you asked me previously to which my reply was met by you with accusations of dodging.  We can certainly drill down to a deeper examination of this.  I would say all the parents involved didnt think jackson was a threat to their children.  Was it wise to let their kids spend nights there?  Regardless, there is a difference between the strange guy down the street and Michael Jackson (or any well known celebrity).

The parents were star struck.  If Jackson was an abuser, his celebrity status would certainly gain him access.  Not being an abuser, his celebrity status means parents were more trusting then they would normally be for a non-celebrity.

Keep in mind there are many awful parents who leave their kids with strangers or less than desirable adults. 

You're reaching to try and find fault in my perspective which is fine but rather off the mark. 

There are numerous examples of parents who convinced their kids to make false allegations.  One in Winnipeg was in the news this week in fact.  There are numerous examples of all manner of authorities doing the same.  Anyone remember the devil worship hysteria from the 80's?

The fact is, no one accused Jackson of anything until that first guy got denied by jackson to fund his career. 

[The Unknown Poster]

1 minute ago, iso_55 said:

Assinine? Look at the crimes committed against children everyday in the news by parents.

Assinine in the sense that if two options exist, the more reasonable one is more likely.  Is it a universal truth?  Ofcourse not.  But parents extorting Jackson doesnt make me think "wow, those parents delivered their kids to an abuser so they can get money".  I immediately think, "wow those parents saw a rich celebrity with questionable judgement who had already paid off other parents and they figured they'd get an easy payday too".

In reality, even knowing Jackson didnt do anything wrong, it was still subjecting their children to an awful situation when parents forced them give false statements and be subjected to examination by the authorities.  So none of those people are winning parent of the year awards.

[iso_55]

You know what, you wear me out. You're right, I'm wrong. So carry on.

Edited June 23, 2016 by iso_55

[The Unknown Poster]

1 minute ago, iso_55 said:

You know what, you wear me out. You're right, I'm wrong. So carry on.

Why do you do that?  Seriously.  Do everyone a favour and dont bother posting if you're intent is that everyone will agree with you or you will sulk. 

[Fatty Liver]

19 minutes ago, iso_55 said:

I don't. There are sicko parents out there that would this unfortunately.

True enough, how quickly we forget.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/sentencing-arguments-parents-toddler-died-meningitis-1.3648846

[iso_55]

20 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Why do you do that?  Seriously.  Do everyone a favour and dont bother posting if you're intent is that everyone will agree with you or you will sulk. 

LOL! You take things way too seriously. Be happy.

 

16 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

True enough, how quickly we forget.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/sentencing-arguments-parents-toddler-died-meningitis-1.3648846

TLB you're right. That was a sad case. The boy was 15 & looked like a 6 year old. The way he was treated & the living conditions were terrible what he endured.

Edited June 23, 2016 by iso_55

[Fatty Liver]

12 minutes ago, iso_55 said:

LOL! You take things way too seriously. Be happy.

 

TLB you're right. That was a sad case. The boy was 15 & looked like a 6 year old. The way he was treated & the living conditions were terrible what he endured.

It might be politically incorrect to identify these people as Mormons but their specific religious beliefs are the source of many of this couples loonie rationalizations and worse still, indicates they are not an isolated example.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

[The Unknown Poster]

23 hours ago, iso_55 said:

LOL! You take things way too seriously. Be happy.

 

.

Not at all.  Its just pointless when someone engaged in a discussion and then does the "taking my ball and going home" schtick.  I enjoy discussion and debate.  If anything, you take it too seriously as I wasnt the one that sulked.  Regardless, it was a good discussion and I appreciate your perspective.

[The Unknown Poster]

This is quite an increase