|
|
Post by TotalInformation on Mar 25, 2005 3:09:06 GMT
Jacko's definitely wacked out. Definitely knows about the Beatles.
It certainly seems he's capable of the kind of thing he's been accused of.
But the family are scam artists.
I noticed some of the protesters are carrying signs connecting Sony to the prosecutir.
Jacko and Sony are -- or were? -- 50/50 owners of the BEATLES catalog.
Peter Asher is a top executive at Sony music.
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Mar 25, 2005 17:37:37 GMT
It all makes me feel SICK !!! How deep the rot goes !!!  |
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Mar 28, 2005 10:50:01 GMT
Jackson Says He´s Victim of ConspiracyNote in particular: ...he indicated some sort of battle is under way over the music catalog he owns that contains the rights to songs by the Beatles, Little Richard and others.
"There´s a big fight going on, right now as we speak, about that," he said. "I can´t comment on it, but there´s a lot of conspiracy out there."...
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey on Mar 28, 2005 14:41:26 GMT
He might very well be telling the truth. I know that Macca would LOVE to get his hands on the Beatles song catalogs ! He battled Jacko for them to start with. At that time, Jacko had more money. Now Macca does  Ahhhh, what a tangled web we weave  |
|
|
|
Post by Mollymalone on Apr 12, 2005 1:44:11 GMT
Jackson would say that, wouldn't he....and even if true, it has no bearing on the case at all. He's been accused of molestation, this is not a financial case.
The issue of the catologue is a consequence of his behaviour pure and simple. No one forced him to have young boys in his bed or shower. I had to do a reality check when I heard his defense argue that he was only PLAYING with a boy in the shower..not molesting him. Playing? playing? A grown man playing?
His defense argued too that a tape recording of Jackson telling a nine year old on the phone about a woman jackson 'fancied' and what he wanted to do with her, was proof that jackson was a heterosexual. Er..hello? What is a grown man doing discussing sex with a NINE YEAR OLD BOY?
Jordy's mother said today that Jackson came sobbing and shaking and crying to her, begging to let her son sleep in his bed. Does that sound NORMAL to you? Like an addict denied his fix more like....
It worries the hell out of me to see people accept his behaviour as innocent or normal because of who he is....forget who he is - just look at the behaviour...no one can defend that...absolutely no one, otherwise we are all doomed.
|
|
|
|
Post by cavendish on Apr 12, 2005 15:00:58 GMT
Molly, his behaviour is totally inappropriate. Who he is, is irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
Post by gracemer on Apr 12, 2005 19:31:33 GMT
He's a guilty, lying pervert. I can't believe that mom who caved in to his crying! Her son hasn't spoken to her in 11 years? Not surprised.
Mollymalone--notice how many people thought it was okay to starve Terri Schiavo to death? We live in an evil age and probably don't know the half of it. We're doomed anyway, Michael Jackson or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by defhermit on Apr 12, 2005 19:41:01 GMT
he should have been arrested when he admitted to sleeping in the same bed as those children on that special.
you don't pay $20 million dollars if you did nothing wrong.
Michael Jackson is a sick sick man.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mollymalone on Apr 13, 2005 1:26:52 GMT
Gracemer, I just fell out with a close friend because of our differences regarding Terri. I won't go into it all but having followed the story for two years I was well aware that the law had not been followed from the beginning. There was ample evidence that her 'husband' had orignially tried to kill her: he won a money settlement that was meant for her therapy alone; he met a woman and THEN decided Terri would want to die (if he had remembered that earlier he would not have got the money)so he stopped the therapy; She was not dying, yet was placed in a hospice - which his lawyer was a director of...and on and on....they executed a woman in a way that even charles Manson and Ted Bundy or my dog were spared. I'm still so angry about it.
What really scares me in these two cases is that the media is distorting the truth and reality. Suddenly, sleeping with boys in your bed..taking showers with them is OK..if you happen to be famous...I actually heard the 'experts' on the E channel saying
"If I had boys in MY bed and in MY shower...please LOCK me up...but because this is Michael there is a chance it is innocent behaviour'
...er no! What makes HIM different? He can sing? He has money? HE pretends to be childlike? I don't care if he has the mental capacity of a two year old....his 'playing', 'spooning' sleeping' with pre-pubescent boys is an abuse in and of itself even if technically no criminal act took place.
But suddenly the media is now brainwashing the public that certain degrees of peodophilia are OK...having a child - boy or girl - sleeping in a unrelated man's bed is OK as long as no act takes place. Taking a shower with them is OK as long as no sexual act takes place.....tell me if I am wrong, but isn't that the impression that we are all getting? Also that the more famous or rich you are, the more the law - meant only for the ordinary people - does not apply?
In Terri's case the media misrepresented the truth again and again and again. So blatant were the lies that it went beyond ignorance or mistake. IT was a calculated blanket lie. No NEW law needed to be invoked. It was NOT a right to die case, it was a criminal case. She was NOT on life support and she was NOT in a PVS. Yet the media fooled the public into believing all the lies...why? Because now the public has been de-sensitised to people being euthanised at the whim of anyone who may have heard a comment from you years ago about wanting to die. Suddenly old/ disabled/ infirm people need not be a drain on the tax payer, the state or a disgruntled relative...now we can just starve them to death. Who is next? The homeless? Criminals, the unemployed..any undesirables...
|
|
|
|
Post by LUCY on Apr 13, 2005 3:36:00 GMT
.......and the rest us 99%ers..........
hey wait.......we outnumber them.......wow! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by gracemer on Apr 13, 2005 3:47:46 GMT
Good report on the Terri Schiavo case peoplescommittee. I wish you had posted it over on Other Conspiracies as well.
We can thank the NAMBLA advocates for the news slant on Jackson.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jilli on Apr 17, 2005 6:17:24 GMT
www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,153414,00.html Jacko Must Make Beatles Sale A deal to extricate Michael Jackson from his perilous financial situation is at hand. I can tell you exclusively that the deal Jackson is being offered must be signed in the next few days, or he really will have his proverbial head on the chopping block. I'm told Jackson will likely be presented with a deal sculpted by what I call his "permanent government" of lawyers and advisers, not the many shady characters who've come and gone over the years. This "government" includes music publisher Charles Koppelman (who's also on the boards of Martha Stewart and Steve Madden's companies), attorneys John Branca and Al Malnik, Jane Heller of Bank of America and private investors represented by Goldman Sachs. First, the deal: Sources say Jackson will be selling most of his 50 percent interest in Sony/ATV Music Publishing, aka the Beatles catalog
|
|
|
|
Post by PaulBearer on Apr 17, 2005 6:49:01 GMT
Interesting. BTW, am I the only one here that still thinks MJ may be innocent? I think someof these so-called witnesses coming forward are being paid by someone...  Hmmm...I wonder if he sells his Beatles catalogue all his "problems" will suddenly go away ie: sexual charges dropped!  |
|
|
|
Post by Mollymalone on Apr 18, 2005 2:40:51 GMT
Innocent? Technically innocent you mean? Cause you cannot surely mean that his sleeping and showering with children is innocent? You seem to be accepting THAT behaviour as normal - this is the danger I am talking about. MJ had made sleeping with children innocent to a lot of people blinded by his fame or god knows what. Because all I see is a grown man crying to share the bed of a child not related to him and there is only one reason on earth he would be doing that - sexual gratification.
Why is he 'befriending' these boys? I'm sick of hearing how MJ 'srtuck up' a friendship with these boys and began talking to them for hours on the phone. Grown men do NOT have friendships with children. Grown men have friendships with grown men and women. And these grown men do not sleep together unless the relationship is sexual. What on earth does MJ have in common with these boys so that they have a friendship?
He picks boys of a certain age, a certain look, who are generally poor and have a family that has broken down. ie vunerable.
He plys them with gifts and trips. He practically buys the mothers off with gifts too. His pattern in each case has been near identical. He has got used to money fixing everything - buying the boys and their families and then paying them off when it all goes wrong. Then he has the nerve to say all these people are after money - hypocrite.
To say that all these people are being paid to lie is interesting. They are swearing on Oath in a court of law. They are not talking to tabloids. There are serious consequences to lying in court.
One or two people lying is possible - but ALL of them?
Everyone BUT MJ is lying? All tell similar stories, and are all lying?
As for the Beatles cat. I don't think the state has the choice of dropping a case mid stream, not unless some new and convincing evidence comes to light - such as a video tape of MJ and the accuser in bed together (that still makes my skin crawl) which shows NOTHING happened on the specific date in question.
|
|
|
|
Post by cavendish on Apr 18, 2005 14:08:41 GMT
I agree Molly. He is a grown man & should not be having friendships of this kind with young boys. He exhibits the typical behaviour of a pedophile |
|
|
|
Post by gracemer on Apr 18, 2005 17:01:49 GMT
The prosecution can drop its case at any time. That they haven't done so is because nothing has occurred to give it a reason to believe no crime has been committed.
|
|
|
|
Post by gracemer on Apr 18, 2005 17:03:38 GMT
Mollymalone--sorry! I called you peoplescommittee up above--same avatar. My apologies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mollymalone on Apr 19, 2005 1:20:15 GMT
No problem gracmer Although it did leave me a little confused ;D |
|
