Jedi Council Forums - Hollywood Death Watch: Patrick Swayze (1952-2009)

Post Reply | Active Topic Notification | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

« 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Hollywood Death Watch: Patrick Swayze (1952-2009)
Merlin_Ambrosius69 Registered: Aug '08	Date Posted: 6/30 3:08pm Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009)
	I don't know if I have the choice to enjoy Michael's music or not; it plays and I respond by finding the groove and (oftimes) singing along. This afternoon, driving around in my car I heard of bunch of MJ's "soft pop" singles from the last few albums, and what can I say? I liked most of them. Is his later period as exciting, as ingenious, as the 80s records? Not IMO. But it was also more polished, with just as much soul, and mellowed by the kind of softening of one's sound and one's impact that has been heard in every multi-decade musician -- from Eric Clapton to Paul McCartney to Elton John to Madonna -- alive and working today. It's impossible to stay relevant and influential three or four decades into your career. -----signature----- "Chance makes playthings of us all." -- Seneca Shameless non-Manager Emeritus sock of Vortigern99. Fan of George RR Martin, JK Rowling and JRR Tolkien.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Moff_D Registered: Aug '02	Date Posted: 6/30 5:31pm Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009)
	The reaction of Joe Jackson to all of this seems to indicate he had a distant relationship at best with MJ. Not that one has to be publically emotionally to demonstrate one's grief, but it appears to me that his chief aim in this is how he can profit off of it. I think that ultimately speaks volumes about the relationship between father and son, by most accounts a relationship that started badly and progressed to nonexistant. Of course, as touched on above, would MJ have been the talent and force he was without the spectre of his father? That question can be debated indefinitely and by no means is limited to those two. -----signature----- 'Why are you always smiling?' 'Cause it's all so ******* hysterical.' -Road To Perdition. Apt, no?
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Zaz Title: Manager, The Ampitheatre Registered: Oct '98	Date Posted: 6/30 7:26pm Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009) - Date Edited: 6/30 8:04pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Zaz
	Merlin, you did what I thought you would: you took the points separately, instead of together. Obviously, every person who hasn't a partner isn't a pedophile, but someone who doesn't but consorts with a pack of children instead gives one pause. And this hardly constitutes a 'nuisance lawsuit'...that's a lot of money, besides the terrible damage it did to Jackson's reputation. And you also said something that surprised me: no, you wouldn't allow sleep-overs for your hypothetical son with single men, except for someone like Jackson. What I took from this is that people think someone this rich and this famous can't be a pedophile. There's no guarantee of that, of course. I'm not at all surprised Joe Jackson isn't grieved. After all, Mikey used him as an excuse for the plastic surgery (the 'I-don't-wanna-look-like-Dad' explanation) and for his extraordinarily infantile behaviour ('my-Dad-was-abusive-and-I-never-had-a-childhood'). There's no guarantee--again--that this isn't a giant construct on the part of Jackson to explain his behavior in a way that makes him a victim rather than a predator. I'm not saying Joe is a good man. But he is probably not as bad as Michael chose to paint him, for his own purposes. As noted above, Michael's brothers seem not to have the same difficulties, though they had the same upbringing. And apparently, Michael once refused to perform if his father used corporal punishment on him. He had his own weapons. As to whether I can enjoy art produced by a person I don't respect, it's variable. I do enjoy some of Jackson's music. I enjoy Wagner's music despite the fact he was a dirty anti-Semite. It's harder with actors, I admit. I still rather enjoy Mel Gibson's performances, though.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
yankee8255 Registered: May '05	Date Posted: 6/30 11:41pm Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009) - Date Edited: 6/30 11:42pm (1 edits total) Edited By: yankee8255
	Merlin_Ambrosius69 posted: yankee8255 posted: An Austrian newsmagazine had a short interview with an American reporter (I forget which magazine she works for, Vanity Fair or US, IIRC) who made three points: (1) There is no question that Jackson preyed on young boys, (2) his predatory behavior was, sadly, enabled by the victims mothers, who basically sold their children to him for cash and fame, (3) Jackson's "Peter Pan" syndrome was complete act meant to garner sympathy and be used an excuse for his deviant behavior. I find it remarkable that you appear to accept all this without the slightest shred of evidence. Where are your critical thinking faculties? Just because some reporter claims these things does not make them true or correct or valid. 1) There is indeed a question, which is why he was acquitted. 2) What mothers, plural? Is there some class-action lawsuit against MJ I'm not aware of? Janet Arvizo is the only litigator on record, and the 1993 "case" (it never went to trial) involved a father who coerced his son into a false admission. There are no other families/mothers/children making any accusations. 3) Based on what evidence? It's easy to point at someone and say, "You're lying and your entire personality is an act meant to garner sympathy for your deviant lifetsyle!", but what specific piece(s) of information can this reporter be relying on for her conclusions? I'm not accepting any of this without evidence, and neither should any of you. Hmmm, critical thinking, eh? How about this: who should I believe more, a journalist from a respected magazine, not to mention an overwhelming amount of news coverage, or some internet site you linked to? Tough call. EDIT: And how could I forget -- Jackson's own words. He probably did more to convince the general public that he was a pederast in that one interview than the most biased, sensation-mongering reporter could have done in a decades-worth of articles. -----signature----- "While a disappointment overall, the Jerry-George conversation is a repeat of a discussion from the first episode, as if to say, "We've run out of stuff to discuss, so let's call it a day."
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Merlin_Ambrosius69 Registered: Aug '08	Date Posted: 7/1 8:49am Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009)
	Critical thinking is based on the analysis of evidence. How many times must I repeat that there is no evidence in these cases? Prove me wrong. -----signature----- "Chance makes playthings of us all." -- Seneca Shameless non-Manager Emeritus sock of Vortigern99. Fan of George RR Martin, JK Rowling and JRR Tolkien.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Zaz Title: Manager, The Ampitheatre Registered: Oct '98	Date Posted: 7/1 9:44am Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009)
	I did, upthread. I gave you a hypothesis of an ordinary man with Jackson's characteristics and asked you if you would allow your hypothetical son to have a sleep-over with him. And you said no. Which means your critical faculties are working just fine.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Moff_D Registered: Aug '02	Date Posted: 7/1 10:00am Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009)
	Regardless of Jackson's legacy, personal life, etc. and getting back to his actual death, it appears that at least one of his doctors is going to be in some serious trouble: We're told the drug Propofol was discovered at the residence. The drug is used to put people under anesthesia before surgery. It is an extremely powerful drug that is only available to medical personnel. As one source said, "There is no conceivable way this drug can be properly prescribed for home use." The drug can only be administered with an IV. Interestingly, Propofol burns and the drug Lidocaine is used to reduce the pain associated with the Propofol injection. As we first reported, Lidocaine was found near Jackson's body. (and how is it that TMZ is the leading source of all of this info and it invariably turns out correct?) I guess Jackson will ultimately be a testament to the notion that you can always find somebody to give you what you want and tell you what you want to hear as long as you pay them enough. -----signature----- 'Why are you always smiling?' 'Cause it's all so ******* hysterical.' -Road To Perdition. Apt, no?
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Jabbadabbado Title: Senate Floor Manager Registered: Mar '99	Date Posted: 7/1 10:08am Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009)
	TMZ reporters are able to travel backwards and forwards through time at will. That's the only reasonable explanation. The technology is expensive, but it is celebrity news after all. -----signature----- "As a Chicago sports fan you get used to disappointment."
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Rogue1-and-a-half Title: Manager: Amphitheatre Registered: Nov '00	Date Posted: 7/1 10:23am Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009)
	And here I thought all their money was sunk in just that one big board at the end of the room. -----signature----- Don't be a fool, don't be blind Heart of mine If you can't do the time, don't do the crime Heart of mine
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Merlin_Ambrosius69 Registered: Aug '08	Date Posted: 7/1 10:59am Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009) - Date Edited: 7/1 11:08am (2 edits total) Edited By: Merlin_Ambrosius69
	Zaz posted: I did, upthread. I gave you a hypothesis of an ordinary man with Jackson's characteristics and asked you if you would allow your hypothetical son to have a sleep-over with him. And you said no. Which means your critical faculties are working just fine. Look, that isn't evidence. You're holding me to a hypothetical answer to an oversimplified question, with imaginary parameters that do not reflect the known reality of the cases. And you're trying to present that opinion as evidence for someone else's criminal guilt. There is a distinction between acknowledging a possibility -- This man might rape my children if I let them sleep at his house -- and providing definitive evidence of the act -- That man raped my child, and here's proof. Skepticism and critical thinking are based on this kind of analysis of physical, quantifiable evidence, not on falsifiable and error-prone testimony (like that of the children in these cases), or hypothetical responses to philisophical questions. No, real evidence would be child pornography, for example, or independent corroboration of the charges by a person who would not benefit from incriminating MJ. We have neither. -----signature----- "Chance makes playthings of us all." -- Seneca Shameless non-Manager Emeritus sock of Vortigern99. Fan of George RR Martin, JK Rowling and JRR Tolkien.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Merlin_Ambrosius69 Registered: Aug '08	Date Posted: 7/1 11:41am Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009) - Date Edited: 7/1 11:42am (1 edits total) Edited By: Merlin_Ambrosius69
	yankee8255 posted: Hmmm, critical thinking, eh? How about this: who should I believe more, a journalist from a respected magazine, not to mention an overwhelming amount of news coverage, or some internet site you linked to? Tough call. The three links I've provided are well-researched and laboriously referenced; the End Notes of Part 1 alone -- which documents the Arvizo scam -- contain 76 notations, to newspaper and trade publications, biographies and TV shows... many or most of them written by -- you guessed it -- journalists of respected outlets (Newsweek, 60Minutes, Dateline NBC, Santa Barbara News-Press, GQ Magazine, Larry King Live, Today Show, etc. etc.). I want you to know that I am intellectually honest. I will read, with an open mind, any source for any possible evidence for Jackson's wrongdoing that you care to post. An excerpt from a book, an article in any paper of blogsite, just provide the link and I'll follow it and study it closely. If there is good evidence out there, I want to look at it. I promise you that if it proves compelling I will concede it. But I ask the same of you. Have you read the articles I linked? If you have some basis to question the writer's sources or conclusions, that's fine. Let's address them point by point, if you're willing to meet me half-way on the legwork. If you decline, and are not interested in starting by reading all five of the pages on MJ at the above-linked site, then your mind is made up and we can cease deliberating. -----signature----- "Chance makes playthings of us all." -- Seneca Shameless non-Manager Emeritus sock of Vortigern99. Fan of George RR Martin, JK Rowling and JRR Tolkien.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Zaz Title: Manager, The Ampitheatre Registered: Oct '98	Date Posted: 7/1 12:00pm Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009) - Date Edited: 7/1 12:03pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Zaz
	Merlin, you've got 'I Want to Believe' tattooed on your heart. I understand this. You admire Jackson, and indeed, he is a very talented performer. But it's like those fans who would claim that Barry Bonds wasn't juicing. No proof! they cried. Of course, you just had to look at him to see it. And the plastic surgeries that caused Jackson to look more and more effeminate are a definite clue, eh? Yeah, O.J. was acquitted. I doubt sentient person in the world actually thought he was innocent, however. And as Jackson aged, his story grew thinner. Okay, Michael, you didn't have a childhood. So now you've had it; get on with it. Only he didn't, because that wasn't the problem. There's no real point in discussing those websites. They are riddled with hearsay of various types. Use your eyes and ears and stop taking Jackson's carefully constructed image so seriously. This can be encapsulated as: use your common sense. You do have it, to judge by your answer to my hypothetical question.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Merlin_Ambrosius69 Registered: Aug '08	Date Posted: 7/1 1:00pm Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009) - Date Edited: 7/1 1:05pm (4 edits total) Edited By: Merlin_Ambrosius69
	You're saying I'm a "believer" and suggest that I would follow Michael blindly wherever he led. But I've assured you upthread that I will concede any legitimate evidence of Jackson's wrongdoing. Do you have any? If so, let's discuss it. Put it on the table. You accuse me of having bought a lie, but you're the one who lacks evidence in support of your claim. Your only indicators are your intuition and your biases. Please explain to me how plastic surgery is a "definite clue" pointing to juvenile sexual assault? I don't understand how the one proposition follows from the other. I agree, there is only "no real point in discussing those websites" I linked, for the simple reason that you've already made up your mind. Why not examine them before making that claim? They're just as "riddled with hearsay" as an journalistic report, biography or documentary you care to reference. Why are the books you've read more reliable than the writings of the site author, whose references are laborious? Why has yankee8255 contended that a writer for one magazine, Vamity Fair, is somehow more reliable as a source than Newsweek, 60Minutes, Dateline, etc.? All of those outlets are listed as references and quoted in the linked articles. I am using my "eyes and ears" and I do not see nor hear hard evidence of sexual assault. You can criticise Michael's excessive surgeries and unusual, "effeminate" persona all you like, it does not strike at the heart of the matter. Your belief and your opinion are emotion-based and unsupported. This has nothing to do with image, appeals to emotion, loyalty to an icon, or any non-evidenciary proposition you care to imagine. -----signature----- "Chance makes playthings of us all." -- Seneca Shameless non-Manager Emeritus sock of Vortigern99. Fan of George RR Martin, JK Rowling and JRR Tolkien.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Zaz Title: Manager, The Ampitheatre Registered: Oct '98	Date Posted: 7/1 1:07pm Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009) - Date Edited: 7/1 1:13pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Zaz
	I'm saying anyone with any sort of sense would not allow the type of contact Jackson had--he admits a certain amount of it--with their children. You are unlikely to get a smoking gun here--Jackson was careful to that extent. Of course, the 13 year old in the first case did collaborate on a book. Called: "Michael Jackson was My Lover". Subtle title! Of course, he's a liar, and Jackson isn't, I suppose. I will note Jackson had plenty of reason to deny it, and apparently was prepared to suppress the book (which he did--you can get foreign copies only) and to intimidate or buy off people who might talk. And I don't think my question to you was 'over-simplified' at all. Divorce the fame and riches from Jackson's actions--and look at his actions and not his words--and it's quite clear what he was.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Merlin_Ambrosius69 Registered: Aug '08	Date Posted: 7/1 1:18pm Subject: Hollywood Death Watch: Farrah Fawcett (1947-2009) & Michael Jackson (1958-2009)
	On that evidence, Santa Claus and all who portray him are also pedophiles and should be convicted in public court. Barney the Dinosaur, the Tele-tubbies, and any birthday-party clown who hangs out with kids must immediately by considered child rapists. Does that sound like a straw man? You're drawing a correlation between entertainment professionals whom children adore/d and who adore children, with direct evidence of sexual assault. I'm not buying it. -----signature----- "Chance makes playthings of us all." -- Seneca Shameless non-Manager Emeritus sock of Vortigern99. Fan of George RR Martin, JK Rowling and JRR Tolkien.
	Post Reply \| Quote Reply \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

« 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 - Previous | Next | Reload