Michael Jackson Dies

[evergreen]

Am I the only one freaked out about the possibility of Michael Jackson rising from the grave as a zombie or vampire that preys on young children? The dude was scary enough in life, so as an animated corpse he would probably make even Dracula run away in terror...

Every time they put on the thriller video, I think that... A zombie, that is.

[Laisrean]

The reason he died may have something to do with this (http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Music/03/04/leisure.jackson.reut/index.html).


Vanity Fair reported in the article that in 2000 Jackson attended a voodoo ritual in Switzerland where a witch doctor promised that Spielberg, music mogul David Geffen and 23 other people on the entertainer's list of enemies would die.

Jackson, who underwent a "blood bath" as part of the ritual, then ordered his former business adviser Myung-Ho Lee to wire $150,000 to a bank in Mali for a voodoo chief named Baba, who sacrificed 42 cows for the ceremony, the magazine reported.

Vanity Fair reported that Jackson wears a page-boy wig and a prosthesis that serves as the tip of his nose. The magazine interviewed a source close to Jackson who said that, without the device Jackson resembles a mummy with two nostril holes.

According to the magazine, Jackson's extravagant lifestyle and declining record sales have left him $240 million in debt.

So a few years ago Jackson spent money to have 42 cows killed for voodoo ritual in order to put a curse on 23 people so that they would die. Well, maybe what happened is the curse backfired and killed Jackson instead....

But in any case, since Jackson put that curse with the intention of killing all those people it shows he's an evil man even if you completely disregard all the pedophile shit... so I don't make any apologies about mocking him after his death, because the man was an asshole.

[evergreen]

The reason he died may have something to do with this (http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Music/03/04/leisure.jackson.reut/index.html).



So a few years ago Jackson spent money to have 42 cows killed for voodoo ritual in order to put a curse on 23 people so that they would die. Well, maybe what happened is the curse backfired and killed Jackson instead....

But in any case, since Jackson put that curse with the intention of killing all those people it shows he's an evil man even if you completely disregard all the pedophile shit... so I don't make any apologies about mocking him after his death, because the man was an asshole.

Really? Seriously? You're honestly going to believe that?

[Laisrean]

Really? Seriously? You're honestly going to believe that?

CNN is a reputable source, right?

[Lunar Raven]

Though it's CNN reporting what vanity fair said...

The idea of it is pretty hilarious though.

[Nicholas]

And the crack pot theories begin. Who really cares why he died, he just did. Eat a cookie and move on.

[Laisrean]

And the crack pot theories begin. Who really cares why he died, he just did. Eat a cookie and move on.

Maybe the CIA killed him so that everyone would be talking about his death and forget that they killed Neda?

[Lunar Raven]

And the crack pot theories begin. Who really cares why he died, he just did. Eat a cookie and move on.

Ice cream > cookie.

[Lunacie]

CNN is a reputable source, right?

But CNN didn't do the research themselves, they were quoting from Vanity Fair.

Hard to put much credit in the Vanity Fair article since they also claim that Jackson "bleaches his skin white because he does not like being black." :wtf: It's pretty well known that he had a medical condition called Vitiligo which causes the skin to loose it's pigment - a condition that supposedly runs in his family. If he was using bleach on his skin it was to even out the skin color.

[Caitlin.ann]

Maybe the CIA killed him so that everyone would be talking about his death and forget that they killed Neda?

That is a dumbass statement. No one is saying they believe the CIA killed Neda. Oh well I shouldn't even bother when one confuses Mexico with Iran.

[Laisrean]

That is a dumbass statement. No one is saying they believe the CIA killed Neda. Oh well I shouldn't even bother when one confuses Mexico with Iran.

I was joking.

Who confused Mexico with Iran?

[Caitlin.ann]

I was joking.

Who confused Mexico with Iran?

Obviously you did. And there is no way you were joking.

[Laisrean]

Obviously you did. And there is no way you were joking.

Who gives a shit? A few posts above in THIS THREAD I was joking, and that's what I meant. See, you can't tell the difference between this thread and another. Pot calling the Kettle black.

[Caitlin.ann]

Who gives a shit? A few posts above in THIS THREAD I was joking, and that's what I meant. See, you can't tell the difference between this thread and another. Pot calling the Kettle black.

I'm not about to get an infraction for continuing this argument, however I think its obvious what is going on here. You are free to PM me to continue any argument.

[Laisrean]

I'm not about to get an infraction for continuing this argument, however I think its obvious what is going on here. You are free to PM me to continue any argument.

I don't want to carry on the argument. I didn't even want it in the first place.... I was simply joking and you had to drag something from another thread into it.

[Lunar Raven]

where's the love..

[BlueMoon13]

... so I don't make any apologies about mocking him after his death, because the man was an asshole.

I agree. He's just a another pedophile off the planet, good riddance. I don't given a damn how many gold records or award winning videos he made. Hitler was one hell of a painter,too. All you have to do is read the sworn affidavit of JUST ONE of his victims.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/mjdec1.html

Yeah I know, he was never convicted. And OJ spent his time looking for the "real killer", too.

[Lunar Raven]

Shal' we all join hands and frollic?

[lightdragon]

But CNN didn't do the research themselves, they were quoting from Vanity Fair.

Hard to put much credit in the Vanity Fair article since they also claim that Jackson "bleaches his skin white because he does not like being black." :wtf: It's pretty well known that he had a medical condition called Vitiligo which causes the skin to loose it's pigment - a condition that supposedly runs in his family. If he was using bleach on his skin it was to even out the skin color.

this agreed. and if anyone missed it here is what President press secretary Robert Gibbs said what the Pres. said about MJ here it is:

"I talked to [the president] about it this morning. He said to me that obviously Michael Jackson was a spectacular performer and a music icon," Gibbs said, according to Newsweek. "I think everybody remembers hearing his songs, watching him moonwalk on television during Motown's 25th anniversary. But the president also said [Jackson] had aspects of his life that were sad and tragic. And his condolences went out to the Jackson family and to the fans that mourned his loss."

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/2009/06/gibbs-comments-on-michael-jack.html

[Bettie]

Why does it have to be a case of "this story is more important than that story?" Do some people have such short attention spans that they are able to follow only one big news story at a time? I've been following what's going on with North Korea and Iran, and yet still able to read up on the circumstances of Michael Jackson's death as well. Multitasking FTW! It's not like they've suddenly stopped writing stories about other events, just that the MJ story is dominating right at this minute. It is possible to keep in touch with political events AND celebrity news, y' know - it doesn't need to be an 'either/or' thing...

A quick look through the 'Just Current Events' forum reveals a wide variety of topics - prehistoric flutes, fireworks, Sarah Palin, Twitter and crop circles. Who's to say which of these is 'more important' than any other? Personally, if I see a thread I'm not interested in, I stay away from it. For example, I kept out of the thread about Ed McMahon's death, because I had never heard of him, and had no interest in him, his life or his death. I didn't spend time posting endlessly, telling everyone else how unimportant his death was, and how they should instead focus on more important issues. Who am I to dictate to others what news story they should consider important? ;)

:)

[lightdragon]

Why does it have to be a case of "this story is more important than that story?" Do some people have such short attention spans that they are able to follow only one big news story at a time?

to a certain extent yes. also a lot of people usually avoid current events and deal with only pop culture. i don't know how it is in other countries but in the USA most people do not who their senators are much less who the vice president is. and even some people are not aware of who the current president is. especially when it's not an electrion year.

but you are right though people shold learn to multitask.

[LostSheep]

I can barely tolerate the sheep following here and other forums

:(

[Lunar Raven]

:(

*pats LostSheep on the back. There there. :cutie:

[Shawn Blackwolf]

QFT...Very well said , Bettie...

Truthfully...out of this list , previously posted :

A senators wife pleads guilty to accepting bribes

How about the case against an 11 year old who was going to be deported because someone forgot to dot some I's and cross some T's when her family moved here legally 8 years ago

How about the Jena 6 trial today?

How about Swede's breaking into the Iranian Embassy?

Or the marketplace bombing in Iraq

How about todays debates on the cap and trade bill (sadly I don't think a majority of Americans know or care about what the cap and trade bill is)

How about 92 Mexican police arrested on drug charges

How about 59 people injured in a train crash in Spain

How about to Brittish men, who were kidnapped in Iraq, whose corpses were returned to Brittain today

Or the drought in India

How about the Duke official who offered up his 5 year old son for sex

How about the missing toddler who's body was found in Indiana

How about the 11th circuit court of appeals declaring it illegal to post naked pictures after a death, even if it is newsworthy, without the families permission

How about the teacher who lost his job (and got it back after taking it mainstream) because he didn't show the Obama innauguration in his class and he had a website that was "too patriotic"

How about Iran charging a slain mans family $3000 for the bullet they shot him with

How about the worlds largest refugee camp, where over 1/4 million Somalis are stuffed into an area meant for 1/3 that many people.

How about the U.S. savings rate at a 15 year high

How about a prototype of a solar powered plane being released

Not a single one holds any real interest for me...

I care about what I care about...if others do not like it...

Too bad...

We are all different , and I keep my stress levels low , by
not paying attention to most of what others buy into , or
feel important , in mass America...

I did not watch tv , or listen to radio , about Michael's death...

But I posted in the thread , to wish him well , in his journey...

I still do...

I always loved Marshall McLuhan's works...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan

We should only answer the phone , doorbell , or pay attention
to media...if we feel like it...:smileroll

( if that means I die , cause I did not see the news...so be it...)

May everyone find , and respond to , that which gets their
attention , and gives them pleasure to do so...:thumbsup:






Why does it have to be a case of "this story is more important than that story?" Do some people have such short attention spans that they are able to follow only one big news story at a time? I've been following what's going on with North Korea and Iran, and yet still able to read up on the circumstances of Michael Jackson's death as well. Multitasking FTW! It's not like they've suddenly stopped writing stories about other events, just that the MJ story is dominating right at this minute. It is possible to keep in touch with political events AND celebrity news, y' know - it doesn't need to be an 'either/or' thing...

A quick look through the 'Just Current Events' forum reveals a wide variety of topics - prehistoric flutes, fireworks, Sarah Palin, Twitter and crop circles. Who's to say which of these is 'more important' than any other? Personally, if I see a thread I'm not interested in, I stay away from it. For example, I kept out of the thread about Ed McMahon's death, because I had never heard of him, and had no interest in him, his life or his death. I didn't spend time posting endlessly, telling everyone else how unimportant his death was, and how they should instead focus on more important issues. Who am I to dictate to others what news story they should consider important? ;)

:)

[Cassie]

Some stories of importance today that are being ignored because of Jacko.

A senators wife pleads guilty to accepting bribes

How about the case against an 11 year old who was going to be deported because someone forgot to dot some I's and cross some T's when her family moved here legally 8 years ago

How about the Jena 6 trial today?

How about Swede's breaking into the Iranian Embassy?

Or the marketplace bombing in Iraq

How about todays debates on the cap and trade bill (sadly I don't think a majority of Americans know or care about what the cap and trade bill is)

How about 92 Mexican police arrested on drug charges

How about 59 people injured in a train crash in Spain

How about to Brittish men, who were kidnapped in Iraq, whose corpses were returned to Brittain today

Or the drought in India

How about the Duke official who offered up his 5 year old son for sex

How about the missing toddler who's body was found in Indiana

How about the 11th circuit court of appeals declaring it illegal to post naked pictures after a death, even if it is newsworthy, without the families permission

How about the teacher who lost his job (and got it back after taking it mainstream) because he didn't show the Obama innauguration in his class and he had a website that was "too patriotic"

How about Iran charging a slain mans family $3000 for the bullet they shot him with

How about the worlds largest refugee camp, where over 1/4 million Somalis are stuffed into an area meant for 1/3 that many people.

How about the U.S. savings rate at a 15 year high

How about a prototype of a solar powered plane being released

No, Jacko's death, and the 911 call, and the search for his doctor, and the autopsy, and the rumors, and everything else Jacko is SOOOOOOOO much more important.
Cool, a list of interesting news stories. Go ahead and post about them if you want; nothing is stopping you. These and similar stories happen every day and are seldom posted about. (I know because I often used to try bringing up world news stories in this forum). My point quite simply is that the lack of attention to these stories has nothing whatsoever to do with the intense coverage of MJ's death. Try finding and posting such stories next week or next month and you will find there is no difference at all in the availability of such stories or the general lack of interest in them.


I agree. He's just a another pedophile off the planet, good riddance. I don't given a damn how many gold records or award winning videos he made. Hitler was one hell of a painter,too. All you have to do is read the sworn affidavit of JUST ONE of his victims.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/mjdec1.html

Yeah I know, he was never convicted. And OJ spent his time looking for the "real killer", too.
But OJ was convicted. MJ wasn't. He was acquitted in a very well publicised trial.
Was he strange, confused and generally an odd-ball? Yes. Was he ever convicted of being a pedophile? No. Thus, I think by the laws of your country he has the right to be presumed innocent.

[memnoch]

But OJ was convicted. MJ wasn't. He was acquitted in a very well publicised trial.
Was he strange, confused and generally an odd-ball? Yes. Was he ever convicted of being a pedophile? No. Thus, I think by the laws of your country he has the right to be presumed innocent.

OJ was acquitted in the murder trial, he was later convicted in a wrongful death civil suit, which doesn't mean murder, and then with the robbery...but by law he was never found guilty of killing Ron Goldman and Nicole.

[Caitlin.ann]

Cool, a list of interesting news stories. Go ahead and post about them if you want; nothing is stopping you. These and similar stories happen every day and are seldom posted about. (I know because I often used to try bringing up world news stories in this forum). My point quite simply is that the lack of attention to these stories has nothing whatsoever to do with the intense coverage of MJ's death. Try finding and posting such stories next week or next month and you will find there is no difference at all in the availability of such stories or the general lack of interest in them.


But OJ was convicted. MJ wasn't. He was acquitted in a very well publicised trial.
Was he strange, confused and generally an odd-ball? Yes. Was he ever convicted of being a pedophile? No. Thus, I think by the laws of your country he has the right to be presumed innocent.
A lot of them are posted, keep up.

[Caitlin.ann]

Why does it have to be a case of "this story is more important than that story?" Do some people have such short attention spans that they are able to follow only one big news story at a time? I've been following what's going on with North Korea and Iran, and yet still able to read up on the circumstances of Michael Jackson's death as well. Multitasking FTW! It's not like they've suddenly stopped writing stories about other events, just that the MJ story is dominating right at this minute. It is possible to keep in touch with political events AND celebrity news, y' know - it doesn't need to be an 'either/or' thing...

A quick look through the 'Just Current Events' forum reveals a wide variety of topics - prehistoric flutes, fireworks, Sarah Palin, Twitter and crop circles. Who's to say which of these is 'more important' than any other? Personally, if I see a thread I'm not interested in, I stay away from it. For example, I kept out of the thread about Ed McMahon's death, because I had never heard of him, and had no interest in him, his life or his death. I didn't spend time posting endlessly, telling everyone else how unimportant his death was, and how they should instead focus on more important issues. Who am I to dictate to others what news story they should consider important? ;)

:)
1. It might be different in Australia but for the past two days the ONLY thing on the news has been MJ. So excuse us for being irritated over it.
2. I posted a crap load of topics yesterday so that other important news stories can be read. They're there because *I* put them there. Obviously that shows that we're capable of following more than one story as Memnoch has shown in his post.

3. It IS an either/or thing here since until today it has been the ONLY thing on the news.
4. No one said MJ's death wasn't important, what was said is that there are MORE important stories and stories other than MJ's death out there that should not be ignored simply because a pop icon died.

All this has been already stated.

[Nicholas]

He's dead, and that's what I hope for this thread very soon.

[memnoch]

He's dead, and that's what I hope for this thread very soon.

I have no problem extending it as long as MJ fans cry or those whose idea of news is Entertainment Tonight whine about how this important story. Its kind of like taunting emo kids.

[Caitlin.ann]

I have no problem extending it as long as MJ fans cry or those whose idea of news is Entertainment Tonight whine about how this important story. Its kind of like taunting emo kids.

Indeed.

I always skip the boring, world news because Entertainment Tonight is the REAL, important news channel. Fawcett isn't getting this much attention. Is her death not important as well? She was an icon.

[Nicholas]

I have no problem extending it as long as MJ fans cry or those whose idea of news is Entertainment Tonight whine about how this important story. Its kind of like taunting emo kids.

Taser them, tis what I do to the Twilight fanatics.

[memnoch]

Indeed.

I always skip the boring, world news because Entertainment Tonight is the REAL, important news channel. Fawcett isn't getting this much attention. Is her death not important as well? She was an icon.

If only she had been creepier, someone might have cared.

[Caitlin.ann]

If only she had been creepier, someone might have cared.

I guess one garners more sympathy when they possibly dies from a self-induced cardiac arrest (drug use) and millions in debt compared to a woman who battles cancer until the very end.

[Nicholas]

This is Madness ...

Wait? Madness?

THIS IS SPARTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YcIQYCkJPI&feature=related

[~Audra~]

We should only answer the phone , doorbell , or pay attention
to media...if we feel like it...:smileroll

( if that means I die , cause I did not see the news...so be it...)

May everyone find , and respond to , that which gets their
attention , and gives them pleasure to do so...:thumbsup:

Well said, Mr. Wolf. Brave and strong, as usual. :uhhuhuh:

[evergreen]

A former Jackson attorney and family friend, Brian Oxman, told Radaronline (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/SIG=14nfmo2cp/**http%3A//www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/06/michael-jackson%25E2%2580%2599s-kids-will-be-his-mother%25E2%2580%2599s-custody-says-longtime-lawyer) Thursday that Katherine Jackson, Michael's mother, is the likeliest candidate to initially look after the children:

"Probably Mrs. Jackson will take care of them, she loves them dearly," Oxman said.... [The children] are currently still in L.A. and with a nanny."
....

Debbie Rowe could also make a play for Prince Michael and Paris. It is unknown if Jackson designated a guardian for the children in a will, but Rowe could claim that her care is in the best interest of her children, and head to court. E! reports (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/SIG=1366vki0l/**http%3A//www.eonline.com/uberblog/ask_the_answer_bitch/b131337_who_will_get_custody_of_michael.html):Whole article about what could happen with his children: http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/stopthepresses/28723/what-will-happen-to-michael-jacksons-children/

[Lunacie]

Why does it have to be a case of "this story is more important than that story?" Do some people have such short attention spans that they are able to follow only one big news story at a time? I've been following what's going on with North Korea and Iran, and yet still able to read up on the circumstances of Michael Jackson's death as well. Multitasking FTW! It's not like they've suddenly stopped writing stories about other events, just that the MJ story is dominating right at this minute. It is possible to keep in touch with political events AND celebrity news, y' know - it doesn't need to be an 'either/or' thing...

A quick look through the 'Just Current Events' forum reveals a wide variety of topics - prehistoric flutes, fireworks, Sarah Palin, Twitter and crop circles. Who's to say which of these is 'more important' than any other? Personally, if I see a thread I'm not interested in, I stay away from it. For example, I kept out of the thread about Ed McMahon's death, because I had never heard of him, and had no interest in him, his life or his death. I didn't spend time posting endlessly, telling everyone else how unimportant his death was, and how they should instead focus on more important issues. Who am I to dictate to others what news story they should consider important? ;)

:)

Very well said. :thumbsup: I cannot multitask, and yet I find it surprisingly easy to read one story, think about it and possibly respond, and then move on to another story. I've heard it said that some of us with ADHD multi-task one task at a time. :lol:





>
But OJ was convicted. MJ wasn't. He was acquitted in a very well publicised trial.
Was he strange, confused and generally an odd-ball? Yes. Was he ever convicted of being a pedophile? No. Thus, I think by the laws of your country he has the right to be presumed innocent.

I agree, MJ was not convicted in the courts of child molestation, therefore the law says he is innocent of those charges. The court of public opinion runs on emotions rather than evidence.



1. It might be different in Australia but for the past two days the ONLY thing on the news has been MJ. So excuse us for being irritated over it.
2. I posted a crap load of topics yesterday so that other important news stories can be read. They're there because *I* put them there. Obviously that shows that we're capable of following more than one story as Memnoch has shown in his post.

3. It IS an either/or thing here since until today it has been the ONLY thing on the news.
4. No one said MJ's death wasn't important, what was said is that there are MORE important stories and stories other than MJ's death out there that should not be ignored simply because a pop icon died.

All this has been already stated.

I don't watch tv all that much - so I don't even care that MJ is almost the only story on the news. The media does tend to hyper-focus on the most startling stories, brushing other news aside. That's probably how it's always been and probably how it will always be. When they're covering a story on tv that I don't care about or feel they're simply rehashing the same information over and over - or playing the same clips over and over - I don't watch the tv. Simple, eh?

And who put you in charge of saying which story is more important? Clearly there are some people who want to know about this story, want to talk about this person. This is what is important to them - at this moment in time. It will all blow over. The stories that are "really important" don't usually go away.

[rainbowspirit]

Whole article about what could happen with his children: http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/stopthepresses/28723/what-will-happen-to-michael-jacksons-children/


I just hope the new carer gets to rename them - poor kids!

[Caitlin.ann]

And who put you in charge of saying which story is more important? Clearly there are some people who want to know about this story, want to talk about this person. This is what is important to them - at this moment in time. It will all blow over. The stories that are "really important" don't usually go away.

The stories that are really important are never talked about. Whats more important, one dead pop star or millions starving in India?

[evergreen]

I just hope the new carer gets to rename them - poor kids!

I know! Can you imagine how confusing it would be to have three Michaels and two Prince Michaels, one of which was known as 'Blanket' (don't know if they call him that, or if the media does). Anyway, compared to the boys' names, Paris Michael Kathrine isn't that bad.

[Lunacie]

The stories that are really important are never talked about. Whats more important, one dead pop star or millions starving in India?

Just because something sparks a discussion or a debate doesn't mean we see it as 'more important' than anything else. I'd say perhaps it's just that some things catch our attention or tweak our emotions momentarily (for some it goes deeper than that).

Why do you think things like this get more attention than the things you feel are 'more important'?


Although all of this is definately off-topic in this thread. :smileroll

[Caitlin.ann]

Just because something sparks a discussion or a debate doesn't mean we see it as 'more important' than anything else. I'd say perhaps it's just that some things catch our attention or tweak our emotions momentarily (for some it goes deeper than that).

Why do you think things like this get more attention than the things you feel are 'more important'?


Although all of this is definately off-topic in this thread. :smileroll

When its the only thing on the news channels I would say the news stations are saying that that particular story takes precedence over the other stories. You are reading things which were not stated. Its not that its sparked debate, its that the important things are rarely discussed with any depth. However one entertainer dies and its all over the news and peoples attitudes about the person tend to do complete 180s.

[evergreen]

When its the only thing on the news channels I would say the news stations are saying that that particular story takes precedence over the other stories. You are reading things which were not stated. Its not that its sparked debate, its that the important things are rarely discussed with any depth. However one entertainer dies and its all over the news and peoples attitudes about the person tend to do complete 180s.

I agree that it's excessive on TV. They're taking out scheduled programing to talk and talk and talk and show him doing thriller. And people who a few days ago would have been up the wall talking about him being a pedophile are now acting like he was God's gift to music. That annoys me, as well.

[Caitlin.ann]

I agree that it's excessive on TV. They're taking out scheduled programing to talk and talk and talk and show him doing thriller. And people who a few days ago would have been up the wall talking about him being a pedophile are now acting like he was God's gift to music. That annoys me, as well.
Exactly my point, and I'm glad to see someone who agrees with me even a little right now besides Memmy and Nick. :)

They are taking hours at a time to talk about the 911 call for heavens sake!

[mystic_zoe]

Exactly my point, and I'm glad to see someone who agrees with me even a little right now besides Memmy and Nick. :)

They are taking hours at a time to talk about the 911 call for heavens sake!

I also agree that its getting too much now. His songs are now always on the radio which is annoying, mentioned on the news several times in a half hour slot.

[Lunacie]

When its the only thing on the news channels I would say the news stations are saying that that particular story takes precedence over the other stories. You are reading things which were not stated. Its not that its sparked debate, its that the important things are rarely discussed with any depth. However one entertainer dies and its all over the news and peoples attitudes about the person tend to do complete 180s.


I agree that it's excessive on TV. They're taking out scheduled programing to talk and talk and talk and show him doing thriller. And people who a few days ago would have been up the wall talking about him being a pedophile are now acting like he was God's gift to music. That annoys me, as well.


Exactly my point, and I'm glad to see someone who agrees with me even a little right now besides Memmy and Nick. :)

They are taking hours at a time to talk about the 911 call for heavens sake!

Actually, I guess you missed it, but I agreed with that earlier. I don't watch a lot of tv because of this very issue. Stories like this (and O.J., and 9-11) definately get too much coverage. I said I think that's probably because these stories catch our attention or tweak our emotions.

I asked "Why do you think these stories get more attention that the stories that you're calling more important?" I guess you missed my question too. :smileroll

[Caitlin.ann]

Actually, I guess you missed it, but I agreed with that earlier. I don't watch a lot of tv because of this very issue. Stories like this (and O.J., and 9-11) definately get too much coverage. I said I think that's probably because these stories catch our attention or tweak our emotions.

I asked "Why do you think these stories get more attention that the stories that you're calling more important?" I guess you missed my question too. :smileroll

Because PEOPLE ARE SHEEP.

[evergreen]

Actually, I guess you missed it, but I agreed with that earlier. I don't watch a lot of tv because of this very issue. Stories like this (and O.J., and 9-11) definately get too much coverage. I said I think that's probably because these stories catch our attention or tweak our emotions.

I asked "Why do you think these stories get more attention that the stories that you're calling more important?" I guess you missed my question too. :smileroll

I don't consider any topic more important then another. I'm someone that can multi-task and jump from story to story. However, I rarely watch the news because of how depressing it is. I prefer reading articles.

I'm more concerned with how all the TV stations seems to think I want to watch MJ all day long. I want to watch something pointless like "True Life: I'm Having Twins" or some crazy VH1 show. The music/entertainment industry is free to mourn, but don't push it onto me.

[Caitlin.ann]

To further elaborate, news stations play these things because they're sensationalist and up ratings. That and the average American IQ is less than that of other countries.

[Lunacie]

To further elaborate, news stations play these things because they're sensationalist and up ratings. That and the average American IQ is less than that of other countries.

The average American politician perhaps. :lol:

Otherwise I'd be interested in seeing some statistics to back that up.

The first source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_IQ)I found definately disagrees with that conclusion.

[Lunar Raven]

Exactly my point, and I'm glad to see someone who agrees with me even a little right now besides Memmy and Nick. :)

They are taking hours at a time to talk about the 911 call for heavens sake!

I actually agreed with that too. At this point, they're just talking about it (on the news) to talk about it. They wont even find out any new information on his death for weeks..so obviously, any talk on the news right now and in the days ahead are just for ratings. But that always happens..that's basically the whole point of the news..ratings. I myself, was just arguing the point that there's nothing wrong with mourning his death or talking about. Especially on a forum. But yeah, the news is getting beyond ridiculous about it..but I knew that would happen. That's expected...


Just because something sparks a discussion or a debate doesn't mean we see it as 'more important' than anything else. I'd say perhaps it's just that some things catch our attention or tweak our emotions momentarily (for some it goes deeper than that).

Why do you think things like this get more attention than the things you feel are 'more important'?


Agreed. I don't see it personally, as more important at all. That doesn't mean I won't talk about it though.

[Caitlin.ann]

There is nothing to post, its a well known fact that American education is far behind that of other developed nations and that our students and adults are no competition for those from those other nations. I will post links later when I have more time.

EDIT: Wikipedia does not count. If I can't use it for reliable college essays then I don't count it here. Additionally it shows the US with a lower IQ than other developed countries as I already stated.

[Lunar Raven]

The average American politician perhaps. :lol:

Otherwise I'd be interested in seeing some statistics to back that up.

The first source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_IQ)I found definately disagrees with that conclusion.

I would like statistics too, but I'm pretty sure it's true. Our education system is a far cry from great.

-edit

http://www.dailytrojan.com/news/u-s-falls-in-education-rank-compared-to-other-countries-1.212897

[Caitlin.ann]

nternational Comparisons

Despite higher than average per-pupil expenditures, American 8th graders ranked 19th out of 38 countries on the most recent international mathematics comparison, the Third International Mathematics and Science Study-Repeat (TIMSS-R) of 1999. American students scored 18th out of 38 countries in science.[16] On the TIMSS 1995 study, which tested 12th graders, American students were ranked 19th out of 21 countries in both math and science general knowledge.[17]

Link (http://www.heritage.org/research/education/wm134.cfm)

Link (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/tables/dt07_389.asp)

Link (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/tables/dt07_390.asp)


Question:
How does achievement of American students compare to students in other countries?

Response:
The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a system of international assessments that measures 15-year-olds' performance in reading literacy, mathematics literacy, and science literacy every 3 years. PISA was first implemented in 2000. PISA is sponsored by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), an intergovernmental organization of 30 member countries. In 2006, fifty-seven jurisdictions participated in PISA, including 30 OECD countries referred to throughout as jurisdictions and 27 non- OECD jurisdictions.

U.S. students scored lower in science literacy than their peers in 16 of the other 29 OECD jurisdictions and 6 of the 27 non-OECD jurisdictions. Twenty-two jurisdictions (5 OECD jurisdictions and 17 non-OECD jurisdictions) reported lower scores than the United States in science literacy.

U.S. students also had lower scores than the OECD average score for two of the three scientific literacy subscales (explaining phenomena scientifically (486 versus 500) and using scientific evidence (489 versus 499)). Twenty-five jurisdictions (19 OECD and 6 non-OECD jurisdictions) had a higher average score than the United States on the explaining phenomena scientifically subscale, and 20 jurisdictions (14 OECD and 6 non-OECD jurisdictions) had a higher averagescore than the United States on the using scientific evidence subscale. There was no measurable difference in the performance of U.S. students compared with the OECD average on the identifying scientific issues subscale (492 versus 499). However, 18 jurisdictions (13 OECD and 5 non-OECD jurisdictions) scored higher than the United States on the identifying scientific issues subscale.

Link (http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=1)

[Lunacie]

To further elaborate, news stations play these things because they're sensationalist and up ratings. That and the average American IQ is less than that of other countries.


There is nothing to post, its a well known fact that American education is far behind that of other developed nations and that our students and adults are no competition for those from those other nations. I will post links later when I have more time.

EDIT: Wikipedia does not count. If I can't use it for reliable college essays then I don't count it here. Additionally it shows the US with a lower IQ than other developed countries as I already stated.

Adding a qualifier such as "developed" after I've responded is creating a false argument. Possibly you meant to add the word "developed" in your previous post and simply missed a word. Happens to me fairly often. I generally catch it and edit the post, but I'm sure some mistakes slip by me. Doesn't mean I don't have a decent IQ.

And this is a public forum, not a college class that will be graded. Can't expect the same standards in both places, can you really?

Heck, I'm not even sure I buy into the argument in the Wiki article that equates Intelligence with Gross Domestic Product. There's education and there's common sense, and there are a lot of very smart people who don't do well on tests but are very intelligent and creative. For instance, I believe Dr. Russell Barkley has shown that people with ADHD are often of above average intelligence and yet they often do very poorly at tests (IQ and other).


At any rate, there is nothing about MJ on the front page of my internet connection anymore. Don't know about tv because I don't watch much tv. Looks like it's still playing on CNN. I think the buzz is already dying down. Too bad some people can't find something else to keep them entertained for 48 hours until a new story comes along to take front page. But any new story is always going to trump long-term issues like starvation in India.

[Lunacie]

Link (http://www.heritage.org/research/education/wm134.cfm)

Link (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/tables/dt07_389.asp)

Link (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/tables/dt07_390.asp)



Link (http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=1)

So, because our education system isn't as good as those in other countries ... somehow that equates to our kids not having as high an IQ?

Now I need a linkie that says IQ is tied to education. Intelligence and knowledge are two different things.

[Caitlin.ann]

No its not. The point was obvious as to what I was talking about. When did I ever question YOUR IQ? At what point did I call you stupid?

Everyone knows Wikipedia is not a reliable source, sort of like the Daily Mail.

[Caitlin.ann]

So, because our education system isn't as good as those in other countries ... somehow that equates to our kids not having as high an IQ?

Now I need a linkie that says IQ is tied to education. Intelligence and knowledge are two different things.

You're serious?

[Lunacie]

No its not. The point was obvious as to what I was talking about. When did I ever question YOUR IQ? At what point did I call you stupid?

Everyone knows Wikipedia is not a reliable source, sort of like the Daily Mail.

Where did you get the idea that I was taking this personally?



You're serious?

That's sort of what I'm asking you. Are you seriously equating IQ with education?

[Caitlin.ann]

Where did you get the idea that I was taking this personally?




That's sort of what I'm asking you. Are you seriously equating IQ with education?

When you asked why I was calling you stupid.

Americans can't compete in a global community because there is a flaw in the education system.

[Lunacie]

When you asked why I was calling you stupid.

Americans can't compete in a global community because there is a flaw in the education system.

This is just adding to my confuzzlement. Where did I accuse you of calling me stupid?


I'm not debating that our education system needs a major upgrade. But that doesn't have anything to do with whether we, as a nation, have lower IQ's than the citizens of other countries. You can't teach IQ, although good learning can possibly raise one's IQ a few points. So can good diet, and good sleeping patterns.

[Caitlin.ann]

I generally catch it and edit the post, but I'm sure some mistakes slip by me. Doesn't mean I don't have a decent IQ.



Did you forget writing this?

[memnoch]

When you asked why I was calling you stupid.

Americans can't compete in a global community because there is a flaw in the education system.

I would like to argue several of the past points all at once. I would not be surprised to see that the AVERAGE american is probably not as bright as the average (insert people of a developed country here), I would take it further and say we probably have more at both ends of the extremes though as well. I will also be the first to admit the american education system is crap, however that is not why we can not compete for global jobs, we can't compete because of the extremely high (comparatively) pay for those who are bright enough to do such jobs, the fact we have the second highest business tax rate in the world, and the fact unions try to push their way in and demand more benefits than would be given elsewhere.

[Lunacie]

Did you forget writing this?

No I didn't forget writing that. But I don't see how that is accusing you of calling me "stupid." I was making the point that even people with above average IQ's sometimes make mistakes, not defending my intelligence against some imagined slight that you didn't propose. Sheesh.


And I'll be damned if I know what any of that has to do with whether people have the right to be curious about MJ, about his life, and about his death. Unless you were implying that only less than average people care about people like MJ. :huh:


... trying to get back to the topic ...

[Caitlin.ann]

No I didn't forget writing that. But I don't see how that is accusing you of calling me "stupid." I was making the point that even people with above average IQ's sometimes make mistakes, not defending my intelligence against some imagined slight that you didn't propose. Sheesh.

"Doesn't mean I don't have a decent IQ" assumes and implies that I had before stated that you don't have a decent IQ to begin with. Now whatever you meant by it seems to be quite different from how it read. You're typing out your own sentences, do not get angry when I read them as you write them.

[Caitlin.ann]

No I didn't forget writing that. But I don't see how that is accusing you of calling me "stupid." I was making the point that even people with above average IQ's sometimes make mistakes, not defending my intelligence against some imagined slight that you didn't propose. Sheesh.


And I'll be damned if I know what any of that has to do with whether people have the right to be curious about MJ, about his life, and about his death. Unless you were implying that only less than average people care about people like MJ. :huh:


... trying to get back to the topic ...

Hey you jumped onto this argument yourself. Don't point the finger at me.

[memnoch]

No I didn't forget writing that. But I don't see how that is accusing you of calling me "stupid." I was making the point that even people with above average IQ's sometimes make mistakes, not defending my intelligence against some imagined slight that you didn't propose. Sheesh.


And I'll be damned if I know what any of that has to do with whether people have the right to be curious about MJ, about his life, and about his death. Unless you were implying that only less than average people care about people like MJ. :huh:


... trying to get back to the topic ...

I would argue that it is less than average people who spend their time fixated to shows like entertainment tonight and cause the news to become fixated on stories that deserve no more than a few minutes.

[Caitlin.ann]

I would argue that it is less than average people who spend their time fixated to shows like entertainment tonight and cause the news to become fixated on stories that deserve no more than a few minutes.

Indeed which also corresponds with the poorer education citizens are receiving. What was that quote again?


Intelligent people talk about ideas. Average people talk about things. Small people talk about other people.

[Lunacie]

"Doesn't mean I don't have a decent IQ" assumes and implies that I had before stated that you don't have a decent IQ to begin with. Now whatever you meant by it seems to be quite different from how it read. You're typing out your own sentences, do not get angry when I read them as you write them.

I certainly know what I meant when I wrote that. Don't try telling me it means something else when you read it because that doesn't change what I meant. I wasn't implying anything to do with you attacking me. When I think I may have been attacked, I use the report button rather than getting involved in a flame war in the midst of a thread.



Hey you jumped onto this argument yourself. Don't point the finger at me.

And what did I supposedly "point the finger" at you about?

OMGs this is getting beyond ridiculous. :goodgrief

[Caitlin.ann]

You wrote it. You can not assume a stranger over the internet is going to know EXACTLY what you meant by it. Which is why I said 'you're the one who wrote it'.

If its so ridiculous to you then maybe you should bow out so to speak?

[Lunacie]

I would argue that it is less than average people who spend their time fixated to shows like entertainment tonight and cause the news to become fixated on stories that deserve no more than a few minutes.

That's a possibility. Mostly because I don't watch those shows and that would confirm that I have slightly above average intelligence. :hehehe:

However, I find it more likely that we all have something that captures our interest for more than five minutes. Someone like MJ appeals to many people - and often for different reasons.



Indeed which also corresponds with the poorer education citizens are receiving. What was that quote again?

... still haven't seen anything to confirm that sub-par education causes sub-par intelligence. :doh2:

[Caitlin.ann]

That's a possibility. Mostly because I don't watch those shows and that would confirm that I have slightly above average intelligence. :hehehe:

However, I find it more likely that we all have something that captures our interest for more than five minutes. Someone like MJ appeals to many people - and often for different reasons.




... still haven't seen anything to confirm that sub-par education causes sub-par intelligence. :doh2:

I've already posted links. If you will not read them then the buck stops with you and is not my shortcoming.

[Lunacie]

You wrote it. You can not assume a stranger over the internet is going to know EXACTLY what you meant by it. Which is why I said 'you're the one who wrote it'.

If its so ridiculous to you then maybe you should bow out so to speak?

I don't assume a stranger is going to know EXACTLY what is meant by what I write on a forum such as this. However, I do assume that most readers with an average intelligence will be able to figure it out by context if not by what I've actually written.

I have been trying to bow out of this particular sidebar and return to the main topic. I haven't seen you actually post anything pertinent to the topic. Most of your posts have been complaints about the amount of publicity MJ's death and past history have been getting.

[Lunacie]

I've already posted links. If you will not read them then the buck stops with you and is not my shortcoming.

They certainly showed that the U.S. education system is falling very short. They did not show that sub-par education causes sub-par intelligence.

[Caitlin.ann]

They certainly showed that the U.S. education system is falling very short. They did not show that sub-par education causes sub-par intelligence.

Of course it does.

[Lunacie]

Of course it does.

**snorts**

You must have read more into those reports you linked the same way you read more into what I wrote here. Doesn't make it true just because you seem to be having trouble with your reading comprehension today.

[Caitlin.ann]

**snorts**

You must have read more into those reports you linked the same way you read more into what I wrote here. Doesn't make it true just because you seem to be having trouble with your reading comprehension today.

You wrote it..

You are responsible for the messages you write and can't expect others to read your mind.

[Lunacie]

From your last linkie...



The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a system of international assessments that measures 15-year-olds' performance in reading literacy, mathematics literacy, and science literacy every 3 years.


That doesn't mean the students are stupider. It means they have been given less effective tools to use so their performance was less effective. That has nothing to do with intelligence.

According to this report (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W4M-4K42DN3-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=941669780&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=02e683a0247d377f58d0ef2946c5a4ea), it appears more likely that IQ affects achievement than the other way around (achievement affecting IQ).

[evergreen]

You know, I'm not sure how much IQ has to do with wanting to watch shows such as Entertainment Tonight. My mom loves watching that show. I'm not going to go into her education, but I don't find her unintelligent (I don't know her IQ). I find that she enjoys watching the show because it helps her to unwind. She works ten or so hours a day and when she comes home, she likes light entertainment. I don't consider myself unintelligent (don't know my IQ either) but I watch some of the stupidest and silliest shows out there for entertainment.

[Shawn Blackwolf]

Michael...

In a world with threads like this...

That are worse than most of what schlock tv ever put out...:uhhuhuh:

I don't blame you , for checking out...ROTFLMAO...:smileroll

[Lunacie]

You know, I'm not sure how much IQ has to do with wanting to watch shows such as Entertainment Tonight. My mom loves watching that show. I'm not going to go into her education, but I don't find her unintelligent (I don't know her IQ). I find that she enjoys watching the show because it helps her to unwind. She works ten or so hours a day and when she comes home, she likes light entertainment. I don't consider myself unintelligent (don't know my IQ either) but I watch some of the stupidest and silliest shows out there for entertainment.

Ah - that's a good point. As individuals we watch different programs for different reasons - maybe to relax, maybe because it's about a particular interest of ours, or because we've heard good things about it, or - maybe because we just likeone of the actors. Enjoying something stimulting doesn't necessarily mean we're more intelligent than someone else, and watching something that doesn't take any thought doesn't mean we're stupider either.

[memnoch]

You know, I'm not sure how much IQ has to do with wanting to watch shows such as Entertainment Tonight. My mom loves watching that show. I'm not going to go into her education, but I don't find her unintelligent (I don't know her IQ). I find that she enjoys watching the show because it helps her to unwind. She works ten or so hours a day and when she comes home, she likes light entertainment. I don't consider myself unintelligent (don't know my IQ either) but I watch some of the stupidest and silliest shows out there for entertainment.

there is a difference in people who watch crap tv (I'm a fan of the judges...although it is educational)...and people whose only connection to the world, as far as news and current events go, are shows like that.

[Shawn Blackwolf]

I watch House , NCI , CSI , when I watch tv...or , I
watch the comedy channel ( basic cable )...:bigredgri

Way before I would watch news...:uhhuhuh:

I watch that , "maybe" , once a month...:smileroll


Ah - that's a good point. As individuals we watch different programs for different reasons - maybe to relax, maybe because it's about a particular interest of ours, or because we've heard good things about it, or - maybe because we just likeone of the actors. Enjoying something stimulting doesn't necessarily mean we're more intelligent than someone else, and watching something that doesn't take any thought doesn't mean we're stupider either.

[David19]

exactly! Born African American, and not all that light. Wow, I have been asking about all kids as well, MJ kept them away from the family. He did not speak to some members in years.
Debbie Rowe wife and mother of could be the best choice for hers, she could make a plea for Blanket ( PrinceMichael)
as to keep the kids all together. Blanket's mom was a surrogate and un named. I have read other sources that they are with a nanny and all have the same Godfather, he may look after them or, a brother may step in. It seems so up in the air as the will has not been mentioned.. but, they are still with a nanny... odd... I have read other articles saying he was 400 mil in debt!!

I'm glad I'm not the only one, I'm just surprised it hasn't been a major issue before, I mean, his kids are blonde, they seem to have blue eyes or some do anyway and they're white, even if the mother was white, they should be mixed race, Michael Jackson may have had something wrong with his skin, and that's why he lightened it, but, that still doesn't change his DNA.

[Phoenix Blue]

**snorts**

You must have read more into those reports you linked the same way you read more into what I wrote here. Doesn't make it true just because you seem to be having trouble with your reading comprehension today.

You wrote it..

You are responsible for the messages you write and can't expect others to read your mind.
How old are you two?! Quit bickering or you'll both be grounded.

[evergreen]

I'm glad I'm not the only one, I'm just surprised it hasn't been a major issue before, I mean, his kids are blonde, they seem to have blue eyes or some do anyway and they're white, even if the mother was white, they should be mixed race, Michael Jackson may have had something wrong with his skin, and that's why he lightened it, but, that still doesn't change his DNA.

Yeah, I don't think they had his DNA. I know that he used a surrogate and probably donor sperm. Nonetheless, that doesn't mean they weren't his children in the legal sense, just not biologically.

[Lunar Raven]

I'm glad I'm not the only one, I'm just surprised it hasn't been a major issue before, I mean, his kids are blonde, they seem to have blue eyes or some do anyway and they're white, even if the mother was white, they should be mixed race, Michael Jackson may have had something wrong with his skin, and that's why he lightened it, but, that still doesn't change his DNA.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure none of them are his kids biologically..which is really strange in my opinion.

[Raven Reed]

I seriously had to stop paying attention to what that man did a loooong time ago. Everything he had done in the last decade was just flat out weird. On the other hand, trying to explain to my 72 year old aunt why some people were so upset at his passing was hard. He was a music icon. A nutty music icon, but a music icon all the same.


Yeah, I'm pretty sure none of them are his kids biologically..which is really strange in my opinion.

[Laisrean]

What really happened with Michael Jackson:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2FTLRRfh0M

[David19]

Yeah, I don't think they had his DNA. I know that he used a surrogate and probably donor sperm. Nonetheless, that doesn't mean they weren't his children in the legal sense, just not biologically.


Yeah, I'm pretty sure none of them are his kids biologically..which is really strange in my opinion.

True, legally, they were his, I'm sure he made sure of that, but, biologically, I don't think they were at all, it makes me think why, though?, I mean, didn't he have or enjoy sex with women? (maybe all his relationships with women were just covers).

I wonder what'll happen to the kids, though, will they go to the mother(s)?.

BTW, does anyone know, but, did Michael have any money left at all?, as I've heard he was in debt (which was the reason he was doing all the concerts), so, I'm just wondering, if the kids would get anything.

[Bettie]

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/381773/Mother-of-Michael-Jackons-children-Debbie-Rowe-confesses-he-was-not-their-father.html

Okay, okay, I know it's NOTW, but would anyone actually be surprised that he wasn't the biological father?

Apparently the article has gone... here's another link to the same story -

http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,25705430-5005381,00.html

[Laisrean]

One suspicious thing about Michael's "love for children" is that it only seems to extend to male children. If his "love" for them was innocent and not sexual, then why would he care about their genders?

[evergreen]

One suspicious thing about Michael's "love for children" is that it only seems to extend to male children. If his "love" for them was innocent and not sexual, then why would he care about their genders?

We don't know that for sure. He could have invited female children to Neverland. We've really only heard about males because they're the ones that accused him. I mean, you could be right, definitely, but we don't really know what went on day to day in his home.

[Raven Reed]

Makes much more sense, thanks! :uhhuhuh:


What really happened with Michael Jackson:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2FTLRRfh0M

[Lunar Raven]

One suspicious thing about Michael's "love for children" is that it only seems to extend to male children. If his "love" for them was innocent and not sexual, then why would he care about their genders?

That's not really true though, considering he invited kids all of all sorts to his ranch..which was shown the documentary that was made about him a few years ago. He had "under-privileged" children of all ages, races, etc come to his ranch before the charges were brought against him (and proven false).

[blithespirit]

Here is a very interesting Flickr collection of photos of the items from Neverland that were up for auction not long ago.

Link (http://www.flickr.com/photos/paulscheer/sets/72157617373340442/)

I approve of his creeptactular taste in art.

[Clair de la Lune]

Jordy Chandler's secret diary of sex abuse


http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00046/mj06_01_2706_46868a.jpg
TV SHAME: Jacko tells Martin Bashir he shares bed with Gavin


28/06/2009
ON STAGE he was a genius showman adored by millions - but when the spotlights went off, Jackson entered a secret dark world where he preyed on young boys. He truly was BAD.

Thanks to immense wealth he kept this chilling side of his life hushed-up and shrouded in mystery.
Then the scandal of 13-year-old Jordy Chandler broke.
Until today the full horrifying details of Jordy's abuse at the hands of Jackson have never been published in Britain.
Click here for all Michael Jackson death and tribute stories (http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/showbiz/michael_jackson/)
Now for the first time the News of the World reveals the explosive story spelled out to author Victor M. Gutierrez in his shock book Michael Jackson Was My Lover: The Secret Diary of Jordy Chandler.

Edited to add: Link to article :

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/381252/Jordy-Chandlers-secret-diary-of-sex-abuse-with-Michael-Jackson.html

[Clair de la Lune]

I can not seem to be able to copy over the picture of the kid (at the time with MJ) who is accusing MJ of this stuff from before.

I just think this person is a very opportunistic little **** and is a coward for waiting until the pop star is dead and can't defend himself...and he is not even waiting until MJ's body is cold practically to release the book.. It has not even been close to a week yet. He is just trying to make money off a tragedy, plain and simple and I think it is in poor taste, to put it VERY mildly!! What a sick sick person!!!

How long has he had that written, just waiting for the bad news so he could release it someday?!!:goodgrief:sick:

[blithespirit]

News of the World is an insane, full of crap, opportunistic rag of a tabloid. Don't worry too much.

It's also an awesome Queen album.

[lightdragon]

News of the World is an insane, full of crap, opportunistic rag of a tabloid. Don't worry too much.

It's also an awesome Queen album.

yeah News of the World is the very magazine that gives stories on Bat boy.

http://lanceballance.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/batboy.jpg

[Lunar Raven]

I can not seem to be able to copy over the picture of the kid (at the time with MJ) who is accusing MJ of this stuff from before.

I just think this person is a very opportunistic little **** and is a coward for waiting until the pop star is dead and can't defend himself...and he is not even waiting until MJ's body is cold practically to release the book.. It has not even been close to a week yet. He is just trying to make money off a tragedy, plain and simple and I think it is in poor taste, to put it VERY mildly!! What a sick sick person!!!

How long has he had that written, just waiting for the bad news so he could release it someday?!!:goodgrief:sick:

I agree. It's pathetic, but not at all unpredictable. That, in my mind, only supports my opinion that MJ never did anything like that. Clearly this person is money hungry, and was just waiting for perfect time to release his "tell all". Eh..money makes the world go round'.

[Bettie]

yeah News of the World is the very magazine that gives stories on Bat boy.




Nup, Bat Boy was originally from the Weekly World News, not News of the World. The NOTW has had it's fair share of crappy stories, but never anything quite that ridiculous... :)

[Clair de la Lune]

Culture


http://static.nowpublic.net/graphics/sites/all/themes/nova/default/images/1px.gif Michael Jackson's Death - The Conspiracy Theory

Share: http://static.nowpublic.net/graphics/sites/all/themes/nova/default/images/1px.gif (http://www.nowpublic.com/forward?path=node/2383395) http://static.nowpublic.net/graphics/sites/all/themes/nova/default/images/1px.gif (http://www.addtoany.com/?sitename=NowPublic&siteurl=http://www.nowpublic.com&linkname=Michael%20Jackson%27s%20Death%20-%20The%20Conspiracy%20Theory%20%7C%20The%20News%20is%20NowPublic.com&linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nowpublic.com%2Fculture%2Fmichael-jacksons-death-conspiracy-theory&type=page) http://static.nowpublic.net/graphics/sites/all/themes/nova/default/images/1px.gif (http://digg.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nowpublic.com%2Fculture%2Fmichael-jacksons-death-conspiracy-theory&phase=2) http://static.nowpublic.net/graphics/sites/all/themes/nova/default/images/1px.gif (http://www.facebook.com/share.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nowpublic.com%2Fculture%2Fmichael-jacksons-death-conspiracy-theory) http://static.nowpublic.net/graphics/sites/all/themes/nova/default/images/1px.gif (http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nowpublic.com%2Fculture%2Fmichael-jacksons-death-conspiracy-theory%26title%3DMichael%20Jackson%27s%20Death%20-%20The%20Conspiracy%20Theory%20%7C%20The%20News%20is%20NowPublic.com)
by duo (http://www.nowpublic.com/duo) | June 28, 2009 at 02:29 am
1460 views | 3 Recommendations | 3 comments (http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/michael-jacksons-death-conspiracy-theory#comments)
Photos


http://media.nowpublic.net/images//38/1/38132aaf2336ace6d95ad21bba49ec2f.jpgMichael Jackson Conspiracy Theory | Photo 02


see larger image http://www.nowpublic.com/sites/all/themes/nova/default/images/1px.gif (http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/michael-jackson-conspiracy-theory-photo-02)
http://www.nowpublic.com/sites/all/themes/nova/default/images/1px.gif (http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/michael-jacksons-death-conspiracy-theory#right)http://www.nowpublic.com/sites/all/themes/nova/default/images/1px.gif (http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/michael-jacksons-death-conspiracy-theory#left)


http://static.nowpublic.net/graphics/sites/all/themes/nova/default/images/1px.gif http://static.nowpublic.net/graphics/sites/all/themes/nova/default/images/1px.gif









Sudden deaths of famous persons are often followed by conspiracy theories. Decades after the assassinations of President Kennedy and Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. as well as the sudden deaths of Marilyn Monroe and Princess Di, speculation continues. Below is Michael's conspiracy theory, which reportedly comes from the Russians.

********************

FourWinds10.com
June 27, 2009

Russia’s FSB Reports Pop Icon Michael Jackson Assassinated by CIA

http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/health/intentional_death/news.php?q=1246050100

FSB sources are reporting to President Medvedev today that American pop icon Michael Jackson was "most assuredly" assassinated by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) after an examination of data transmitted by a Russian Military's Kosmos sateliite.

To the reason behind the CIA needing to assassinate Michael Jackson, these reports continue, was an out of court settlement the pop icon signed with son of the king of Bahrain, Sheikh Abdullah bin Hamad al-Khalifa, this past November in London, and which stated, in part, that in exchange for millions of dollars previously lent to Mr. Jackson by the Sheikh, Mr. Jackson would allow his sold-out United Kingdom concerts to be a “platform” for warning the World of a soon to occur mass genocide event.

Both Michael Jackson and Sheikh Abdullah bin Hamad al-Khalifa have been long standing supporters of the fearless Austrian investigative journalist, Jane Burgermeister, who is warning the world that the greatest crime in the history of humanity is underway.

********************

At least Michael is not being sited around the globe like Elvis Presley was, although we should prepare for an avalanche of Michael-impersonators. There were many Michael Jackson look-alikes performing even before his death, although this became less popular after his legal problems. Before that, there was a time when it seemed all the little boys were wearing a single white glove and practicing their moonwalk.

Princess Di had an interesting conspiracy theory that even went to court -

For the link, go to:
http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/michael-jacksons-death-conspiracy-theory

[Clair de la Lune]

Jackson Conspiracy Theories Swarm Web


2:59pm UK, Sunday June 28, 2009
Jo Couzens, Sky News Online
From the first reports of Michael Jackson's death, the perhaps inevitable conspiracy theories began taking shape across the internet.


http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2009/Jun/Week4/15320201.jpg

Blogs, Twitter, internet forums and social networking sites have been buzzing with increasingly absurd theories.
Even as Jackson was being taken to hospital in Los Angeles, celebrity blogger Perez Hilton wrote: "Jacko pulled a similar stunt when he was getting ready for his big HBO special in '95 when he 'collapsed' at rehearsal!
"He was dragging his heels on that just like his upcoming 50 date London residency at the 02 Arena, of which he already postponed the first few dates!!!"
He went on: "Either he's lying or making himself sick, but we're curious to see if he's able to go on!!!"
The post was later taken down.


http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2009/Jun/Week4/15320203.jpg (http://showbiz.sky.com/) Sky Showbiz http://news.sky.com/sky-news/app/img/chv_14_red.gif (http://showbiz.sky.com/)

Get more news on the death of Michael Jackson from Sky Showbiz.




Many theories claim the star faked his death to escape his mounting financial problems.
"Millions in debt and realises that he can't deliver on a 50-gig comeback tour, so he fakes his death, assumes a new identity (which he's been trying to achieve for many years) and disappears?" read one post on digitalspy entertainment website.
The emergence of reports that Jackson (http://indepth.news.sky.com/InDepth/topic/Michael_Jackson)'s personal doctor refused to pronouce the star dead at his home have fed into other suspicions.
Website michaeljacksonhoaxdeath said: "Obviously he [Dr Conrad Murray] didn't want to associate his name with the death of Michael Jackson, because he knew beyond a doubt that The King of Pop' was still alive and well.

http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2009/Jun/Week4/15321085.jpg Dr Conrad Murray

Jackson is headed for a new life "away from the media spotlight, impending bankruptcy and twisted public image", it wrote.
A post from 'Cascade' on selectsmart said: "He faked his death because he knew he'd make a hell of a lot more money dead than alive.
"He's now on the CIA payroll working with Elvis and Hoffa."
The message went on to claim "everyone knows" Jackson died at the age of 12 and was eventually replaced by a robot.
"The current (presumably late) MJ was actually an advanced DARPA humanoid robot model that had developed a few 'quirks' and had to be turned off," wrote Cascade.

http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2007/Aug/Week3/1574165.jpg Elvis Presley

Other posts suggest Jackson was killed by a new experimental biological weapon.
And Twitter user bloggerheads claimed: "TMZ story was not true, but the media bandwagon gained so much momentum they had to covertly kill him."
But others are more tongue-in-cheek, apparently poking fun at other well-known conspiracy ideas.
Internet site 68comeback reported that Jackson is living with Elvis Presley (http://indepth.news.sky.com/InDepth/topic/Elvis_Presley) at a "top secret megacelebrity retirement community".
It wrote: "Surely you've heard of the secret, seven-storey-deep bunker that Elvis Presley had built underneath Graceland, prior to faking his own death?
"MJ lives there now with Elvis and certain other 'dead' celebrities. You don't have to be sad for him any more.

[lightdragon]

Nup, Bat Boy was originally from the Weekly World News, not News of the World. The NOTW has had it's fair share of crappy stories, but never anything quite that ridiculous... :)

all the same to me. although the National Enquirer and Star magazine usually have semi-credible stuff or as far as tabloids go.

[memnoch]

That's not really true though, considering he invited kids all of all sorts to his ranch..which was shown the documentary that was made about him a few years ago. He had "under-privileged" children of all ages, races, etc come to his ranch before the charges were brought against him (and proven false).

being found not guilty does not mean "proven false", it just means the jury did not have enough evidence to be 100% sure of his guilt...our system is set up to where we would rather see 100 pedophiles free than 1 falsely imprisoned...not saying we occasionally don't get the wrong person...but we do let too many guilty go free.

[Caitlin.ann]

I can not seem to be able to copy over the picture of the kid (at the time with MJ) who is accusing MJ of this stuff from before.

I just think this person is a very opportunistic little **** and is a coward for waiting until the pop star is dead and can't defend himself...and he is not even waiting until MJ's body is cold practically to release the book.. It has not even been close to a week yet. He is just trying to make money off a tragedy, plain and simple and I think it is in poor taste, to put it VERY mildly!! What a sick sick person!!!

How long has he had that written, just waiting for the bad news so he could release it someday?!!:goodgrief:sick:

Not picking a side, however you don't think the child was possibly scared or MJ paid off his parents? If MJ is dead he can't hurt him and I'm not saying that I can understand the mentality of an abused person from first hand experience, but don't you think there would be some trauma involved? MJ was a legend and it was the kids word against his. I'd be awfully damn scared too.

However that is hypothetical assuming NOTW is a tabloid like others think. This is my first contact with this publication.

[David19]

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/381773/Mother-of-Michael-Jackons-children-Debbie-Rowe-confesses-he-was-not-their-father.html

Okay, okay, I know it's NOTW, but would anyone actually be surprised that he wasn't the biological father?

The article isn't there anymore, I just got a link saying "page cannot be found".


One suspicious thing about Michael's "love for children" is that it only seems to extend to male children. If his "love" for them was innocent and not sexual, then why would he care about their genders?


We don't know that for sure. He could have invited female children to Neverland. We've really only heard about males because they're the ones that accused him. I mean, you could be right, definitely, but we don't really know what went on day to day in his home.

evergreen said it best, you don't know he didn't abuse girls, if he did abuse kids at all that is (I'm going to add that disclaimer, as he was found not guilty). For all you know, any girls may be too ashamed, or maybe too traumatised to speak out, or maybe they were paid off before they could speak out.

[David19]

Jordy Chandler's secret diary of sex abuse


http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00046/mj06_01_2706_46868a.jpg
TV SHAME: Jacko tells Martin Bashir he shares bed with Gavin


28/06/2009
ON STAGE he was a genius showman adored by millions - but when the spotlights went off, Jackson entered a secret dark world where he preyed on young boys. He truly was BAD.

Thanks to immense wealth he kept this chilling side of his life hushed-up and shrouded in mystery.
Then the scandal of 13-year-old Jordy Chandler broke.
Until today the full horrifying details of Jordy's abuse at the hands of Jackson have never been published in Britain.
Click here for all Michael Jackson death and tribute stories (http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/showbiz/michael_jackson/)
Now for the first time the News of the World reveals the explosive story spelled out to author Victor M. Gutierrez in his shock book Michael Jackson Was My Lover: The Secret Diary of Jordy Chandler.

Edited to add: Link to article :

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/381252/Jordy-Chandlers-secret-diary-of-sex-abuse-with-Michael-Jackson.html


I can not seem to be able to copy over the picture of the kid (at the time with MJ) who is accusing MJ of this stuff from before.

I just think this person is a very opportunistic little **** and is a coward for waiting until the pop star is dead and can't defend himself...and he is not even waiting until MJ's body is cold practically to release the book.. It has not even been close to a week yet. He is just trying to make money off a tragedy, plain and simple and I think it is in poor taste, to put it VERY mildly!! What a sick sick person!!!

How long has he had that written, just waiting for the bad news so he could release it someday?!!:goodgrief:sick:


News of the World is an insane, full of crap, opportunistic rag of a tabloid. Don't worry too much.

It's also an awesome Queen album.

Like blithespirit said, the NOTW isn't reliable, and I agree it's in poor taste, although a small, morbid, part of me would like to see what's in the book, but, I don't think I'd waste my money buying it.

Also, maybe with Michael dead, he can publish the book, although, it seems to have been published quite quickly, makes you think it was all ready, just waiting for the final factor to be in place.