R.I.P. Michael Jackson

[Bill Mullins]

"weird Annoying Uncle magicians"

I take offence.

Yes, but does your nephew? <G>

[mrgoat]

"weird Annoying Uncle magicians"

I take offence.

Yes, but does your nephew? <G>

Not offence per se, more therapy.

[Ian Kendall]

I agree with Damian - a magician is one who performs magic. If you add the requirement to be entertaining I'm going to have to get new business cards printed...

Take care, Ian

[Bill Duncan]

Michael was the single greatest entertainer on the planet, there would be no Usher, Chris Brown or Justin Timberlake without him. NO ONE WILL EVER match his talents.

I thought religious discussions were forbidden here.

At least we now know who to blame for Usher, Chris Brown, and Justin Timberlake.

[Mark Lewis]

We appear to be getting into a battle of semantics here. Do we agree that most people who do magic are bloody awful? How about that.
Of course that could mean that the odds are that you are one of them so perhaps that question had better not be answered.

And yes. I do think that Michael Jackson was a terrific entertainer. I think we can all agree on that. Or can we?

[jason156]

Houdini was a great entertainer too, we still talk about him 83 years after his death...

[Roger M.]

I see praise for an unrepentant, unconvicted pedophile.

I see more praise for what can only be described as a limited talent, not anything unique.
Go see a show on Broadway, there's hundreds of kids far more talented than Michael Jackson ever was performing in shows nightly.

He stole freely from the song-and-dance men of another age, and portrayed it as his own.
In fact, there were many who did what he did onstage far better than he himself did it.......they just lived in a different era, an era when world wide publicity wasn't something that could be accomplished by more than a few entertainers.

In Vaudeville, he would have been lucky to get on a big circuit like the Keith, and more than likely would have been outshone by hundreds of other far more talented performers.

Jackson was little more than the product of a publicity machine, of MTV, and of an era that took the combined skills of Quincy Jones, Rick Baker, Michael Peters and dozens of others, and sold them as a solo creation of Michael Jackson.

Save your over the top praise for somebody deserving of it, Jackson certainly doesn't deserve it, and should have died behind prison bars.

[Bill Duncan]

Houdini was a great entertainer too, we still talk about him 83 years after his death...

Funny you should mention that. I've had more than one layman tell me that Houdini was the greatest magician of all time, but when asked they couldn't relate a single effect he did, or why he was the greatest. But they know for an absolute certainty he was...

One even got angry when I told him that Houdini really wasn't much compared to some of today's master magicians.

[Jonathan Townsend]

I see praise for an unrepentant, unconvicted pedophile...

While you sir are what? A victim of abuse? What point is there to speaking of others in that way?

As to talent - Michael Jackson stole the show from his brothers early on. From what their early TV showed it looked set as Jermain's team with a cute younger brother much like the Osmonds but things happen.

Now what's all this about pedophilia? Wasn't it obvious from his surgery and skin change that something was wrong? Was it not sufficient notice to the observant that as soon as he was away from his father he took to wearing something close to military uniform? Isn't it simpler to ask what sort of parent would bring their child over to be with a broken person?

He's dead folks. No O2 shows. Whatever was filmed from rehearsal is now the end of what we might know of what he wanted to share with the public. Randy and the others may well tour next year but it won't be the same Jackson 5.

For all that was and so much that could be - he is gone. And some of us seem more wretched for it especially in what they say on the occasion. What does it mean to speak ill of the dead if not to say worse of ourselves?

Please let his pain go with him and let those who may yet be in pain start to heal.

[Mark Lewis]

I did a psychic reading for him when he was a much younger man.I felt sorry for him then and I feel sorry for him now. I am perhaps a little naive but I think he was innocent of those awful allegations.

With regard to the entertainment side of things I don't know much about singing and dancing but he looked pretty good to me.

[Paul Gordon]

In the UK, we have a pop star/paeodophile called Gary Glitter. He was "massive" in the UK from circa 1971-1976. When he dies, there won't be any glowing tributes. So, why all the glowing tributes to MJ? (Rhetorical question, btw, - I know why!)

There's a lot of hypocrits getting on the MJ after-death band-waggon. Lots of money to be made by those who loved and disliked him. The curse of celebrity...

Most recently, there have been plane crashes with hundreds dying, bombings in the middle east, famine in Africa, economic chaos, riots and more. But, what's the main focus of the media? Bloody Michael Jackson.

For my part, I thought he should have been locked up years ago.

Paul Gordon

[Ian Kendall]

"The evil that men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones"

Mark Anthony, Julius Ceasar.

One thing Shakespeare got spectacularly wrong.

Take care, Ian

[Francesca Moffet]

In the UK, we have a pop star/paeodophile called Gary Glitter. He was "massive" in the UK from circa 1971-1976. When he dies, there won't be any glowing tributes. So, why all the glowing tributes to MJ? (Rhetorical question, btw, - I know why!)

Jade Goody was treated exactly the same as MJ when she was dying of cancer. She exposed her self as a vile, foul-mouthed racist on 'Celebrity' Big Brother and was branded 'The Most Hated Person in Britain' by the media. A short time later she's diagnosed with cervical cancer and the media start treating her like she was a Saint saying how there was a huge public outpouring of grief at her death...no there wasn't...not by anyone who was capable of seeing through the rose-tinted shroud the media were using to surround her situation.

Sir Michael Parkinson saw the situation clearly.

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/ ... 048656.ece

The double standards of the media are truly astonishing.

[Bob Coyne]

Most recently, there have been plane crashes with hundreds dying, bombings in the middle east, famine in Africa, economic chaos, riots and more. But, what's the main focus of the media? Bloody Michael Jackson.

I agree with the sentiment, but not the analysis. It's really not the media's fault -- they're just providing what the public is interested in. Paraphrasing the bard, "The fault, dear viewer, is not in our media, but in ourselves."

[erdnasephile]

Most recently, there have been plane crashes with hundreds dying, bombings in the middle east, famine in Africa, economic chaos, riots and more. But, what's the main focus of the media? Bloody Michael Jackson.

I agree with the sentiment, but not the analysis. It's really not the media's fault -- they're just providing what the public is interested in. Paraphrasing the bard, "The fault, dear viewer, is not in our media, but in ourselves."

This is absolutely true--if we, the public, didn't consume this stuff, there wouldn't be People magazine, TMZ, Email Spam, or one-trick DVD's! :grin:

[Mark Lewis]

Gary Glitter was convicted. Michael Jackson wasn't. That is the difference.

[Paul Gordon]

Gary Glitter was convicted. Michael Jackson wasn't. That is the difference.

...and MJ should have been!

[mrgoat]

Gary Glitter was convicted. Michael Jackson wasn't. That is the difference.

...and MJ should have been!

Didn't have MJ's budget.

[jason156]

Houdini was a great entertainer too, we still talk about him 83 years after his death...

Funny you should mention that. I've had more than one layman tell me that Houdini was the greatest magician of all time, but when asked they couldn't relate a single effect he did, or why he was the greatest. But they know for an absolute certainty he was...

One even got angry when I told him that Houdini really wasn't much compared to some of today's master magicians.

I intentionally used the word "entertainer", not "magician"...

[AJM]

Anyway, returning to the actual topic of the thread...

We now hear from the family that MJ's funeral / memorial service will not involve Neverland Ranch, despite reports to the contrary earlier this week.

Hear that deafening noise? It's the sound of the world's largest penny dropping.

Elsewhere, folks who purchased tickets for the O2 gigs can get either a full refund or elect to receive a collectable concert ticket.

Those who purchased tickets through eBay using PayPal should also be able to claim a refund (however I guess they'll miss out on that special ticket.)

Don't despair though, rumours of a series of Jacksons reunion concerts at the O2 next year are still to be confirmed.

This is Andrew Murphy
Fox News

and now the weather in your neck of the woods....

[Francesca Moffet]

A friend sent me this...



They do look a bit alike and are both as evil as each other.

[David Alexander]

In the UK, we have a pop star/paeodophile called Gary Glitter. He was "massive" in the UK from circa 1971-1976. When he dies, there won't be any glowing tributes. So, why all the glowing tributes to MJ? (Rhetorical question, btw, - I know why!)

There's a lot of hypocrits getting on the MJ after-death band-waggon. Lots of money to be made by those who loved and disliked him. The curse of celebrity...

Most recently, there have been plane crashes with hundreds dying, bombings in the middle east, famine in Africa, economic chaos, riots and more. But, what's the main focus of the media? Bloody Michael Jackson.

For my part, I thought he should have been locked up years ago.

Paul Gordon

Further proof that Paul Gordon is a sane and rational person. I couldn't have said it better myself.

[NCMarsh]

So, why all the glowing tributes to MJ? (Rhetorical question, btw, - I know why!)

Despite it being intended rhetorically, I think Bob Herbert gives an intelligent answer to this in an editorial in this morning's NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/04/opini ... rbert.html

Highlight:

In many ways we descended as a society into a fantasyland, trying to leave the limits and consequences and obligations of the real world behind. Politicians stopped talking about the poor. We built up staggering amounts of debt and called it an economic boom. We shipped jobs overseas by the millions without ever thinking seriously about how to replace them. We let New Orleans drown.

Jackson was the perfect star for the era, the embodiment of fantasy gone wild. He tried to carve himself up into another person, but, of course, there was the same Michael Jackson underneath talented but psychologically disabled to the point where he was a danger to himself and others.

...

The Michael-mania that has erupted since Jacksons death not just an appreciation of his music, but a giddy celebration of his life is yet another spasm of the culture opting for fantasy over reality. We dont want to look under the rock that was Jacksons real life.

As with so many other things, we dont want to know.

[Mark Lewis]

To quote a few lines from the immortal Scottish Poet Robert Burns in his poem "Holy Willie's Prayer"

"O ye wha are sae guid yersel
sae pious and sae holy
Ye've naught to do but mark and tell
your neigbours fauts and folly'

If you do not speak the Scottish language you will have to find an interpreter I am afraid. The best translation I can give is to quote from some chap or other in the Bible who said "Judge not that ye be not judged"

I shall merely say that there appears to be rather a lot of Holy Willies about not least on this forum.

[Bill Duncan]

Lawrence,
Doesn't that same book say that all will be judged? If so it would seem a tacit approval of judging others, since there is no way to avoid being judged anyway.

I'm just sayin'

[Jonathan Townsend]

If it helps you any just imagine Britney Spears doing "womanizer" with the lyrics changed to talk about "pedophile" and suitable dancers, clips and gary glitter fantasy and get it out of your system.

If you must dwell upon the horror - remember that it takes a willing parent to give over a child to the attentions of such a pedophile.

What's left? Too many folks spend too long practicing the moves for a topical MJ act complete with sparkly socks and armband that they won't be getting to perform? Did somebody get stuck with a truckload of rhinestone gloves for a trick that won't be selling now?

[CraigMitchell]

Available for your children's birthday party - as performed for Michael Jackson:



http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainmen ... trick.html

[Francesca Moffet]

Anyone seen this yet?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hpV-NTHgAI

Who ya gonna call?

Larry King...apparently.

[Ray Eden]

I do believe in ghosts... I do. I do. I wonder when the "MJ's not really dead" rumors will start. He married the King's daughter, so why not follow the King's path in death?

Leave it to Larry King to air this kind of fluff... ah, I mean, stuff.

[Jonathan Townsend]

Undead superstar?

[Francesca Moffet]

I have succumbed to the hype and bought the Michael Jackson King of Pop CD. I am now singing along to Thriller in my office...like a numpty. :blush:

[erdnasephile]

Apparently, US Rep. Peter King (R-NY) agrees with many who have posted in this thread http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07 ... -low-life/

[Jonathan Townsend]

How long till we get a "Leave Britney Alone" type video rebuttal?

"He was a pervert, a child molester; he was a pedophile. And to be giving this much coverage to him, day in and day out, what does it say about us as a country? I just think we're too politically correct."

King, a Republican who is among the possible contenders for the seat held by Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, said Jackson "may have been a good singer" and "did some dancing," but blasted the singer as someone who could not be trusted around children.

"There's nothing good to say about this guy," King continued.

All that followed by the comic statement about leaving a child alone with a popstar - when we all know about those who can't keep their hands off the pages.

[000]

Read somewhere........

'.....my friend says he pays tribute to MJ by moonwalking to the fridge whenever he wants another sixpack of beer'

[Mark Lewis]

I also read a piece in a newspaper. It was written by a lawyer. It stated that only the people who attend the trial can judge the guilt or innocence of someone fairly. It seems there are hours of important testimony that are not included in media reports.And of course you can see the demeanor of witnesses as well as the accused. This is what the person should be judged by. And of course is by a jury. Not by the ignorant public at large who simply do not have all the facts and make decisions by viewing and reading biased and sensationalised media reports which may or may not be accurate.

The particular writer of the piece was in court throughout the trial and he was a neutral observer. He said that the evidence was very weak indeed and the verdict was quite obvious. He also explained that there is such a thing of presumption of innocence if somone hasn't been proved to be guilty. So start presuming.

Nobody to my knowledge has proven Michael guilty of a single thing. No evidence, no conviction.

I made a psychic prediction on this very forum that he would be found innocent and he was. Why? Because he WAS innocent. I know these things.............

[Richard Kaufman]

Mark, no one pays a kid's family 22 MILLION dollars to make a civil suit go away before trial unless they're guilty. The kid in that case gave a deposition in which he described Jackson's genitals in detail.

[Matt Sedlak]

Mark, no one pays a kid's family 22 MILLION dollars to make a civil suit go away before trial unless they're guilty. The kid in that case gave a deposition in which he described Jackson's genitals in detail.

That reminded me of a Dave Chappelle skit from awhile back:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/ind ... eoId=11926

[Jim Maloney]

Mark, no one pays a kid's family 22 MILLION dollars to make a civil suit go away before trial unless they're guilty. The kid in that case gave a deposition in which he described Jackson's genitals in detail.

22 Million could easily be cheaper than the cost of a high profile trial. And if you have the money, you might do it, if only to get on with your life (which was his stated reason for doing so). He was also focusing on his health, as he was dealing with a painkiller addiction at the time.

And while the kid did provide a description, it was not conclusive enough to state that it was a definitive match. There were also some significant inconsistencies in the description. The boy's father also came across as extremely manipulative -- recordings of the father made prior to any accusations were made seem to indicate that he was simply out to extort money from Jackson. He later used Sodium Amytrol, a highly controversial drug (purported to be a "truth serum", but which actually places the subject in a highly suggestive state), to coax the initial report of abuse out of his son.

There was no criminal trial because 1. the Chandler family did not pursue it and 2. a Grand Jury determined that there wasn't sufficient evidence to indicate any crime had taken place.

-Jim

[Richard Kaufman]

If the evidence was so weak, I don't think Jackson would have paid 22 million dollars.

[David Alexander]

There was no criminal trial because the victim refused to testify having received a "settlement" of $15 million. His father got $5 million.

The cost of a good defense would have been far cheaper than the reported settlement, even at the cost of several thousand dollars a day. I know the cost of lawyers in California and a good defense wouldn't have gone much above $4 or $5 million. From a defense perspective there is always the possibility that the defendant will be found guilty because you can never be certain exactly how a jury will go. Given that a guilty verdict would irreparably harm his career, it was cheaper to make a settlement to make the charges go away than to take the chance.

The problem from the prosecution side is, with celebrity defendants the prosecution begins with the jury having a false assumption that they "know" the celebrity. It's nonsense, of course, but that's part of the uphill battle to convict a celebrity of anything.

As far as Mark's quoted lawyer, if he was a defense lawyer, he would naturally come to that conclusion. A lawyer with prosecutorial experience would give a different view of the case. Neither could be impartial observers.

For an interesting read see Vincent Bugliosi's book on the OJ Simpson trial for a scathing analysis of both the prosecution and defense. While the evidence in that case supported conviction you had a particularly dumb jury and, for a variety of reasons, a half-hearted prosecution who didnt really want a conviction.