Jackson's autopsy results revealed

[Main Street]

Nevertheless, Jackson's personal conduct did not meet even the common standard of decency. Much of his personal life centered around (prescribed) drugs  and an obsession with children and childhood. By his own admission, Jackson repeatedly "slept" with unrelated children at his mansion in "Neverland". Perhaps as a form of compensation, those children and their families enjoyed luxurious benefits.

Are courts with juries the only way in which someone may be recognized as a pedophile? Is there no common definition that might apply based
on undisputed facts? if this was a priest would such leeway be given by the public? Nowadays pedophilia is high profile. Everyone is sensitive about it.

So if you sleep in the same bed as (an unrelated) child, you are a paedophile?

Perhaps not - but you'd be hard pushed to find anyone who'd find that sort of behaviour acceptable.

But behaviour not being acceptable is a long way from behavious being criminal.

As somebody said on the previous Wacko thread, society seems to look for the badness in people rather than goodness/innocence.

Kids generally love sleepovers, whether it be with their parents or their friends.
My belief is that is all this was. Innocent. Unacceptable, naive and idiotic, but no harm meant.

From what I read there was no accusation of sexual intercourse, no physical evidence of abuse.

The accusations were of inappropriate touching, something that could not be proved, one person's word against another, so impossible for any of us to know the truth. But when I saw him interviewed on the subject he convinced me that he did no wrong to any child.

As for Gandhi. That's a new one for me!

These were the actions of a 40 yo man
You have a belief strongly based on one interview with him.
Fine
If these allegations were about a priest or an adult in charge of boy scouts on a camping trip,  would you have a different perspective?

[ziggysego]

Another famous public figure Mohandas Ghandhii has never been found guilty of incestuous pedophilia in the courts, but does that mean that people cannot consider well documented and undisputed facts regarding his life lead to the inescapable conclusion that he was not
always the saint that he has been cracked up to be. Would it be wrong to call Mohandas Gandhi a pedophile even though no court of law ever
convicted him of that? He has been given a lot of leeway.

Huh, where did that come from?

Have I missed something, or were their rumours about Ghandhi's personal life?

No rumours,, but substantial facts.

Gandhi took the vow of brahmacharya, which means not only complete chastity but the elimination of sexual desire in his middle 30's.
He propagated this image and succeeded  in elevating his image in the eyes of many Indian people to something akin to sainthood.
It is well documented that Gandhi slept with naked teen-aged girls  including his 13 yo niece.
Gandhi claimed that it was to bolster his "self-control".
His personal life was beset with child abuse allegations and adultery with 12 year old girls.
Quite a lot revealed by his grandsons
"Sexual Antics of Gandhi:" An anthology or research based on the books by Gandhi's grandsons.
"Gandhi's Girls":- very comprehensive Time Magazine article.

Relevance is that that many people chose not to have their image of this man besmirched by these facts.

First I've heard of this. If it is fact as you say, then it completely changes my opinions of him.

[Hound]

You have a belief strongly based on one interview with him.
Fine
If these allegations were about a priest or an adult in charge of boy scouts on a camping trip,  would you have a different perspective?

Based on one interview, the fact that there was no physical evidence, and that the allegations seemed to have arisen some time after the alleged events took place.

What are your beliefs based on?

[ludermor]

As somebody said on the previous Wacko thread, society seems to look for the badness in people rather than goodness/innocence.

Kids generally love sleepovers, whether it be with their parents or their friends.
My belief is that is all this was. Innocent. Unacceptable, naive and idiotic, but no harm meant.

From what I read there was no accusation of sexual intercourse, no physical evidence of abuse.

As i said in the MJ thread if he wasnt sexually active then it might have some credance 9not saying that i would approve), but the man had 3 kids so obviously had some sexual experiance. The sleepover that kids love dont generally ( i hope) involve people with sexual activity or im sure the parents wouldnt allow it!
Hound if you had a kid would you let MJ join them in a sleep over?

[jimbo]

As somebody said on the previous Wacko thread, society seems to look for the badness in people rather than goodness/innocence.

Kids generally love sleepovers, whether it be with their parents or their friends.
My belief is that is all this was. Innocent. Unacceptable, naive and idiotic, but no harm meant.

From what I read there was no accusation of sexual intercourse, no physical evidence of abuse.

As i said in the MJ thread if he wasnt sexually active then it might have some credance 9not saying that i would approve), but the man had 3 kids so obviously had some sexual experiance. The sleepover that kids love dont generally ( i hope) involve people with sexual activity or im sure the parents wouldnt allow it!
Hound if you had a kid would you let MJ join them in a sleep over?

3 very very white kids!!!

[ludermor]

Cant deny that.

[ziggysego]

Wait a minute....... isn't MJ white?? 

[jimbo]

Wait a minute....... isn't MJ white?? 

sureheis

[Main Street]

You have a belief strongly based on one interview with him.
Fine
If these allegations were about a priest or an adult in charge of boy scouts on a camping trip,  would you have a different perspective?

Based on one interview, the fact that there was no physical evidence, and that the allegations seemed to have arisen some time after the alleged events took place.

What are your beliefs based on?

You have a strange manner of not answering a direct question.
My contention is MJ was allowed a lot of leeway because he was a pop celeb. My question is  very simple, would you have a different perspective
about the same admission and allegations, that an adult in charge of boy scouts on a camping trip admitted to have slept with boys on that camping trip regularily, gave gifts to boys. And  a few cases against the hypothetical Boy Scout leader, including the evidence, did not come to court because the main accuser was paid off.

[Seamus]

Adams  "thinking out loud "was part stimulated after reading a report in the Sun. He peddled a conspiracy, when the known and established facts in this case alone make bizarre reading. Adams did not add anything of substance to the event except to push his own agenda just as you are pushing your conspiracy agendas,

Your ignorance of Mike Adams is obvious and then you go on your own conspiracy rant.

Disappointed that your Chappaquiddick bait did not catch the fish you expected?

[Puckoon]

Main street,
I suppose the benefit of the doubt is given by some of us due to the insight offered into jacksons own childish nature by the media and in particular, the Martin bashir interview. If I was on a jury, and the evidence presented to me was what hound references, I'd have found him not guilty. Stupid, childish, naive and poorly advised yes, but nit guilty.

As for your question about a priest, well I suppose given the accurate history in this country, my first reaction would be typically knee jerk. I'd probably know a lot less about the lifestyles and habits of a random priest than one of the most documented figures in the world, so the comparison while it makes a point, doesn't really stand.

[Puckoon]

By the way, is there really a book called "the sexual antics of ghandi"? That's fecking funny shit right there.

[muppet]

Main street,
I suppose the benefit of the doubt is given by some of us due to the insight offered into jacksons own childish nature by the media and in particular, the Martin bashir interview. If I was on a jury, and the evidence presented to me was what hound references, I'd have found him not guilty. Stupid, childish, naive and poorly advised yes, but nit guilty.

As for your question about a priest, well I suppose given the accurate history in this country, my first reaction would be typically knee jerk. I'd probably know a lot less about the lifestyles and habits of a random priest than one of the most documented figures in the world, so the comparison while it makes a point, doesn't really stand.

Would you not ask which priest?

It should be about reality rather than perceptions.

[heganboy]

pharmaceutical drugs- as opposed to the other sort of drug ?

Mike Adams was thinking out loud, far better than following blindly.  My point is that more people should do likewise and not be afraid of the probable ridicule that may accompany it.

is the only option to thinking out loud following blindly?

I know full well that the vast majority of people disagree with my opinions on world affairs. I completely understand as I too was conditioned. It's the opposite as it empowers me, something that you are incapable of understanding going by your responses thus far

first up- I'm not sure that we have seen much of your opinion on world affairs.
Conditioned isn't really the word you're looking for - lazy is probably closer.
I'm also not sure how you feel I am incapable of understanding that you believe your world view empowers you- as concepts go its not really what you would call the most complex now is it?

This is probably the first time you have heard of Mike Adams yet you have already judged him.

mike adams and his ilk have been peddling a pared down version of the truth for a long time. He falls into many of the same category of snake oil vendor as many of the pharma companies he lambasts. He did not cure himself of diabetes either, he simply controlled his diet and health so that his insulin levels were controlled by diet and exercise rather than drugs- this is not a cure. And yes I judged him but thats mostly because I went to his health ranger website first to see what he had to say about himself rather than what you have to say about him.

Funny how you call me a conspiracy theorist when you believe in one of the biggest conspiracy theories of them all, the official 911 fairytale. Hopefully you are not one of the people that still believes in the Oswald "lone nut theory". Then there's global warming, now called climate change. What do you thing of the Cap and Trade Bill passed in the House and now heading for the Senate soon to be signed into law by the messiah Abomination? The crap is hitting us between the eyes yet some still cannot see.

Ah is this the world view you were talking about? where to begin?
the official 911 fairytale? dont get me started- or if you do please at least read popular mechanics- there's a lot unexplained yes- there is insufficient evidence for your conspiracy as yet.

Oswald- lone nut- physically impossible- next
global warming- cap and trade- what's your point? did the dinosaurs farts cause the ice age, planets and all spacebodies go through phases and cycles- or maybe you're telling me that God created the world in 6 days four thousand years ago?
Messiah abomination- come on- you're making this too easy- are you referring to Barack Obama? what are you implying?
the crap- oh yes, there is crap all right...



Oh and I think its the huffing rather than calling bullshit thats the issue

[balladmaker]

...and did you know that MJ stopped for a KFC in Blanchardstown, Dublin, in late 2006.....gem of a story and true.