On some people’s SKEPTICISM over Michael’s BEDROOM ISSUES
Great. Skeptic has just called me wacky saying that all Michael Jackson’s fans are nutty. Sort of an honor I would say – reminds me of Jesus’s desciples who were also crucified following their teacher…
Well, this kind remark shows me that this blog which was temporarily occupied by my numerous well-wishers should be requested back and taken solely into my hands again. And the first question to deal with will be exactly the one asked by Skeptic concerning why Michael allowed children into his bed:
“There’s no way to go round the issue – Michael was partly to blame for this. If he hadn’t slept in the same bed as that boy then all of this would not have happened. Him being the adult – he should have set some boundaries. One could argue this was down to his naivity – however after 1993 he should never have let a child sleep in his room, period.
If your child said to you that they had been molested and you knew they had slept in the same room as the alleged abuser – would it be absurd to believe that they might be telling the truth? …I don’t think so.
Fact is, he wasn’t just accused twice but 5 times (that I definately know of – this is stated in the Aphrodite Jones True Crimes documentary) – so you have to ask yourself why didn’t he stop allowing children to sleep in his bedroom? A lot of people keep saying that people who believe he molested boys have no foundation – but as you can see, what I have said above raises some doubt.”
Let me tell you one thing first – no matter what great proof of Michael’s innocence is found in this blog or anywhere else NOTHING will ever convince the skeptics of Michael’s innocence if they don’t want to believe it.
Skepticism is a way of life, it is a stance taken once and forever, a comfortable couch from which a choosy idler picks at the gifts brought to him by a hardworking researcher. It is a capricious laziness waiting to be entertained with facts of 24 carat value only – but even if it gets them it will still yawn at all the boredom of it and ask for more facts, miracles and overseas treasures.
“What about this boy? And that boy? And what about that maid who worked at Neverland for half a minute? And about that passerby who wanted to make a couple of millions from some trash lying on the ground? And what about that journalist who showed somebody’s dirty underwear on TV? Oh, you think she took it from the first rubbish bin? Prove it pleeeeease, or otherwise I won’t be convinced”…
This won’t do, dear skeptic. Sometimes people need to think on their own and decide for themselves, for ex. whether it is possible to believe at all a person who is capable of such unbelievable public ‘underwear’ tricks. The answers you get in the process of thinking are incomparable to anything which is given to you ready-made. No magician will ever be able to prove to you anything which you haven’t earned yourself and received free of charge without working.
Thinking together – this is what is awaiting you now. Don’t expect any facts to be put into your mouth any longer – you’ve had so many of them that even half the amount would be enough to prove Michael’s complete innocence and convince any nitwit that Michael’s harassment by the media and prosecution was deliberate – meant to drown him in the mud in somebody else’s interests.
You mentioned five Michael’s accusers. Actually I don’t remember five of them but let it be the way you say it – in Michael’s case the number is of NO importance anyway.
Why is the number of accusers not important in Michael’s case? It’s because he should have had hundreds of them considering his lifestyle and all his hospitality, generosity and trust he had in people flocking into his house and living there as if it were their own. Yes, one would expect a whole crowd of them which surprisingly he didn’t have …
By the way how many accusers did a self-confessed pedophile Thomas O’Carroll have? None as far as we know??? But if the experience is there where are the actual victims? Why did they have to jail him for keeping children porn only which was found not even in his own, but his friend’s (Anglican minister) house? Do you remember me telling you why? Because according to the police Thomas O’Carroll and his friend were very frequent visitors to Eastern Europe where they gained their pedophilic experience and returned to the UK innocent as babies to share their impressions and photos at numerous pedophile sites.
Do you see any difference between these two types of behavior or is it all the same to you? I mean one being completely OPEN and the other being completely CLOSED and SECRETIVE?
Isn’t it one thing to have a couple accusers in a situation when a criminal hushes up a crime in one place, gets a job in another, leaves numerous dirty traces here and there and finally disappears with no clue as to his whereabouts ? Or lives his life quietly as a mouse presenting to the world the standard picture of a completely normal man so that no one ever, never notices anything at all? God forbid inviting any children to his home! (as if it can be done only at home…)
But isn’t it another thing to have a couple of accusers in a situation when a person speaks about his love for children openly, gives them free access to his rooms and says to the sheer horror of his supporters that he will not drive a child out of his bed if he accidentally crawls there – as if inviting the money-greedy applicants to accuse him of every unspeakable crime?
Twenty accusers (not that Michael had them!) in such a situation would be a mere nothing as compared to one real victim of a real criminal whose ‘activities’ are so covered up that even their immediate neighbors would never know for decades what kind of hell is going on behind that fence of theirs…
You asked why he allowed children into his room at all.
Do you want me to answer? Or will you try it yourself just for once? As to me I can give you a dozen reasons which you won’t believe anyway, so I really don’t know whether the job is worth doing…
Well, I am the only child in the family, and I don’t have five brothers, and I’ve never tried to live with them all my childhood and adolescent years in one room in a small house or at a hotel. If I did I would probably like all the noise and commotion it brings about and would be even frightened of the stillness of the night – especially after the roar of the concert I’ve just given. If this was my life experience I would probably want other people to stay at night with me and replace them with full-size mannequins if real people were not available to me for some reason.
But since my life experience is different my habits are different too and I like to enjoy a little quiet for my sleep. But again what I feel is of no importance at all because I have my life and Michael had his.
Why didn’t he have a woman by his side? A different one after each concert as some of us would prefer? Well, having one and the same girl would be committing himself too much and would be verging on a marriage already (he did practice it though with LMP when it came to that). Having a different one each time could end up in reading the Bible to them every night (remember that beautiful story of him being locked by his brothers with two prostitutes and the effect it had on all the three?). Having sex with someone new, glamorous, but money-greedy could result in a grandiose story in the next morning’s press, while not having sex with the same girl could result in a twice as grandiose story in the same morning press. No, whichever way you look at it, it doesn’t work out…
What about having a male friend accompanying him on a tour? Well-well, shall I do it for you or will you do the job yourself elaborating on the beauty of the situation and its impressive media consequences?
My last suggestion is a relative, let us say a girl (to avoid suspicion of a male-boy love), say, a niece some 15 years… no, 10 years…. no, better 6 years old…. No good either? AGAIN? Oh, I see your point… Well, Michael would probably not be too frantic about the idea anyway as keeping company with girls isn’t so much fun – they like playing dolls and things like that, no climbing trees, no water fights, no nothing…
A careful scrutiny of all the candidates leaves us with guys like Macauley Culkin as the only choice for a companion – this way you are guaranteed a hundred pranks a day, not a moment of quiet any more, fun round-the-clock and numerous common interests like throwing water balloons from the balcony and so on.
You wonder why he needed any companions during his tours at all? And why did he take his own children everywhere he went? Do you take your children with you each time you go on a business trip? By the way have you ever spent half a year all alone in a 3-room suite of different hotels while being on a tour – sorry, business trip?
Shall I remind you of the funny remark Dr. Klein made to Larry King about Michael’s habits when they were on a tour and his whole office had to sleep together with Michael to make him fall sleep? (“Once we were on tour with him, we were in Hawaii. He couldn’t get to sleep, so me and my whole office went to sleep in the room with him”). What a ridiculous method of fighting sleeplessness none of us ever heard before…
But it was nevertheless this method that Michael evidently used when they were in Las Vegas with June Chandler, Jordan and Lily – you’ll be surprised to know that the first night all of them slept in ONE room of their three-room suite as June Chandler described it in her testimony:
Q. Now, when you got to Las Vegas, did you have — obviously you had a room —
A. Correct… Well, there were approximately three bedrooms in that suite at the Mirage Hotel. Lily and I were staying in one bedroom, Jordie had another bedroom, and Michael had another bedroom.
Q. — in The Mirage. And who was in your room when you first got there? Who was staying in your room?
A. Jordan, myself, Lily and Michael.
Q. All in the same room?
So was it because of his sleeplessness that he always needed some companions around him? WHAT A GREAT VERSION I HAVE HERE – and mind it that it is also a much more grounded one than those horror fairy-tales told before me by thousands of Michael’s detractors.
I know I didn’t convince you (I was prepared for that), and these reflections were not really for you, skeptic. They were meant for those who even at the age of 80 can still remember what it is like to be playful in life and not take it too seriously…
Finally some of you say he should have stopped “it” after 1993.
What EXACTLY should he have stopped, please? Hugging a child? Kissing him/her on the cheek? Allowing him to watch TV in his bed and fall asleep there? And why should he have stopped it? Let those who are guilty stop their atrocities… Why should the non-guilty stop anything at all? Because someone with a dirty mind demands it – even in spite of the fact that the children and their parents look forward to all the joy and willingly participate in it?
Was Michael’s home and life in general a public theatre which the audience hungrily watched and hissed at in case they didn’t like the play?
If so, why don’t they hiss and throw rotten tomatoes now at those who commit REAL crimes against children? Why do they let them write BOOKS and recommend their filth as a must read to normal human beings? Why do they keep shy silence when someone ‘renowned’ speaks of these crimes as sheer POETRY, says that ALL of us are ‘like that’ and propagates this practice at every corner as something ‘rich and rewarding’ for everyone to try?
These are just a couple of questions for your homework…
P.S. As a special bonus for skeptics here are two articles to prove that firstly, there were really more than two accusers in Michael’s life and secondly, that the craziness of it all is simply unbeatable:
1) The first accuser claimed (among other things) that Jackson subjected him to unnecessary cosmetic surgery, burned, tortured, beat him, sexually assaulted him for 12 years by the year 2008, had him ejaculate into a jar to later use his semen for impregnating his wife Debbie and also stole songs from him. The case was dismissed after the applicant failed to show up for the commencement of the trial: http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/entertainment/lawsuit-against-michael-jackson-dismissed_10012984.html
2) The second accuser claimed emotional and physical trauma as he was kidnapped and molested by the singer at gunpoint for several days in New Orleans while all this time Jackson was in California receiving an award from President Reagan and rehearshing for his Victory Tour in 1984: http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2006-04-18-jackson-follow-up_x.htm?csp=34
The craziness Michael went through is unbelievable…………