[b]Media Fixated on Nonsense? – MJEOL Bullet #49[/b] The following is a quote from the new Michael Jackson 60 Minutes interview with Ed Bradley:

MJ: Of course. Of course. Why not? If you’re gonna be a pedophile, if you’re gonna be Jack, the Ripper, if you’re gonna be a murderer, it’s not a good idea.

Here, Michael Jackson clearly knows that if you are a terrible person who is breaking the law, then it is NOT a “good idea” to have any child sleeping anywhere near you. The quote continues:

“…That I am not. That’s how we were raised. And I met—I didn’t sleep in the bed with the child. Even if I did, it’s ok. I slept on the floor. I gave the bed to the child.”

Again, Jackson is clearly stating that, contrary to the way sensationalistic media whores have tried to spin his words, he has not even slept in the same bed with this accuser, let alone molested him. Jackson also draws parallels to who should and should not have sleepovers, however infrequent, by distinguishing himself from a person that is breaking the law. Thus, Jackson is not a child molester or a murderer, so in theory, it is “ok” to sleep in the same bed or in the same room with a child. During the interview, there is the sense that he is speaking more in theory than about his actual behavior following this ordeal. As it is, I don’t give a flying flip about whether or not Jackson thinks it is “ok” in theory to sleep in the same bed with a child. He is not on trial for that, nor is he on trial for his idealistic views. We have to look at the facts which are that both he and this accuser have independently confirmed that he and Jackson [b][u]did not[/u][/b] sleep in the same bed with each other. So, those dirty-minded individuals and judgmental, holier-than-thou hypocrites–who want to use Jackson’s proximity to the child as proof of his guilt—need to find another misguided argument for which to beat Jackson over the head. They, collectively, can stick a fork in themselves for wanting to project their own fears of what’s appropriate or inappropriate ONTO Michael Jackson. As a result of the suspicion, however, Jackson has put in precautions—like making sure there is adult supervision or at least a third party present at all times when he was with this accuser and his family–as his lawyer Mark Geragos reveals in the interview. This, however, leads to an entire set of other questions that should be asked. For example, is there a written rule which states that all molestation must take place in a bedroom? The molester’s bedroom, at that?? People and most news media cannot see the forest for the trees in this argument. They are focused, like a laser pointing the wrong way, on something that [i]should[/i] be of very little consequence in the scheme of the big picture. These NORMAL people, who are content on buying into the media’s story, should be asking themselves at least three very important questions: 1. What the hell kind of molester molests 1 kid every 10 years? 2. Does a child molester need a bedroom to molest a kid? If not, then why am I so fixated on the “bedroom” issue where Jackson is concerned? 3. If Jackson is never alone with these children, how is it possible that molestation can take place? What is appropriate and inappropriate, and who should decide? I think it’s inappropriate for unmarried people to be living together. I think it’s inappropriate to have a mouth full of platinum teeth (insert name of hip-hop artist here). I think it’s inappropriate for parents to let their children drink in their house because they are too scared that their kid is going to go out and get drunk at some party. I think it’s inappropriate to beat and ridicule people who are seen as “nerds” and “geeks.” I think it’s inappropriate to stick your 2 year old child into public daycare. I think it’s inappropriate to discipline children by hitting them. I think it’s inappropriate for your car to cost more than your house. Now, with that said, the things I find inappropriate are all things that NORMAL people do every day! The world is not and should not revolve around what I think is inappropriate. Thus, Michael Jackson’s idealistic behavior should NOT be subjected to my or anyone else’s approval, as long as he is not breaking the law. As for the age argument which so many love to throw out: Show me a NORMAL 45 year old man that has lived a life, had the same sensitivities, respect, trust and vulnerabilities, and who has grown up like Jackson. Name one. If you can’t, you’re not alone. I don’t even know a man who is as nurturing, let along cares enough about kids to the point where he will take the heat of suspicion if that means a kid’s life could be saved. The bottom line is Jackson cares enough about children to take on all of society’s nonsensical suspicions if that means a kid could have a better life. And for that, we’re supposed to dog him about what’s inappropriate behavior in our sick society? I don’t think so. -MJEOL

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *