Friday, July 10, 2009

"A talent for lies and abuse"

This article in yesterday's The Australian pretty much encapsulates my thoughts on Michael Jackson, which I think makes a very good read in the current climate of selective amnesia about the man's accomplishments. Forensic psychiatrist Robert M. Kaplan writes:
Jackson had been successful in achieving his most important goal: claiming the mantle of victimhood as justification for leading an exploitative and predatory

People talk about MJ as if he was some kind of saint, an image he carefully nurtured with his Christ-and-the-children-type hype. If, like me you're sick of everyone's defences and rationalising of MJ's behaviour, check out the full article.


Kim said...

For those who might want to read some other views on Michael Jackson, try Ishmael Reed's, "The Persecution of Michael Jackson":

Also read Mary A. Fischer's article, "Was Michael Jackson framed?" which was written after he was first accused of being a paedophile:

The article in The Australian makes the claim that Jackson used so much mercury to lighten his skin it made him bald. Where is the evidence? Jackon's dermatologist told the New York times in 1993 that he'd been treating Jackson for the skin disease vitiligo, a disease that causes loss of pigmentation.

Check out this 9 minute doco on You Tube which makes a compelling case in Jackson's favour:

Paul Martin said...

The idea that Jackson was persecuted because he was born black is just preposterous.

Kim said...

I don't agree with everything Reed says, but I watched Capturing the Friedmans a few days before MJ died. The parallels between the police investigations of that family and of MJ are striking and disturbing. Far more disturbing than his eccentric behaviour.

I also find it disturbing that lies about MJ taking drugs to change his skin colour are being perpetuated in the MSM without challenge.

Anonymous said...

I don't think anyone paints Michael Jackson a saint but he was certainly different. If he had been a woman showing that much affection for kids and letting them stay over her house, then it would have been fine but a man is unacceptable.

Anonymous said...

the only ones with selective amnesia are the non-fans who seem to want to tear him down to shreds even after he has died. No child abuse allegations were proven and yet he is still guilty. How can this be so? If, as a journalist yourself, you did some research on the backgrounds of the TWO who tried to sue him, you will discover plenty of dirt much more sickening that anything about Michael Jackson's eccentric behaviour. There is even reports that the kid who tried to sue him first in 1993 is considering coming out claiming his case were based on lies and now that he is older and Jackson is dead, he wants to set the record straight. Watch this space but, unfortunately, some people like you, Paul, will still try him as a pedophile.

Paul Martin said...

Anonymous@4:54PM, that's a good point. I have strong paternal feelings towards children and related at least partially to MJ's apparent affection for children. Quite honestly, though, I'd have serious misgivings about a woman having the same attitude that MJ did. It went beyond affection. To what? Who knows?

People get worked up one way or the other (and I've seen it on both camps) and we may never know. Maybe those boys will come out and say it was lies. Maybe others will come out in 10 or more years and claim they were also abused.

Anonymous@5:18PM, I haven't tried anyone. I've read an article that dispassionately presents things as I see them. People have legitimate concerns about the man; why do others get so hot under the collar?