Michael Jackson rushed to hospital

shazzoom · Post by **shazzoom** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:06 pm

Lets not judge or speculate how he died,, the fact is a He was World Wide King of Pop and Icon,, and i for one will miss him making more fabulous music. He had it all, singing, songwriting, dancing and doing his videos. He was also Dad, Son, Brother, Uncle and Father,, lets not forget he has 3 children.

R.I.P MICHAEL JACKSON

For the Record i am a true Michael Jackson Fan and i have all his music and seen him in concert a couple of times.

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:46 pm

Rapunzel;1209610 wrote: No, I don't think a lawsuit can progress once one party has died. As you say, his clothes, possessions and property will be sold off and his estate will still be collecting royalties, so I imagine his kids will be okay.

Unmasked: Michael Jackson and his two oldest children Prince and Paris walk through a car park at a Los Angeles studio

Unmasked: A rare glimpse of Michael Jacksons' kids faces as they visit a recording studio | Mail OnlineThere's no way those kids are of mixed race!

shazzoom · Post by **shazzoom** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:48 pm

Dont give a toss who are his natural mother and father , as long they were loved and still will be.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:49 pm

abbey;1209777 wrote: There's no way those kids are of mixed race!

It is possible ,,, my black aunt has a white child

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:05 pm

kazalala;1209781 wrote: It is possible ,,, my black aunt has a white child

It happens....... my father was a lesbian

buttercup · Post by **buttercup** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:11 pm

I have a black friend and she married a white guy and they had a son together, beautiful little boy with blonde hair and blue eyes, kinda spooked my friend a little bit.

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:12 pm

shazzoom;1209744 wrote: Lets not judge or speculate how he died,, the fact is a He was World Wide King of Pop and Icon,, and i for one will miss him making more fabulous music. He had it all, singing, songwriting, dancing and doing his videos. He was also Dad, Son, Brother, Uncle and Father,, lets not forget he has 3 children.

R.I.P MICHAEL JACKSON

For the Record i am a true Michael Jackson Fan and i have all his music and seen him in concert a couple of times.

bravo!:guitarist:guitarist

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:18 pm

shazzoom;1209744 wrote: Lets not judge or speculate how he died,, the fact is a He was World Wide King of Pop and Icon,, and i for one will miss him making more fabulous music. He had it all, singing, songwriting, dancing and doing his videos. He was also Dad, Son, Brother, Uncle and Father,, lets not forget he has 3 children.

R.I.P MICHAEL JACKSON

For the Record i am a true Michael Jackson Fan and i have all his music and seen him in concert a couple of times. Very well said.

I am not sickened by the jokes about him on the joke thread. As others have said, it is only natural to get some jokes in any death or disaster. There are some pretty sick one's i've heard about Diana as well.

What I find astonishing is that posters can write in all conviction that he was definately a child molester calling him names such as 'Peado' where there is not a scrap of legal evidence to prove it. There is every possibility that he was blackmailed by Jordy Chandlers parents and the trial that lasted 4 months would have needed solid evidence to convince a fair jury to return a verdict of guilty. A not guilty verdict means that there was none or very little eveidence. Does anyone know the history between the Sherriff who brought the charges on MJ and MJ ? I have read a great deal on the subject and there was a history of bad feeling between the two men. If MJ had been convicted, i would not have a problem with anyone calling him a peado but the fact is there is no evidence and he was aquitted. The people who are calling him a peado are bigoted and believe that the scenario they have made up in their heads is the truth. I challenge anyone who has called him a peado on this forum to show REAL HARD evidence. Some people read newspapers and believe anything they read. There is NO evidence.

Having said all of that, i don't think MJ did himself any favours. Admitting he shared his bed with youngsters in the 'Martin Basher' interview was his downfall and it was in fact the only evidence that the Sherriff had to bring the charges. MJ went to the police voluntary. He was NEVER arrested.

MJ was a genious long before any allegations were made. Let's not forget that.

If some-one can show me proof that he molested children, then i'll believe it.

buttercup · Post by **buttercup** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:21 pm

But how could anyone prove it Oscar? The only two people who were there were the kid and MJ so you believe the kid or you believe MJ.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:27 pm

buttercup;1209901 wrote: But how could anyone prove it Oscar? The only two people who were there were the kid and MJ so you believe the kid or you believe MJ.

Exactly...... so there is a 50% chance he is totally innocent. What if he was totally innocent?

buttercup · Post by **buttercup** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:31 pm

Well i don't really want to get into it with you 'O' but kids should not be in the beds of friends who are adult -- period !!!!

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:35 pm

buttercup;1209914 wrote: Well i don't really want to get into it with you 'O' but kids should not be in the beds of friends who are adult -- period !!!! No, that's fine, i agree with you there entirely. He did not seem to see it as anything sinister.

buttercup · Post by **buttercup** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:37 pm

I know but he's the only person on the planet that thought that way.

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:41 pm

oscar;1209910 wrote: Exactly...... so there is a 50% chance he is totally innocent. What if he was totally innocent?

Why would anyone in the world think that a grown man who has a child locked in his bedroom with him and maybe in bed with him, is a totally innocent scenario?

Maybe MJ did want to be like Peter Pan and have sleepovers. :-2

But, in all honesty, a grown man - with a child - is not an innocent scenario.

Even if MJ were brain damaged in some way and had the mind of a child. But he wasn't, he was a grown man with adult urges. I work with brain-damaged children - and they still have urges! It's natural to procreate, to continue the species. The boys I work with have these urges. They have girls they like. They like to stroke the girls' hair or arms. Or they sit and rub their ... uh... bits and I have to tell them to put their hands on the table and concentrate!

MJ was a professional. He understood as an adult understands and there is no way that he could have explained having a child in his room as innocent. Even if he did nothing. The fact that the child was there is not innocent.

And I have to say that paying the childs parents an estimated $22 million is not an innocent gesture! If someone were truly innocent then surely they would fight the ruling rather than just hand over $22 million. I'm sorry but such a reaction does NOT smack of innocence.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:41 pm

buttercup;1209920 wrote: I know but he's the only person on the planet that thought that way.
I'm no physcologist but i do tend to go along the route of some experts who are of the opinion that MJ had a very child-like mentality and it is very possible that he truely did see sharing a bed with 'his friend' as an act of friendship as alot of kids do on sleep-overs.

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:42 pm

Oops! It's all already been said!

buttercup · Post by **buttercup** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:45 pm

oscar;1209923 wrote: I'm no physcologist but i do tend to go along the route of some experts who are of the opinion that MJ had a very child-like mentality and it is very possible that he truely did see sharing a bed with 'his friend' as an act of friendship as alot of kids do on sleep-overs.

Sorry, no, cant go there with you.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:45 pm

Rapunzel;1209925 wrote: Oops! It's all already been said!

We must have posted at exactly the same time. :wah:

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:49 pm

oscar;1209928 wrote: We must have posted at exactly the same time. :wah:

Yup, and on the same topic. Great minds, huh? :wah:

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:50 pm

Rapunzel;1209932 wrote: Yup, and on the same topic. Great minds, huh? :wah: It's rumoured i was seperated at birth you know. :wah:

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:54 pm

buttercup;1209927 wrote: Sorry, no, cant go there with you. Fair enough. I'm just a cynical old git who likes proof. When anyone becomes famous and especially if they have enormous wealth such as MJ, you always get the leeches. People change when money is involved and do exceptionally uncharacteristic acts all for greed. I have always believed that MJ was blackmailed by Chandlers parents. FFS....... MJ was being constantly filmed with him all over the world for several years. Where were the parents then? Sorry, but to me that stinks of blackmail.

buttercup · Post by **buttercup** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:56 pm

Do you have respect for 'childline' ?

They say children never lie.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:05 pm

buttercup;1209937 wrote: Do you have respect for 'childline' ?

They say children never lie.
I can not put childline and MJ's life in the same arena. A child phoning childline is anon. Did any of the charges and allegations brought against MJ originate from an anon call from the suppossed victem? I don't think so.

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:14 pm

oscar;1209923 wrote: I'm no physcologist but i do tend to go along the route of some experts who are of the opinion that MJ had a very child-like mentality and it is very possible that he truely did see sharing a bed with 'his friend' as an act of friendship as alot of kids do on sleep-overs.Would you have let a child of yours sleep in his bed?

buttercup · Post by **buttercup** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:15 pm

If you want to think he's innocent that's your choice. Its like i said - you are put in the position of believing the adult or the child. You believe the adult, i believe the child. Let's leave it at that

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:18 pm

abbey;1209946 wrote: Would you have let a child of yours sleep in his bed?
The truth to that answer is no, i would not. However, i say that due to the fact that he is either 50% guilty or he is 50% innocent. I would not leave it to a 50% chance and risk the consequenses, however, my point on some posters being fixated that he is a 'peado', is that there is no proof just speculation.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:19 pm

buttercup;1209947 wrote: If you want to think he's innocent that's your choice. Its like i said - you are put in the position of believing the adult or the child. You believe the adult, i believe the child. Let's leave it at that

No problem my little kilt flinger.

:)

buttercup · Post by **buttercup** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:28 pm

Lifter :rolleyes:

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:59 pm

buttercup;1209953 wrote: Lifter :rolleyes:
:wah:

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 5:38 pm

oscar;1209935 wrote: It's rumoured i was seperated at birth you know. :wah:

Really? Whereabouts? Head from neck? Right side from left side? Where? Huh?

:wah::wah::wah:

Kidding.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 5:40 pm

Rapunzel;1209998 wrote: Really? Whereabouts? Head from neck? Right side from left side? Where? Huh?

:wah::wah::wah: Brain and mouth i have been told :wah:

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 5:41 pm

oscar;1209999 wrote: Brain and mouth i have been told :wah:

:wah:

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 5:46 pm

oscar;1209999 wrote: Brain and mouth i have been told :wah:

you do have quite the mouth!:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

at least you have all your teeth ffs!:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

sharedfastlane · Post by **sharedfastlane** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 12:55 am

I haven't posted in a very long time, please excuse me chipping in!

I feel so sad that his talent/performances didn't espeoially enhance his life to a great enough extent, fabulous wealth and public adoration aside, yet each person has their own highs and lows - just not so dramatic I guess. The firework accident on the set of the Pepsi Commercial must have been horrble for him.

The way his face changed over the years is shocking. His money couldn't BUY a BETTER nose?

There is a tribute of flowers and candles laid out near the O2 and I'll go today. Just want to say Thank You to him, but he isn't there to hear it.

I appreciate he was " removed" form normalcy and my take on the " having young boys in his bed" is; I am not sure of the truth - not behaviour I'd expect any other male to get away with - but we're talking a very unusual guy. DID many from his entourage ever try to get him to " wake up " to " things".

My last point in this long spiel is: I thought myself when I had heard him say he couldn't do 50 shows, having agreed previously to a certain amount , Well who's making you? I know it's only a month or so's work and he woudln't have done a whole hour and a half stint, but it troubled me that someone dictated to him he HAD to increase his appearances to a point he was obviously unhappy with and I wished his fans could have protected him a bit. Many of them were old enough to see him as a middle aged man not just someone to scream at , treat like a King and be entertained by.

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:40 am

Jackson dies, almost takes Internet with him

I thought this was an interesting headline.

LONDON, England (CNN) -- How many people does it take to break the Internet? On June 25, we found out it's just one -- if that one is Michael Jackson.

The biggest showbiz story of the year saw the troubled star take a good slice of the Internet with him, as the ripples caused by the news of his death swept around the globe.

"Between approximately 2:40 p.m. PDT and 3:15 p.m. PDT today, some Google News users experienced difficulty accessing search results for queries related to Michael Jackson," a Google spokesman told CNET, which also reported that Google News users complained that the service was inaccessible for a time. At its peak, Google Trends rated the Jackson story as "volcanic."

As sites fell, users raced to other sites: TechCrunch reported that TMZ, which broke the story, had several outages; users then switched to Perez Hilton's blog, which also struggled to deal with the requests it received.

CNN reported a fivefold rise in traffic and visitors in just over an hour, receiving 20 million page views in the hour the story broke.

Twitter crashed as users saw multiple "fail whales" -- the illustrations the site uses as error messages -- user FoieGrasie posting, "Irony: The protesters in Iran using Twitter as com are unable to get online because of all the posts of 'Michael Jackson RIP.' Well done." The site's status blog said that Twitter had had to temporarily disable its search results, saved searches and trend topics.

Wikipedia saw a flurry of activity, with close to 500 edits made to Jackson's entry in less than 24 hours. CNET reported that by 3:15 p.m. PT, Wikipedia seemed to be "temporarily overloaded."

The Los Angeles Times, the first news organization to confirm Jackson's death, suffered outages. The site also reported that AOL's instant messenger service had been hit, quoting an AOL statement that said, "AIM was down for approximately 40 minutes this afternoon." The statement said, "Today was a seminal moment in Internet history. We've never seen anything like it in terms of scope or depth."

That was backed up by AOL consumer adviser Regina Lewis, who said that, although the numbers weren't in yet, the day should prove a historic milestone for mobile Internet traffic.

"It could go down as the biggest mobile event in history," Lewis said. She felt that was in part because people were checking news headlines from work. "People wanted to keep tabs on this story, but if you're an accountant you're supposed to be working on your spreadsheet. So they were using their personal cell phones to do so," she explained.

While the scale of response to Jackson's death might be unprecedented, the pattern of it was not, Lewis added.

"With the advent of social networking, we saw a sequence that we traditionally see around the death of celebrities," she said.

"One, people clamor for the latest news; two, they share it; three, they react; and then the next stage, which we're seeing alive and well on video sites ... are tributes. In the case of Michael Jackson and Farah Fawcett, [people have] a lot to work with in terms of images and video," she said.

By Friday morning, news sites seemed to be coping with traffic, but Jackson fan site mjfanclub.net was still performing sluggishly. Mashable.com reported that tributes to, and remarks upon, Michael Jackson's death were responsible for 30 percent of tweets.

As with any breaking piece of news on the Web, the reports of Jackson's death sparked something of a feeding frenzy -- and with that came rumors that dragged in other celebrities completely unconnected to the "King of Pop's" death.

One Wikipedia prankster wrote that Jackson had been "savagely murdered" by his brother Tito, who had strangled him "with a microphone cord."

Soon rumors spread online that movie star Jeff Goldblum had fallen from the Kauri Cliffs in New Zealand while filming his latest movie. On several search engines, "Jeff Goldblum" soon became the only non-Jackson-related term to crop up in the top 10.

The rumors forced Goldblum's publicist to issue a statement to media outlets, saying: "Reports that Jeff Goldblum has passed away are completely untrue. He is fine and in Los Angeles."

At the same time, Harrison Ford was also rumored to have fallen from a yacht off the south of France.

Web site snopes.com, which shoots down rumors, gossip and urban legends -- and how they originated -- said the likely culprit was a Web site that allows users to input celebrity names -- and then inserts them into fake templated stories (a further variant has stars dying in a plane crash).

In a sense the feeding frenzy was understandable -- Jackson's death, coming only hours after that of 1970s icon Farah Fawcett, left many Web users shocked by the news and asking what would happen next. In this febrile climate, any rumor runs the risk of being seized on, believed and treated with more credulity than usual.

The need of the professional media to be first with the news -- many did for a short time report the Goldblum rumor as fact -- adds further veracity. And, of course, the whole process is speeded up by the Web.

There is also, of course, the old adage that celebrities die in threes, with the deaths of Gianni Versace, Princess Diana and Mother Teresa in 1997 frequently held up as an example of this.

But while Diana and Teresa passed away within seven days of each other in August and September, Versace was killed in early July. Their deaths were most keenly mourned by the same broad sections of the public -- and hence were inextricably interlinked.

The Web can disseminate news -- but like any form of communication it can also help us create what we expect to see next.

Jackson dies, almost takes Internet with him - CNN.com

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:47 am

Rapunzel;1210075 wrote:

There is also, of course, the old adage that celebrities die in threes, with the deaths of Gianni Versace, Princess Diana and Mother Teresa in 1997 frequently held up as an example of this.

Just as a btw, do you think Ed McMahon is the third in this trilogy of celebs dying or do you think someone else is in line to kick the bucket? :sneaky:

Just a thought.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:49 am

I think Ed McMahon was the 3rd one. Trio of deaths in a week.

I was amazed at first hearing about the net story-and texting too, the phone services were going rampant with the amount sent about his death.

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:12 am

chonsigirl;1210083 wrote: I think Ed McMahon was the 3rd one. Trio of deaths in a week.

I was amazed at first hearing about the net story-and texting too, the phone services were going rampant with the amount sent about his death.

I agree. I think Ed McMahon was the third one too. It would be hard to deal with the death of another major celebrity. I think the internet probably could crash then.

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:13 am

Twelve facts about Michael Jackson

I thought this was interesting, especially points 3 & 5.

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Twelve facts about Michael Jackson

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:49 am

Exact Details of Michael Jackson's Death Still Unclear

Exact Details of Michael Jackson's Death Still Unclear - Celebrity Gossip | Entertainment News | Arts And Entertainment - FOXNews.com

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 7:53 am

sharedfastlane;1210040 wrote: I haven't posted in a very long time, please excuse me chipping in!

I feel so sad that his talent/performances didn't espeoially enhance his life to a great enough extent, fabulous wealth and public adoration aside, yet each person has their own highs and lows - just not so dramatic I guess. The firework accident on the set of the Pepsi Commercial must have been horrble for him.

The way his face changed over the years is shocking. His money couldn't BUY a BETTER nose?

There is a tribute of flowers and candles laid out near the O2 and I'll go today. Just want to say Thank You to him, but he isn't there to hear it.

I appreciate he was " removed" form normalcy and my take on the " having young boys in his bed" is; I am not sure of the truth - not behaviour I'd expect any other male to get away with - but we're talking a very unusual guy. DID many from his entourage ever try to get him to " wake up " to " things".

My last point in this long spiel is: I thought myself when I had heard him say he couldn't do 50 shows, having agreed previously to a certain amount , Well who's making you? I know it's only a month or so's work and he woudln't have done a whole hour and a half stint, but it troubled me that someone dictated to him he HAD to increase his appearances to a point he was obviously unhappy with and I wished his fans could have protected him a bit. Many of them were old enough to see him as a middle aged man not just someone to scream at , treat like a King and be entertained by.

Very well said.

G-man · Post by **G-man** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 3:24 pm

Odie;1209523 wrote: go ahead, make me a wager, I don't lie, first was my father, my aunt and uncle, my sister-in-laws father, my FIL, my best friends mom, my neighbours, two of them, friends of friends, distant relatives, relatives in Scotland, not sure why I am even giving you this somewhat list as it my life and its personal!:mad:

believe what you want, as I really don't care, as far as Michael Jackson, you should have read my post last night.

It's okay to care for the ones you loose, whether its family or a celebrity you grew up with.

I feel compelled to step in here... you're merely confirming that you missed her point, Odie. She's saying that you knew these individuals that were family, loved ones, lovers, etc. as opposed to a celebrity that you likely didn't know... unless you perhaps grew up in Indiana and lived down the street from Michael Jackson and his family or perhaps lived down the block from their family home in California. I may be going out on a limb here, but I'm assuming that you didn't physically know Michael Jackson?

You've got to admit that it's a bit odd to mourn celebrities that most of us never knew personally. I like a few others grew up and have been around a few celebrities for much of my life and the fact is that they're just like anyone else.

So why would we mourn some person that we've never met? Why do young girls scream, cry and faint at the sight of their favorite singer on stage? I never got into that whole pop culture thing... worrying about some celebrities personal life... I don't really care whether Brad and Jennifer get back together or whether Brad's mother prefers Jennifer over Angelina... I just don't care about these strangers, personally. If folks wanna' get all worked up about some celebrities personal life... so be it, it's got nothing to do with me. I too, don't believe that the way folks feel sad about the loss of Michael Jackson, Farrah Fawcett or any other celebrity is the same as the true feeling of loss that we have for family, loved ones, etc.

What's really going on in folks minds? Is it the fact that the death of a celebrity that we "grew up with" a reminder of our own mortality? These folks aren't gods, they're human like the rest of us, they live and die just like the rest of us. Perhaps it's about folks identifying with these celebrities for whatever reason? Perhaps folks are merely feeling selfish about the loss and just want that next album that will never come out now or one of those last fifty concerts he may or may not have had? Perhaps folks feel sorry for how things were later on in his life and now there's no chance for him to make a comeback?

I don't doubt the sincerity of the emotional outpouring of these individuals, or anything... I just find it odd and a bit interesting is all... most celebrities are a bit odd and interesting, too, but fans make them that way. To me, some of the most normal celebrities are folks like Johnny Depp, Billy Corgan, Bryan Vigerson, Axl Rose, Angelina Jolie... who shun that celebrity lifestyle and try their best to lead somewhat normal lives and consider the work they do to be just another job.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 3:47 pm

[QUOTE=G-man;1210418]

You've got to admit that it's a bit odd to mourn celebrities that most of us never knew personally. I like a few others grew up and have been around a few celebrities for much of my life and the fact is that they're just like anyone else.

QUOTE]

WHY ??? Very good question.

Celebrities come and go....... one's like MJ are not born even once in 100 years, they are only born once. They have a genius and uniqeness that sets them apart from your every day celebrity.

Who ever we favour in the celebrity world, they inspire us. MJ inspired young black men at a time when black singers were classified as 'Motown' and little else. Millions of kids all over the world wanted to dance like MJ. It's when one person can truelly inspire you to want to take to your feet and dance and inspire future children to explore their talents, that truelly was his gift.

Jagger has that affect on me. I only have to hear that music and i'm rockin where ever i am. When a man can make you do that, they are unique.

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 4:11 pm

G-man;1210418 wrote: I feel compelled to step in here... you're merely confirming that you missed her point, Odie. She's saying that you knew these individuals that were family, loved ones, lovers, etc. as opposed to a celebrity that you likely didn't know... unless you perhaps grew up in Indiana and lived down the street from Michael Jackson and his family or perhaps lived down the block from their family home in California. I may be going out on a limb here, but I'm assuming that you didn't physically know Michael Jackson?

You've got to admit that it's a bit odd to mourn celebrities that most of us never knew personally. I like a few others grew up and have been around a few celebrities for much of my life and the fact is that they're just like anyone else.

So why would we mourn some person that we've never met? Why do young girls scream, cry and faint at the sight of their favorite singer on stage? I never got into that whole pop culture thing... worrying about some celebrities personal life... I don't really care whether Brad and Jennifer get back together or whether Brad's mother prefers Jennifer over Angelina... I just don't care about these strangers, personally. If folks wanna' get all worked up about some celebrities personal life... so be it, it's got nothing to do with me. I too, don't believe that the way folks feel sad about the loss of Michael Jackson, Farrah Fawcett or any other celebrity is the same as the true feeling of loss that we have for family, loved ones, etc.

What's really going on in folks minds? Is it the fact that the death of a celebrity that we "grew up with" a reminder of our own mortality? These folks aren't gods, they're human like the rest of us, they live and die just like the rest of us. Perhaps it's about folks identifying with these celebrities for whatever reason? Perhaps folks are merely feeling selfish about the loss and just want that next album that will never come out now or one of those last fifty concerts he may or may not have had? Perhaps folks feel sorry for how things were later on in his life and now there's no chance for him to make a comeback?

I don't doubt the sincerity of the emotional outpouring of these individuals, or anything... I just find it odd and a bit interesting is all... most celebrities are a bit odd and interesting, too, but fans make them that way. To me, some of the most normal celebrities are folks like Johnny Depp, Billy Corgan, Bryan Vigerson, Axl Rose, Angelina Jolie... who shun that celebrity lifestyle and try their best to lead somewhat normal lives and consider the work they do to be just another job.

actually, it is not wrong to mourn celebrities whom we love and cherish and who grew up with.

I'm not missing the point in the slightest, god forbid the day Rod Stewart passes, I grew up with him when he first started, have seen him in concert, have all of his CD'S, poster and memorabilia.

You don't have to know someone

as family to grieve for them.

It's just what you feel.

G-man · Post by **G-man** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 6:26 pm

Rapunzel;1210131 wrote: I agree. I think Ed McMahon was the third one too. It would be hard to deal with the death of another major celebrity. I think the internet probably could crash then.

Now THAT would be a major death... even I might cry if the internet died!

:yh_rotfl

Odie;1210454 wrote: actually, it is not wrong to mourn celebrities whom we love and cherish and who grew up with.

I'm not missing the point in the slightest, god forbid the day Rod Stewart passes, I grew up with him when he first started, have seen him in concert, have all of his CD'S, poster and memorabilia.

You don't have to know someone

as family to grieve for them.

It's just what you feel.

I never suggested that it was wrong ...odd and interesting were the terms that I used... and maybe just a lil' bit nuts :yh_rotfl ...but certainly not wrong. I would never suggest to anyone that what emotion they were experiencing or feeling was wrong.

I'm not certain what it is that mourners are grieving over, but I feel it has more to do with the grievers, personally, rather than the celebrity's death. I find it interesting that folks can become so emotional over the death of someone that they don't have much of a physical connection with. It's simply not something that I can easily relate to or comprehend.

Mind you, I don't mourn quite the way that most people mourn. I feel that I'm a very emotional person, but I have difficulty in expressing my emotions... I tend to be analytical of what I'm feeling. Partly, it's simply my personality and partly it has to do with experiences in my past... I've seen a lot of disturbing things and I've experienced a lot since a very early age. Yeah, I'm probably a bit nuts, too! :yh_rotfl

Odie · Post by **Odie** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 10:12 pm

G-man;1210529 wrote: Now THAT would be a major death... even I might cry if the internet died!

:yh_rotfl

I never suggested that it was wrong ...odd and interesting were the terms that I used... and maybe just a lil' bit nuts :yh_rotfl ...but certainly not wrong. I would never suggest to anyone that what emotion they were experiencing or feeling was wrong.

I'm not certain what it is that mourners are grieving over, but I feel it has more to do with the grievers, personally, rather than the celebrity's death. I find it interesting that folks can become so emotional over the death of someone that they don't have much of a physical connection with. It's simply not something that I can easily relate to or comprehend.

Mind you, I don't mourn quite the way that most people mourn. I feel that I'm a very emotional person, but I have difficulty in expressing my emotions... I tend to be analytical of what I'm feeling. Partly, it's simply my personality and partly it has to do with experiences in my past... I've seen a lot of disturbing things and I've experienced a lot since a very early age. Yeah, I'm probably a bit nuts, too! :yh_rotfl

your not nuts, you are an emotional man just like I am an emotional woman at times, but you should reach out and feel those feelings, don't let them stay inside you. It is never good to not express your emotions as years ago I didn't, and I paid for it 2 years later. One of the shrinks I used to see had told me, you must grieve, if you don't, someone else will show up.......and, it did.

You should talk to someone and let it all out, you would be surprised just how better you will feel and you will also feel so much relief.

I never cried over MJ, I was in shock and was just stunned.

and really I shouldn't have been, as he has done nothing now for over 15 years, the only reason he had upcoming concerts was to get some money.

-its just memories I have.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 10:49 pm

I think it's interesting too, maybe linked to group hysteria. Though there can be genuine shock, and a genuine sense of loss. I couldn't myself believe the hoo haaa over the death of the late Princess of Wales, but know that for many people her death was somehow catastrophic. I can see her sons being devastated, but for everyone else surely it's a kind of enjoyable dramatic melancholy - your pulse beats faster at the hype and excitement - and to me just isn't in any kind of even vaguely similar basket to burying your own child, or husband or brother or mother.

My newspaper this week has also carried snippets about the body of some unnamed baby found at a rubbish dump, the death of a dad who got caught in a crossfire as he bought hamburgers for his kids, a teen who just couldn't take any more bullying. For some reason, these deaths touch me very much more.

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Sun Jun 28, 2009 3:51 am

Latest updates:

Doctor who ‘injected Demerol’ joined Jackson just 13 days ago

Doctor who ¿injected Demerol¿ joined Jackson just 13 days ago | Mail Online

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... s-ago.html

'No, Daddy, No!' screamed Michael Jackson's children as manager broke news of death | Mail Online

So sad :-1

sharedfastlane · Post by **sharedfastlane** » Sun Jun 28, 2009 9:28 am

oscar;1210179 wrote: Very well said.

:yh_wink

Flip, what WOULD we do if the Internet died? Heh,heh.

Personally there was a lot of Michael's performances that didn't do anything for me, but looking through his back catalogue over the last few days I re-discovered the , for me , great songs that grabbed me. " Beat it", " Black or White" , " Earth Song". I didn't like his strange look later in life, hated the tipped too low hat and the daft mask, but when he wasn't over spangled I loved his dancing.( the crotch grabbing grew old fast!) As I grew up men dancing on T.V. were rather embarrassing, not particularly masculine. I think sometimes music can take us to another place and sometimes M.J. and I would be the same in my mind's eye. I could dream about being on stage and being so alive, so sexy. I didn't try to start a band as a teen but I did plenty of dancing in my bedroom repeating my favcourite records at high blast. Also society can make it hard for us to age, with thoughtless comments and mockery of the old, did my fair share as a young person,and I wonder if some of his pain in later life was the knowledge he was loved for his appearance which would change and his moves which would be hard to keep up in mid-life. I suppose he could have helped launch up and coming young talent but to continue as he had been would have been hard. He became Wacko Jacko.

I think, too, for black people he seemed to get through the briar patch of racism as an entertainer and became properly high profile, bit strange for them he then became "white".

The O2 Arena drew a lot of critiscism for being an expensive white elephant, but it was an exciting thought that M.J. would come there.

And yes I think the pulse quickens when a celebrity attracts international attention, but then at times in society we can't be free to talk to people in the street or speak our mind against anti-social behaviour or express our emotions about private stuff just when we need to. So I think it gets transposed a bit onto familiar figures.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Jun 28, 2009 9:37 am

sharedfastlane;1210689 wrote: :yh_wink

Flip, what WOULD we do if the Internet died? Heh,heh.

Personally there was a lot of Michael's performances that didn't do anything for me, but looking through his back catalogue over the last few days I re-discovered the , for me , great songs that grabbed me. " Beat it", " Black or White" , " Earth Song". I didn't like his strange look later in life, hated the tipped too low hat and the daft mask, but when he wasn't over spangled I loved his dancing.( the crotch grabbing grew old fast!) As I grew up men dancing on T.V. were rather embarrassing, not particularly masculine. I think sometimes music can take us to another place and sometimes M.J. and I would be the same in my mind's eye. I could dream about being on stage and being so alive, so sexy. I didn't try to start a band as a teen but I did plenty of dancing in my bedroom repeating my favcourite records at high blast. Also society can make it hard for us to age, with thoughtless comments and mockery of the old, did my fair share as a young person,and I wonder if some of his pain in later life was the knowledge he was loved for his appearance which would change and his moves which would be hard to keep up in mid-life. I suppose he could have helped launch up and coming young talent but to continue as he had been would have been hard. He became Wacko Jacko.

I think, too, for black people he seemed to get through the briar patch of racism as an entertainer and became properly high profile, bit strange for them he then became "white".

The O2 Arena drew a lot of critiscism for being an expensive white elephant, but it was an exciting thought that M.J. would come there.

And yes I think the pulse quickens when a celebrity attracts international attention, but then at times in society we can't be free to talk to people in the street or speak our mind against anti-social behaviour or express our emotions about private stuff just when we need to. So I think it gets transposed a bit onto familiar figures.
Again very well said.

It's very easy to dub him Whacko but i do believe amny of the stories about his eccentricity were tabloid inventions.

As we sit in our houses thinking about going to work and can we afford that holiday this year, we can not even begin to comprehend a world where a kid is globally famous at the age of 8 yrs old. He just has not had a normal life in any extreme. He has been surrounded all his life by staff, promoters and adoring fans. Is it any wonder he grew up a little odd?

I think the outpouring of grief for him is also always that fascination that the world has had about his life. It's been nothing short of a freak show over the years with the world looking on to see what he was going to do next. When the world has that deep fascination for a celeb, they crave the intrigue of knowing every gory detail. Much of his life was so secret that it is that which adds to the enigma of MJ.