On 22 Apr 2006, PamelaKay@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Pam is totally full of ****)
posted some news:10584-444B1D2E-558@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Tattoo says>"Most radio stations don't care about Jackson these days,
> at least not the big mainstream outlets."
>
> That's true because of what the programmers have decided to do on
> their own. These people lie and say that the public doesn't want to
> hear Michael's music, yet, they make the decision. It has crap to do
> with what the public wants. The **** that they play on the radio is
> what they decide to play and THEN the public becomes absorbed with it,
> get's used to it and then requests it. It is not because the music is
> that good. Mainstream radio did the same thing to Madonna with her
> American Life(I think that's the name of it) album. They decided that
> they weren't going to play it. Her fans were going crazy because these
> were the very same fans who had been on MJ fan boards telling us that
> it was NOT a conspiracy that radio stations weren't playing Michael.
> Those same fans began to change their tune when it happened to
> Madonna.
>
> I for one am hoping that his new album has a strong R&B vibe to it as
> Invincible did. It was because of the R&B radio and R&B fans that
> Invincible did as well as it did. The concentrated and contrived
> negativity affected the pop audience because they DEPEND on what
> critics say. Most didn't even give the album a chance because they sat
> back and waited and digested what the critics said. R&B audiences went
> by what they heard played on the radio. They liked the songs and went
> out and bought the album. Those same people, a majority of them
> non-fans, STILL say that Invincible was one of Michael's best albums.
> Because of R&B's embrace of "Butterflies", "Break of Dawn", "Heaven
> Can Wait", and YRMW, the album sold over 2 million copies in the US
> alone; and this was with non-stop daily negativity from a media and
> industry who were intent on destroying Michael because of what he said
> about Mottola. Anyone who believes or says otherwise is in serious
> denial. It was evident out-of-the-box that something was wrong with
> the promotion of Invincible. It was evident that the non-stop
> negativity was planned/calculated. Even during the MSG Tribute
> concerts, there was not one commercial about Michael's new album.
> Now, I dare anyone to tell me THAT was normal for a record company to
> do for its BIGGEST artist on the eve of his release. By this time,
> even Michael realized that Mottola/Sony was leaking negative info
> through Friedbrain and others. That is why his lawyer said that
> Michael had tried to talk to Mottola for over 6 months and he wouldn't
> talk to him. Michael had to eventually "go over his head" and talk
> directly to the the Japanese head of Sony. THAT is what got Mottola
> tossed out on his head and nothing else.
>
> Michael is not tainted by the trial. The fact that a certain group of
> people didn't get what THEY wanted is what's wrong. These people want
> to try and ****tray Michael as doing something wrong when he didn't.
> They WANTED him to be found guilty to fit their agenda. When that
> didn't happen, they had to eat crow and are still eating crow. They
> are angry that there plan didn't work. Their plan was to have Michael
> in jail so they could just waltz in and take everything. THAT didn't
> happen and THEY are angry. Most aware fans KNEW that their were two
> sides of Michael-the child-like persona(not contrived) and the
> everyday,normal, guy side that LM, his friends and family talked
> about. It was ignorance on the part of the media and others who
> thought that he ONLY had one side to his personality. It was ignorance
> that caused people to think that just because he loved children and
> related to them that he lived every second of his life like that.
> Quincy Jones ALWAYS said that there were two sides to Michael-the side
> that related to children and the side that acted like an 83 year old
> or who could change to his serious side. The media and public
> evidently weren't able to discern that a person CAN have two sides.
> The media crafted this a***ual image of Michael and were shocked that
> he looked at adult material, just like any other normal man. It is not
> his fault that a bunch of low-life grifter thugs went through his
> belongings. It is his fault that he was too nice and kind to that TP
> trash. If he had thrown these creeps out into the street, he would
> have been better off. Alas, that is not his nature.
>
> There was nothing that showed Michael ALLOWED the grifters access to
> alcohol and adult material. There was plenty to show that these thugs
> took it upon themselves to go through his belongings and to go through
> his wine cellar. Michael was not at Neverland when these low-lifes
> went through his wine cellar. He was not responsible for these thugs
> when he was not there, their mama, JaNUT was. It is so stupid for
> anyone to blame him for keeping an eye on those rugrats when it is the
> parent's responsibility. Of course, JaNUT was off SUCKering-in(pun
> intended) Maj. Jackson, so she didn't care what her kids did. After
> Michael rejected her,she HAD to find someone else who would fall for
> her bull****.
>
> There is no way in hell that I would not keep an eye on what MY
> children were doing. I am obsessed when it comes to keeping an eye on
> my children(when they were young) AND granchildren. I don't allow
> anything to get by.Therefore, all of this bull**** about Michael
> "allowing" these thugs access to alcohol and adult material is just
> that-bull****. These people were guests and they took advantage of his
> hospitality. It was JaNUT's responsiblity to look after her own kids.
> Of course, these thugs had already been exposed to drinking and "****"
> before they ever set foot at Neverland. That is why they were so
> familiar with those type of things.
>
> You say that Michael associates himself with questionable/criminal
> types.
> Are you saying that Michael KNEW that Branca, a man that he has
> TRUSTED for years, was going to go behind his back and take money from
> him? Are you saying that he knew that Weitzer was going to stab him in
> the back. Are you saying that just becasue Marc Shaffel was gay, that
> Michael shouldn't do business with him? Are you saying that Michael
> knew that Mottola was going to sabotage his album and try to steal the
> Beatles' catalogue from him? These are people that Michael trusted, at
> first. He later began to suspect that they were going behind his back
> and that is when his investigation of them began. He dropped
> Shaffel,Weitzer and began investigating Branca. He outed Mottola. I
> would say that he didn't INTENTIONALLY associate with questionable
> types; but, found out LATER that the people he trusted WERE
> questionable.
>
> Can you tell me what people(that he knows and loves) that he has shown
> a callous disregard for? Please, don't say Bob Jones. Michael kept
> Jones on the payroll for YEARS, just because he respected and loved
> him. Jones has been nothing but a "figurehead" for a long time and
> Michael still didn't want to let him go. Because of the trial, Jones
> was no longer needed and should have already been gone. He was getting
> paid,and he knows it, when even HE admitted that, he had virtually no
> access to Michael and was not doing any PR work for him. You tell me
> why he shouldn't have been gone sooner. I will tell you why, Michael
> was TOO NICE to fire him. Michael sup****ted this man because he loved
> and respected him. When Randy came in, he did what Michael should have
> done years ago, he fired Bob Jones. I will say that Jones did an
> excellent job while he was working. Of course, he hadn't done much
> work in years. Why should he still be getting paid?
> As for the Neverland staff, Michael again didn't have the heart to
> just come out and say "YOU'RE FIRED." These people lived at Neverland,
> ate at Neverland,slept at Neverland free of charge for SIX MONTHS. Who
> were they working for? Who were they cooking for? Who were they
> cleaning for? Themselves? Who was messing up the house? Them? Were
> they FORCED to stay(as the grifters claimed they were)? Would it have
> been better if he had fired the whole bunch of them and put them out
> with no place to go on the day that he left for Bahrain?
>
> Finally, you say that Michael was not a "nice guy." Your statement
> would belie what EVERYONE else says about this man. Even Shaffel had
> to agree that Michael is nice. Even the rabid and obsessed Rabbi
> Shmuckley said that Michael was/is nice. His family, friends and
> everyone else say that he is he nicest person that you would want to
> meet. Who has said that he wasn't nice? Does he have his bad days? Of
> course. EVERYONE has days when they are not at their very best, don't
> feel well, etc. Anyone who says otherwise is a damn liar. The
> bottomline is that this trial only made Michael more human, more like
> the everyday person. He has his faults just like everyone one of us,
> he is not perfect and he has never said that he was.None of us are
> perfect.
>
> The KING-Mr. Michael Joseph Jackson
> ACQUITTAL! VINDICATION!! REDEMPTION!!!
> NOT GUILTY on ALL fourteen counts.
> A day in HISTORY-June 13, 2005
This is the biggest load of crap I've read in weeks.
|
