I'm not trying to pick on any single person, so please ignore the fact
that I have to single out one person to reply to.

Christ, you guys. This is the GARDENING newsgroup. If we want to
discuss what a frigging pederast Jackson is, we can do it ANYWHERE.

Subject: Bees in your Garden?

Jesus. Really. When I want to discuss sushi I go to afs. Mexican
cooking, afmc. Gardening, rg. I'm not trying to be a nazi, but
really. This is not only a hijack of this thread, but of the whole
board. Yeah, OT happens, but jesus christ.

Sorry. Sort of.

Jeffrey


(paghat) wrote in message ...
In article , Janet Baraclough
wrote:

The message
from animaux contains these words:

How do you know she was seeking anything? You
can't make such claims without knowing HER or at least something about
her...which I believe you do not.

I saw her interview with Bashir, which was broadcast on the night of
one of her husband's biggest public engagements. She appeared on
primetime TV to give a detailed account of his adultery and her own. She
said she wanted to tell her version of what had gone on in their
marriage, and she then told it to as many complete strangers as
possible. That sounds like a definition of seeking maximum publicity to
me.

I'm certainly not saying MJ is "all there" or his discretion is
sane, but I still and always will believe he is not a pedophile. He's
"A-sexual" if anything.

From your comments above, should we assume your opinion is based on
personal intimacy with MJ ? Or have you had yet another accident in the
logic department?

Janet

First, Jackson is AT LEAST a pedophile, the only question is whether he's
also a pedarast who acts on his pedophilia. We have sworn court testimony
he is also a pedarast.

I have no trouble admitting that Bashir manipulated Jackson by pretending
to admire him & drawing him out by playing to Jackson's ego. Only in the
last of the series of interviews was Bashir totally honest admitting he
was troubled by Jackson's relationships with children. Bashir might from
the start have just said outright, "Your locking yourself alone in a room
with little boys & playing with them in your bed makes you a menace to
these children, even IF there MIGHT be a DISTANT but rather improbable
chance that you do nothjing more than lock yourself in a room with them to
play in your bed". But in that case, instead of revealing his unwholesome
worldview about the excellence & propriety of sleeping with other peoples'
little boys, he'd've instead just told Bashir to leave, & we wouldn't have
heard in Jackson's own voice that his behavior is AT BEST inappropriate, &
his idea of 'love' includes purchasing bedroom privileges with young boys.


That the parents may find Jackson graciously friendly with his largess
over all this makes those parents panderers. This kind of child pandering
is very common. Parents are given money as no-strings "gifts" by the
"family friend" who is then -- no connection to having been paid, of
coruse -- give over their child for all-nighters with the "friend." These
sorts of under developed pedarasts always start with "innocent" wrestling
matches, arm wrestling, "see how hard you can hit my chest," "let's take a
shower together" & other activities that encourage mutual nakedness & bed
bouncing, & it escalates only if the child is suitably pliable & the
parents sufficiently self-blindered by the money to be made. Everyone
involved pretends the inappropriate sale of bedroom privileges with the
child is appropriate & innocent -- because to admit otherwise shuts off
the money fountain.

In the long run the parents are worse than Jackson. His excuse is he's
miswired; theirs is that they're greedy & willing to play at being unaware
for the profit of it. He's manifestly enough of a risk that parents really
concerned for their childrens' welfare would at least err on the side of
safety -- & would obviously would not permit a middleaged man with
childish propensities to sleep with their sons -- that is, if it weren't
so damned profitable to pretend they're not pandering their young. And
Jackson in his own words makes it clear that his privilege of taking these
boys into his bedroom alone at night is NOT something he's willing ever to
give up -- because having the wonderful child-trap of a personal zoo &
carnival rides was never something that happened organically without
ulterior motive.

****er for the parents of little girls who can't make the same profitable
bargain.

And remember, the author of Michael's coopted self-imaged Peter Pan
himself left a trail of emotionally damaged children, & the living
prototypes for his "Lost Boys" truly were tragic in the aftermath of
Barrie's sinister attention. As critic & literary fantasist Brigid
Brophy has written of Barrie's classic: "his theme being incest,
castration and homosexuality, Peter Pan is an aesthetic massacre of the
innocents." And when one goes back to the original novel, we see that
Peter Pan is a somewhat self-hating, a dark figure really harmful in his
promises, as well as himself doomed by his incurable condition. Like
Michael Jackson, Peter feels sorry for himself, & practically begs to be
pitied, claiming weakness & childishness as his excuse for what amounts to
criminality, in the same way that Michael bursts into tears (as the court
testimony claims he did when a boy expressed his dislike of being
french-kissed in bed, or when Bashir was finally honest in the final
interview).

Sir James Barrie was an all-out pedophile who never consummated his
belated marriage to Mary Ansell (who divorced him, never having had the
option of sharing her life with him), yet he had no problems expressing
all his passionate feelings toward the sons of Sylvia & Arthur Davies.
It's hardly subliminal that Peter is also named for the erotic god Pan, &
the tradition of casting boyish women in the roll of Peter on the stage
very likely arose from the completely inappropriate nature of ever showing
on stage grown men carrying on in this manner with boys. And no wonder
Mark Twain assessed the play as "sordid."

Barrie's arrested sexual development has been traced to his mother's
response to the death of his older brother David -- not because he grieved
that David Barrie died at age 13, but because James saw his mother's
extravagant grief, & began to wear David's clothes, whistle in the manner
of David, & sneak into his mother's room at night pretending to be David.
Whether this really marks the origin of James' pedarasty I wouldn't hazard
as strongly as do some literary historians, but it's interesting he was
always a weirdo. Like Michael Jackson after him, James, when in his 30s,
began to arrange fairy tale adventures for boys he had crushes on,
arranging repeatedly to be left alone with them. Such family friendships
might sometimes be possible with all innocent intent, BUT NOT WHEN LIKE
JACKO & BARRIE, THEY ABSOLUTELY INSIST ON BEING LEFT ALONE NIGHTS WITH
THEIR CHOSEN FAVORITES. Arthur Davies knew, & complained, that something
odd was up with James' obsession for the boys, & one of the actual "lost
boys" whose name was indeed Peter is on record stating planely that Barrie
"brought more sorrow than happiness into our family," & his life ended in
suicide by leaping under a tram (another of Barrie's five Lost Boys is
believed to have commited suicide at age 21, though there's an off chance
it was an accidental drowning).

So absolutely, I accept that James Barrie/Peter Pan is the PERFECT emblem
for Michael Jackson, & not surprised he identifies with Peter Pan, because
I also do not believe believe Jackson is unaware that Peter Pan is a
symbol of nambla, & Barrie one of the appalling "pedophile movement's"
leading icons whose novel & play are repeatedly cited as "evidence" that
pedarasty is good.

-paghat the ratgirl