Micheal Jackson's dead.

Heart attack.

oh lol, I posted in news section .

Sad, I liked his old music, oh well.
He didnt live that long, only 50 years.

Still Ironic for a guy who tought he was like Peter Pan, and would actually never die.

Btw, who will inherit from his song's and the Beatles' rights? And his 23 Gagillion $?

He actually dosent have much money...he had to have a sort of "Yard Sale" and sell things from netherlands ranch, though he dose have two homes.


And Im assuming his Ex Wife and kids will inherit his things, as well as his siblings and mother.

He sold his Neverland ranch in 2005 or 2006.. don't know.
Cuz he had money problems and debts etc.

Big news. A pity. I liked his music. Yet, for me this is a relatively sad remainder of how people tend to care much about those who have done few in contrast to those who have done much - he'll receieve more honours than thousands of surgeons world wide that have literally saved dozens of lives putting themselves under the strongest pressure.

You want the world to admire you, erect monuments to you and cry for you? Grab your genitals, scream in a high pitch and dance. Save lives? Hell no, what kind of importance can that have?

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Big news. A pity. I liked his music. Yet, for me this is a relatively sad remainder of how people tend to care much about those who have done few in contrast to those who have done much - he'll receieve more honours than thousands of surgeons world wide that have literally saved dozens of lives putting themselves under the strongest pressure.

You want the world to admire you, erect monuments to you and cry for you? Grab your genitals, scream in a high pitch and dance. Save lives? Hell no, what kind of importance can that have?

I don't think you will ever get it will you?

IT'S NOT ABOUT THE CONCRETE RESULTS.

It's about the fact that, there is only 1 Michael Jackson, there is only 1 guy in the world that can say, hey i can make a CD of number 1 hits. ONLY FREAKIN' 1! And No i don't think there is only 1 guy that saved a life, using surgery on this planet.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Big news. A pity. I liked his music. Yet, for me this is a relatively sad remainder of how people tend to care much about those who have done few in contrast to those who have done much - he'll receieve more honours than thousands of surgeons world wide that have literally saved dozens of lives putting themselves under the strongest pressure.

You want the world to admire you, erect monuments to you and cry for you? Grab your genitals, scream in a high pitch and dance. Save lives? Hell no, what kind of importance can that have?

i couldn't agree more, and all people are unique creatures, so its pity to lose just one of them. i would prefer if it was Paul Roberson he was an respectable and honorable man, i just rediscovered his music again, he also had more character and he was also alot more intelligent then Micheal Jackson.
Micheal's dead have just made him more popular, people realise that they won't get any more of his music now, and they forget his bad sides, thats allright.

how come no one cares Fara Fossit died?

Let alone spell her name right.

Jesus wrote:

I don't think you will ever get it will you?

IT'S NOT ABOUT THE CONCRETE RESULTS.

With irrational quasi animals like you, perhaps. You can be my pet if you want... although on second thoughts I got two ferrets already and you probably would be far more costly to mantain, plus not cute and less fun.

Also, I don't see what you meant by "concrete results" as in this context it doesn't really make much sense. Both a surgery, whatever its outcome and Michael Jackson getting y amount of money for selling x number of albums are concrete results. Perhaps you were searching for another expression.

Jesus wrote:

It's about the fact that, there is only 1 Michael Jackson, there is only 1 guy in the world that can say, hey i can make a CD of number 1 hits. ONLY FREAKIN' 1! And No i don't think there is only 1 guy that saved a life, using surgery on this planet.

So? I just pointed out that in my opinion it is sad that people give more acknowledgement to an artist who is literally being ripped off being used as a tool to rip people off than guys that literally put themselves under the hardest mental strains to save lives.

Whether Wacky Jacky was unique or not, is not what I'm discussing. Objectively, we're all unique. Whether he deserves to be acknowledged or not for hat he did in such a proportion is not up to me to decide, I just exert my opinion that any surgeon that has saved a life deserves more credit than him and that it is sad that people don't see it that way. Again, just my personal opinion.

The nameless crowd under the command of some fat cats made him and the nameless crowd cried for him while the fat cats made money.


And this time I have to agree with Tyrlop.

MJ was liked and famous for his music, he had stopped producing anything new for a while and became mainly a target for libel. The last decade he was nothing but a target for mockery and a victim of disgrace. Those who didn't know him for his music knew him for his sexual predilection of children (something of which veracity or lack of it is still in debate and may never be proven). Now what lives on is what made him great as the ghost of pedophilia fades away kept nonetheless alive by people like those from 4chan.

As for Farrah Fawcet... I guess the reason that she's not so mentioned now is because she was by far less prominent for our generations than to those that reached their adolsecence in the 60's 70's. Plus the reason for her death is perhaps of a more disgusting tone than that of MJ.

Also, they're two separate artists, why bringing her death to MJ's thread?

As Zeal said, wth Faucet, or whatever, she was less popular with today's generation.

Bt I have to say that Micheal DID do much to save lives. He visited hosptals and orphanages, giving toys, singing, most every weekend.

Just a thing like that, i know that it's not as concrete as a surgery, but many people in modernized country, have not commited suicide, or dangerous things, because of X artists and such, can't count the number of letters, where Nirvana, was mentionned, as a group that was like a Plaster on the wounds of depressed teenagers... just a tought like that.

TK wrote:

Bt I have to say that Micheal DID do much to save lives. He visited hosptals and orphanages, giving toys, singing, most every weekend

And yet, that's doing far less than what any surgeon has done. Else, those efforts and intentions by Michael Jackson would be meaningless without the medical workforce put to save those lives.

Jesus wrote:

Just a thing like that, i know that it's not as concrete as a surgery, but many people in modernized country, have not commited suicide, or dangerous things, because of X artists and such, can't count the number of letters, where Nirvana, was mentionned, as a group that was like a Plaster on the wounds of depressed teenagers... just a tought like that.

And many more may be inspired to kill or commit suicide by the very same works of art as this is a subjective reaction from the people listening to them. In contrast, a surgery is the direct intervention of one or more individuals to save the live of other individuals.

A surgery has the express objective of saving or improving the physical quality of a life, a song is merely a means of expression with no direct impact over a person's integrity.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

TK wrote:

Bt I have to say that Micheal DID do much to save lives. He visited hosptals and orphanages, giving toys, singing, most every weekend

And yet, that's doing far less than what any surgeon has done. Else, those efforts and intentions by Michael Jackson would be meaningless without the medical workforce put to save those lives.

Jesus wrote:

Just a thing like that, i know that it's not as concrete as a surgery, but many people in modernized country, have not commited suicide, or dangerous things, because of X artists and such, can't count the number of letters, where Nirvana, was mentionned, as a group that was like a Plaster on the wounds of depressed teenagers... just a tought like that.

And many more may be inspired to kill or commit suicide by the very same works of art as this is a subjective reaction from the people listening to them. In contrast, a surgery is the direct intervention of one or more individuals to save the live of other individuals.

A surgery has the express objective of saving or improving the physical quality of a life, a song is merely a means of expression with no direct impact over a person's integrity.

That would be like saying that, a Surgery can kill someone if it fails, or just make the situation worse (Happens quite often)

Jesus wrote:

That would be like saying that, a Surgery can kill someone if it fails, or just make the situation worse (Happens quite often)

Invalid paralelism. You were appealing to the song's, let's say, "inspirational powers", the positive influence it may have on people and its indirect effects as per the subjective intepretation by the individual.

A surgery, on the other hand, is the direct intervention whatever its result might be, with the express objective to save a life or at least improve the physical integrity of the patient.

A surgery either fulfills those objectives or not. Music can just have indirect implications product of subjective interpretations.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Jesus wrote:

That would be like saying that, a Surgery can kill someone if it fails, or just make the situation worse (Happens quite often)

Invalid paralelism. You were appealing to the song's, let's say, "inspirational powers", the positive influence it may have on people and its indirect effects as per the subjective intepretation by the individual.

A surgery, on the other hand, is the direct intervention whatever its result might be, with the express objective to save a life or at least improve the physical integrity of the patient.

A surgery either fulfills those objectives or not. Music can just have indirect implications product of subjective interpretations.

Well to my knowledge, most artist, make and produce Music, in the goal to make theyr life, and normally the ones of the others (I'm talking about the average guy, in every case, like Surgery guys, there is always exeptions). Just look at the song i posted in the Red Square... ther eis a goal for that song, even if it sounds vulgar.

Jesus wrote:

Well to my knowledge, most artist, make and produce Music, in the goal to make theyr life, and normally the ones of the others (I'm talking about the average guy, in every case, like Surgery guys, there is always exeptions). Just look at the song i posted in the Red Square... ther eis a goal for that song, even if it sounds vulgar.

I wrote:

A surgery either fulfills those objectives or not. Music can just have indirect implications product of subjective interpretations.

A surgery has direct, well-determined results. Music doesn't. A surgery necesarily saves a life or not. Music doesn't. That's the whole point. Music can either make you feel happy, depressed, make you want to kiss someone, make you want to buy a puppy, dance. Whatever. It has entirely subjective implications, unlike surgery.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Jesus wrote:

Well to my knowledge, most artist, make and produce Music, in the goal to make theyr life, and normally the ones of the others (I'm talking about the average guy, in every case, like Surgery guys, there is always exeptions). Just look at the song i posted in the Red Square... ther eis a goal for that song, even if it sounds vulgar.

I wrote:

A surgery either fulfills those objectives or not. Music can just have indirect implications product of subjective interpretations.

A surgery has direct, well-determined results. Music doesn't. A surgery necesarily saves a life or not. Music doesn't. That's the whole point. Music can either make you feel happy, depressed, make you want to kiss someone, make you want to buy a puppy, dance. Whatever. It has entirely subjective implications, unlike surgery.

Ok yeah, get your point (I'm gonna Digress here)

What about PLASTIC! Surgery! (Talking about the Wolf)

Jesus wrote:

Ok yeah, get your point (I'm gonna Digress here)

What about PLASTIC! Surgery! (Talking about the Wolf)

The same premise applies in regards to how direct and intervention it is. As for "lifesaving" it doesn't have a direct lifesaving implication. For example, a person may consider himself so ugly that he wil suicide if he doesn't improve that, if he can afford a plastic surgery then it may be saving his life. It may also happen in extreme cases of DOC where the individual requires a plastic modification of his body or may even attempt suicide. But then again, the lifesaving implications of plastic surgery are indiect.