Michael Jackson's racist rant resurfaces

[Eighteen 5,420]

1 hour ago, nicolasrumet said:

And for the "jew me, sue me" part it's ****ing ridiculous. He was using "jew me" as in "persecute me". It was definitely not antisemitic.

uh i'm afraid you're wrong there. jew when used as a verb always refers to the term "jew down" which i'm pretty sure is an offensive term. it definitely doesn't mean what you purport it does lol. 

[Ayria 463]

1 minute ago, nicolasrumet said:

Read what I just posted above.

And go get the book with him. Slippery slope doesn't simply mean "A will lead to B" lol.

Lol you’re not addressing your hypocrisy of using the media as an example of what is right and wrong and then saying WE are brainwashed by it. That’s the issue, and no pointing that out is not an example of a slippery slope fallacy. 

[Ayria 463]

8 minutes ago, SCHEISSEMONTRE said:

Until I hear or have video proof of this then I’m going to stay unbiased 

It seems like to MJ fans being “unbiased” means believing MJ did nothing wrong and everyone who says otherwise is a money hungry sociopathic liar. 

[Regina George 59,387]

18 minutes ago, Ayria said:

People would defend him if he admitted to being a pedophile. They can’t see the forest for the trees. 

 yea no... I’m offended by the fact you would think I or anyone in here would defend someone who is PROVEN to be a pedophile. P R O V E N. 

- CINSIDERING the fact I was one of the most vocal members when we found out that another GGD member is pedophile and is using minor GGD members for **** pics, etc. 

[Chickens in Malibu 7,873]

6 minutes ago, Ayria said:

Lol you’re not addressing your hypocrisy of using the media as an example of what is right and wrong and then saying WE are brainwashed by it. That’s the issue, and no pointing that out is not an example of a slippery slope fallacy. 

Let me re-use words you used, so that maybe you can understand better. It is fallacious to say that just because I claimed that we need to be wary of certain media reports, means that I can't refer to FCC regulation when it comes to common decency for the viewership.

These are two different arguments, and neither can be used as the justification for the other. That's what slippery slope means. When you create a causal relationship between two things that doesn't exist in the first place and is illogical, it's slippery slope.

Here's why. FCC regulations are administrative law. In other words, it is the law of the land. Such law is not enacted by the media. It's enacted by a governmental agency, and that is the FCC.

[Ayria 463]

Just now, ReginaGeorge said:

 yea no... I’m offended by the fact you would think I or anyone in here would defend someone who is PROVEN to be a pedophile. P R O V E N. 

What constitutes proof for you personally? Why don’t you take victims at their word?

[mariomania1234 11,368]

The idea that these lyrics could be deemed objectionable is extremely hurtful to me, and misleading. The song in fact is about the pain of prejudice and hate and is a way to draw attention to social and political problems. I am the voice of the accused and the attacked. I am the voice of everyone. I am the skinhead, I am the Jew, I am the black man, I am the white man. I am not the one who was attacking. It is about the injustices to young people and how the system can wrongfully accuse them. I am angry and outraged that I could be so misinterpreted.

— Michael Jackson

[Melech 9,869]

8 minutes ago, nicolasrumet said:

Get that book too. Or even look it up online, here's a quote from even wikipedia:

T. Edward Damer, in his book Attacking Faulty Reasoning, describes what others might call a causal slippery slope but says,

"While this image may be insightful for understanding the character of the fallacy, it represents a misunderstanding of the nature of the causal relations between events. Every causal claim requires a separate argument. Hence, any "slipping" to be found is only in the clumsy thinking of the arguer, who has failed to provide sufficient evidence that one causally explained event can serve as an explanation for another event or for a series of events."

What did the person I'm arguing with do?

He made an illogical causal relationship between what I said about the need to be skeptical of certain news reports, with what is considered decent by FCC regulations. Both claims are sperate arguments.

And by using one as an explanation for the other, he used the fallacy of slippery slope.

You can't really come for me. I know what I'm talking about when it comes to this.

Try again.

Re-read the book then.  

[Ayria 463]

Just now, mariomania1234 said:

The idea that these lyrics could be deemed objectionable is extremely hurtful to me, and misleading. The song in fact is about the pain of prejudice and hate and is a way to draw attention to social and political problems. I am the voice of the accused and the attacked. I am the voice of everyone. I am the skinhead, I am the Jew, I am the black man, I am the white man. I am not the one who was attacking. It is about the injustices to young people and how the system can wrongfully accuse them. I am angry and outraged that I could be so misinterpreted.

— Michael Jackson

A black man should still not be using slurs, Gaga was wrong for doing it in Born This Way and MJ is in the wrong here too.

[Chickens in Malibu 7,873]

1 minute ago, Melech said:

Re-read the book then.  

It's one thing to misunderstand "slippery slope". But it's another to completely insist on being right despite being wrong. Read my reply to Ayria above.

[Regina George 59,387]

5 minutes ago, Ayria said:

What constitutes proof for you personally? Why don’t you take victims at their word?

I don’t think words are enough for anyone to believe anything. My family was in a situation when “words” were against us and when “words” accused us of something we never did. So I know how it feels to be wrongly accused of something that I never did. When you are MJ and when you have cameras all over the house and when someone claims you had sex with him all over the property and you filmed it - then I expect there would be AT LEAST one valid proof of that. 

[Ayria 463]

Just now, ReginaGeorge said:

I don’t think words are enough for anyone to believe anything. My family was in a situation when “words” were against us and when “words” accused us of something we never did. So I know how it feels to be wrongly accused of something that I never did. When you are MJ and when you have cameras all over the house and when someone claims you had sex with him all over the property and you filmed it - then I expect there would be AT LEAST one valid proof of that. 

So unless there is video evidence you don’t believe he did anything? Gotcha. 

[Melech 9,869]

5 minutes ago, nicolasrumet said:

It's one thing to misunderstand "slippery slope". But it's another to completely insist on being right despite being wrong. Read my reply to Ayria above.

You come here claim logical fallacies yet you didn’t came up with any argument at all. 

[Regina George 59,387]

Just now, Ayria said:

So unless there is video evidence you don’t believe he did anything? Gotcha. 

Never said that. Don’t put words in my mouth. I explicitly said “one valid evidence”, no where did I say “it has to be video evidence”. I just used that as an example.

Try harder next time love 

[Ayria 463]

Just now, ReginaGeorge said:

Never said that. Don’t put words in my mouth. I explicitly said “one valid evidence”, no where did I say “it has to be video evidence”. I just used that as an example.

Try harder next time love 

I mean I consider Jordan Chandler correctly identifying markings on Jackson’s genitalia (verified by Bill Dworin, lead investigator), Jordan Chandler’s claims of abuse being seen as valid by the leading authority on false allegations and Jackson owning “art books” of child nudity that were produced by known pedophiles as “valid evidence” but what do I know?