Michael Jackson and 3 Kings

Michael Jackson is the King of Pop. Would you or anyone challenge this extraordinary claim ? Who would argue about this world-wide recognition ?

There is a man called Peter King who blasted MJ by saying that " he died, he had some talent, fine. There is nothing good about this guy ". This guy, the King of Pop, is Michael Jackson, so who is the other guy Peter King who blasted this guy ? Well, Peter King is a U.S. Republican Congressman (NY). His descriptions of MJ were so negative and extreme that it probably made many people mad. It probably hurt not only the Jackson family but also millions of fans all over the world.

"He had some talent". Wrong. Michael Jackson had huge talent, not some. "There is nothing good about this guy". Wrong again. There is not only something good, but many things good about this guy: being an extraordinary man, son, father, brother, uncle, relative, friend, excellent entertainer, singer, songwriter, music producer, dancer, artist, creator, philanthropist, idealist, promoter of love and world peace, and being a positive unifying force for humanity. He made many people happy and the whole world feel alive and connected.

Peter King complained that the media and the world honored and paid tribute to a "low life", while people like US troops fighting overseas were ignored. Wrong again. The life of Michael Jackson was anything but a "low life". It was a "very high life", "a very extraordinary life", but not a "low life". It is also untrue that US troops fighting overseas were ignored. The U.S. media never stops reporting news about U.S. troops in Afghanistan, Iraq and other parts of the world. U.S.A. has about 1000 military posts outside its own soil. It is impossible to ignore and not to report U.S. military activities in the world.

Peter King said we should give the U.S. soldiers the credit they deserved. But shouldn't we also give Michael Jackson the credit he deserved ? Mr. King said he wished the media would honor people like teachers in rough neighborhoods, AIDS clinics volunteers, police and firefighters, and US troops serving overseas.

This kind of wishful thinking and 'cherry picking' mentality is rather stupid really. How can you compare an apple to an orange and many other different kinds of fruits ? Michael Jackson is not only an apple, but a very special apple.

Shouldn't we honor all teachers, and not only those who work in rough neighborhoods ? Shouldn't we honor the doctors, nurses, and all kinds of volunteers and workers of different kinds of charity, and not only the AIDS clinics volunteers ? Shouldn't the Americans honor all U.S. soldiers, including those stationed on home soil and the veterans, and not only those serving overseas ? Mr. King implies that Michael Jackson is not a hero, but the real heroes are those examples on his list, including the police and firefighters, and U.S. troops serving overseas.

Mr. King said too many people in public life have made fools of themselves, by talking about Michael Jackson as if he was a hero. Look, the whole world is talking about Michael Jackson "as a hero", not "as if he was a hero". Mr. King, a person in public life, may be making a fool of himself instead. Obama's comments about Michael were much wiser than Mr. King's. He mentioned Michael was a great entertainer, but avoided talking about his personal life.

Mr. King asked a stupid question " What are we glorifying for?" He just didn't even get it. The world is not glorifying for war, fighting and killing, but fun, unity, love and peace.

What is a hero ? Yes, we should respect the police, for keeping law and order. Yes, we should respect the firefighters, for saving lives and properties. Yes, we should respect the soldiers for their fighting for freedom and defending their country (but not fighting an illegal war, or so-called holy war, and participating in an invasion of another sovereign country, causing the death of so many innocent people).

Please think about this: these people are simply doing their jobs, right ? So why keep saying that they are the heroes ? I can give you a very long list of heroes, if you define a hero as someone who simply does his or her job and duty. How about the doctors and nurses who look after the health of people ? How about the pilots who fly you all over the world ? How about the bus and taxi drivers and public transit workers, who take you to different places ? How about the farmers who grow food for you to eat ? How about the garment makers who create clothes for you to wear ? How about the builders who build the homes for you to live in ? How about the ordinary parents and workers who work so hard to raise their children and provide for their families ? The list can go on and on. Are these people not also heroes ?

I would rather define a hero as someone who did something good and extraordinary, to help and benefit other human beings, animals, the environment, the world, the Universe, beyond his or her duty and job requirements. If a policeman caught a thief and saved a life, that was his job. If an ordinary citizen caught a thief and saved a life, that was not his job, so he deserved more than a policeman, to be called a ' hero '. If a life guard saved someone from drowning, that was his or her job. If an ordinary citizen did the same thing, he or she would deserve more than a life guard, to be called a " hero ". Examples are endless.

The point is this: Michael Jackson was not "as if" or pretending to be a hero. He was, still is, a hero. His job was to entertain. It was not a job requirement for him to be a philanthropist and promoter of love and peace. It is O.K. if you think he should not be called or treated as a hero, but there is no way that you can win, if you argue about the fact that he is "The King of Pop".

Mr. Peter King blasted Michael Jackson, accusing him that there was nothing good about him, and that he was a pervert and child molester. I was shocked to hear these words which Mr. King actually used. I was disappointed and felt sad, because Mr. King is a Congressman and lawmaker, yet his statements have no legal sense and no legal effect at all. They were rather some personal moral judgment, and untimely political statements, out of his own speculation and presumption.

Regarding Michael Jackson being a child molester or not, one could only speculate. A pedophile is someone who has a sick mind, and who cannot control himself, and his behavior is compulsive, obsessive, addictive, and repetitive. This doesn't even fit the profile of Michael. My speculation is that Michael was a child-like person, because he did not have the normal kind of childhood that we had. He started working when he was only a child. He created Neverland, a world of innocence and pure fun, to re-live his lost childhood. He turned fantasy into reality. He was able to do that, because he had the imagination and could afford to do so.

Am I absolutely sure that Michael Jackson was not a child molester ? No, I am not absolutely sure. I can only speculate. However, if you look at the matter from the legal point of view, Peter King's negative statements against Michael were really stupid. Michael was acquitted of child molestation charges in 2005. Why did Mr. King insist that Michael was guilty? A U.S. law maker didn't even understand the U.S. legal process ? What a disappointment! In law, Michael was not guilty. He was not a child molester. Certainly, you can keep on speculating and arguing forever, but it has no legal effect at all. The case is closed, nor can it be re-opened now, because Michael is dead.

If you know Michael's defense lawyer, maybe you can ask him, and he will be able to explain to you why Michael was found not guilty. I don't know Michael's family, but I met his personal magician, who said that Michael was innocent.

Peter King asked a question " Would you let your child or grandchild be in the same room with Michael Jackson ? " Donald Trump, a very sharp and wealthy businessman, sort of answered that question. He said Michael was very smart and talented, and he loved children, and Mr.Trump let his own children play with Michael and his children.

I like Larry King of CNN. He has interviewed many different kinds of people. He is always calm and relaxed, articulate and never becomes presumptive and judgmental. He would not blast his guests like Peter King did to Michael Jackson.

The King of Pop, Peter King and Larry King - which King deserves your love and respect ?

Last but not least, in this world, there are generally 2 kinds of people: those who live in Love, and those who live in Fear. To which of the 2 groups do you belong ?
And the 3 Kings ?

Good Day !

Religion and Politics

Religion and Politics are 2 difficult topics to talk about. Suddenly people would lose their senses and become ridiculously emotional and unreasonable.