October 31, 2005

Volume 42

1. Rosa Parks
2. Random Thoughts
3. Do You Really Know Them
4. SPORTS: Soccer Rape Allegation
5. ENTERTAINMENT: The Spouse Is Better Looking
6. ENTERTAINMENT: Miami Vice Movie
7. ENTERTAINMENT: Mariah Carey No Kids Policy
8. ENTERTAINMENT: Is The Entertainment Industry No Longer About Entertainment?
9. ENTERTAINMENT: Celebrity excuse making
10. ENTERTAINMENT: Envelope pushers
11. JOURNALISM: Media blackouts
12. JOURNALISM: Plagiarism
13. LEGAL FILE: Corporate Theft: FBI arrest in Corning vs. Picvue
14. LEGAL FILE: Madonna Lawsuit/ Madonna, the Copy and Paste Artist
15. LEGAL FILE: Copyright Infringement and Hollywood
16. LEGAL FILE: Horowitz Murder Case
17. SPIRITUAL: Weather Woes
18. SPIRITUAL: Cults
19. SPIRITUAL: Discouragement
20. SPIRITUAL: What would Jesus Do?
21. SPIRITUAL: Talk to your Children

Rosa Parks

 

Last month in the September 30th 2005 Diary supplement, I jokingly wrote about wanting to pull a Rosa Parks on my flight to the Caribbean, where my seat was conveniently located in the last rows of the plane (for background on that click here).

Recently, I was saddened to learn that Rosa Parks died a week a go. She was a hero. She stood up for what she believed in, even in the face of seemingly insurmountable circumstances. She could have easily been jailed, beaten or killed for what she’d done and fear could have gotten the better of her – but she courageously did it anyway. That’s a hero.

I always respected her for that because it takes courage to stand up for what you believe in, in the face of injustice, inequality, unpopularity and oppression.

Sometimes you have to stand (or sit) alone to get justice. But make no mistake, it’s worth it. I’d rather stand alone and be right than sit with others and be wrong.

People will give you a million reasons why you shouldn’t, but you have to be the one that comes up with the one reason why you should ethically stand up for what you believe, even if it goes against the grain.

The people who change this world for the better aren’t the cowards, but the courageous.

By God’s grace she is a shining example of how one person can positively spark change and make a difference. People often think as one person they can’t make a positive change of any significance or lasting effect, but she is irrefutable proof that you can.

It only takes one person to say something is unjust and make a positive change that will make it that much easier for everyone else to gain justice and a better life. The positive changes made today may save someone’s life and future tomorrow.

People make excuses all the time for their circumstances, as it’s very easy to feel sorry for yourself. While some circumstances are an individual’s own making, some are unjustly thrust upon them. Rosa was the latter, as she didn’t create racism and segregation, but she did something positive about it.

So, the next time you turn wimp in chickening out in doing what you know is right or will make a difference, I want you to remember how God used Rosa Parks, one person, to spark a positive change that made things better for many. God has the world at His disposal, to do with as He wishes, but He often uses the one you’d least expect.

He did so with King David as well. God chose David to be King of Israel at age 15. David had brothers who were taller and more studly and kingly looking, but God chose seemingly insignificant David because He knew what was in his heart and mind.

God knew that as small and as poor as David was at the time, underneath that exterior was a great heart and a great mind that He gave him. Yes, God knows His own merchandise better than anyone else.

He knew David had what it took to lead his country and win many wars on behalf of Israel, who according to scholars like John Hagee, were the smallest in number at the time.

When the challenge came to fight the giant Goliath, the last person you’d think would step forward would be a kid – but that’s exactly what happened. Brave little David stepped forward and did what no one else had – defeated Goliath.

Looking on everyone probably thought this runt is gonna get squashed by this giant Goliath, but God had other plans.

Pride and arrogance killed Goliath. I’ll tell you why. He relied on his strength and pride. God knew the intelligence and ingenuity He gave David would conquer the roaring giant…who was too dumb and too proud to duck a seemingly insignificant stone from a seemingly insignificant kid (either that or David was really quick).

That seemingly insignificant kid and that seemingly insignificant stone ended up being his undoing. It’s often the one you least expect who turns out to be the greatest.

Ray Charles would have seen those stones coming...but Goliath stood there, ignored the impending danger and relied on his strength that ultimately failed him.

David used his wit and speed to beat Goliath’s strength and size.

There are many lessons to be learned from that story, two of which are:

a.) Wisdom is better than strength
b.) Helmets save lives.

Random Thoughts

Why is it when you reach home to your front door, that's when your body decides you urgently have to go to the bathroom (never mind you can't find your keys and have to go so badly that a brief moment of bathroom induced insanity makes you contemplate breaking into your own house). Just kidding.

And why is it when you really have to go, the sound of running water makes it even worse.

Yes, these questions have perplexed scientists and scholars for years (kidding).

Do You Really Know Them

The AIDS virus doesn't discriminate. But it's strange how people do. They look at people and judge, saying things like a person "looks clean." However, many people with AIDS look perfectly healthy. When rapper Eazy E of NWA died from AIDS, it was reported that he looked healthy and the same as he always had.

People sometimes take up with people they don't know in ill-advised relationships. They open up their heart, home, bed and wallet to them, only to find out the person was not truthful with them and gave them HIV.

People never think AIDS can happen to them. They go by appearances. Some judge by race, others by wealth and social status,  when those are poor indicators as to whether or not a person is infected. You can't go by that. A proper AIDS test is a more accurate judge.

While I'm not a pessimist, I am a realist. There are some in life who will lie to you about who they really are. Some date and sleep with people they really don't know...and you can know a person for months and not know them at all.

This person could be sleeping with someone else that you don't know about, then the next thing you know, you find out they've given you HIV. And in some cases, later you unknowingly pass it on to someone else.

There was a woman who was a friend of one of my friends since they were both in high school. She was a bright girl, very outgoing. Mixed with a lot of famous athletes and slept with several of them who were friends with each other. Then she died in her 30's from AIDS.

That lifestyle was fun for her for a while, but she left this earth far sooner than she should have due to that lifestyle. She slept in the finest hotels, ate in the finest restaurants and traveled first class for a while due to the men she slept with, but it all came to a screeching halt. And by all accounts, she really didn't like any of them. She just liked the lifestyle and the attention. 

What she was faced with made the whole experience that she thought was good, suddenly the worst experience of her life. She trusted people and other people trusted her and they became conduits for the virus. 

Some people are too trusting. They like someone or want to have sex with them and that's all they are thinking about. Most people think they are so special that nothing bad can happen to them, but it can, especially with trusting people too much.

You also need to stop and think, if someone is so willing to do certain things with you and they don't know you very well, who else are they doing the same things with that they are not telling you about.

Some people will lie to you and tell you what they think you want to hear in order to get what they want out of you, whether it be sex, money or something else.

Is your health and life worth trusting someone you truly don't know to such an extent that you are endangering your very existence and future. No one is worth that. All those feelings you had for them will wear right off when you are faced with a life threatening disease.

Once again, some are too trusting and in situations they shouldn't be. You think you know certain people in your life when you truly don't. People will surprise you sometimes. That's a very serious gamble to take with your life. You have a lot to lose - your health.

If someone loves you, they'd wait to marry you and would not put your life at risk by sleeping with others.

Then again, some people don't love anyone but themselves. Someone with that view on relationships can be the worst thing that ever happened to you, because they have no concept of commitment or dedication.

You'll end up in a relationship that you think is about love, when for them it's about sex, money or social status. When you find out the truth, if you're not careful, it will destroy you.

Once again, do you really know this person.

SPORTS: Soccer Rape Allegation

I read about the soccer rape scandal involving Cristiano Ronaldo. I certainly hope it is not true, as the allegations are terrible. He denies that he raped two women. His lawyer via a public statement proclaimed the story is false and the alleged victims allegedly filed charges after they failed to sell their story to the British tabloids. However, the Metropolitan Police are taking the allegations very seriously.

If his lawyer's statement is true, it would cast serious aspersions on whether or not they are telling the truth. However, the details are a bit murky at this time, therefore people should keep an open mind until the case is thoroughly investigated.

Cristiano reportedly confessed that it was consensual and apart of the practice popular among some soccer players known as "roasting." I wrote about this inappropriate, degrading practice over a year ago and it needs to stop. One would think it would have stopped, as this is the fourth time a woman has come forward and accused a famous soccer player of rape via "roasting," yet amazingly the practice still continues.

Cristiano is a well known soccer player who makes $100,000 a week playing for Manchester United. This incident has put his career in jeopardy. He has a lot to lose, but risked so much.

The Spouse Is Better Looking

Women who tauntingly do tell-alls about cheating with someone's partner or spouse really ought not to. It's especially odd when the public views the person being cheated on as more attractive than the person in the picture claiming to have cheated with said person's partner. I saw an article like that this month and thought, what were you thinking?

Some of these women are grinning and posing in the magazine tell-all pics, when many people are going, "Why did so and so cheat with someone who isn’t as attractive as their wife/partner.” And don’t pretend I’m the only one who wonders that when they see a tell-all.

There was another article of that nature a year ago. The woman was being spiteful and nasty to the wife about cheating with her husband and stated her husband cheated because she looks better than his wife (um, his wife at the time who has since divorced him is a very beautiful actress). It takes a brave woman to publicly go on record and say she looks better than a beautiful, well-known entertainer who most men would give their right arm to marry.

Why is it that in these public scandals the women usually are not prettier than the person being cheated on – but love to proclaim they are. And how does that make the cheating husband look.

Explanation for all this...

Some men (and a few women) have very little or no self-control in these matters. They get turned on when some woman other than their wife flirts with them and they don't stop and walk away. Instead of leaving, they let the person go further and further until their marriage, career and name are in tatters.

…then the girl goes psycho on them, starts stalking them and their family, they have to take out a restraining order, the police end up getting the girl...and then nobody can enjoy their popcorn during family movie night.

I ask you, is that what you really want. You know you’re married – keep it zipped.

ENTERTAINMENT: Miami Vice Movie

In the August 2005 Sound Off Column (click here) I wrote about the Miami Vice movie that was being filmed in Miami and wondered out loud why it hadn’t wrapped yet, as for months I’d been reading in the paper about sightings regarding the film.

While the city loved having them here (Foxx and Farrel were quite a draw), Miami Vice was my favorite drama as a kid (the Golden Girls my favorite comedy – yes, I was miss NBC as a child) and I know how long it takes to shoot a movie in each genre, therefore I wondered if something had gone awry for that reason. My instincts were right. Last week Radar magazine printed that something had indeed gone awry on the shoot, as there were reportedly, um, scheduling conflicts within the cast and other things. However, it was reported that it’s all sorted and they’ve wrapped now.

I still think they chose Miami because it's a great place for a vacation (yea, that and the film's called Miami Vice).

I read an article in Miami Herald's Parade magazine about one of the film’s lead actors, Jamie Foxx, real name Eric Bishop. He’s had a tough life. Sometimes people look at a person and just don’t know the half of it. Abandoned by his birth parents, given to his mother’s adoptive mom at age 5, he faced a harsh racial climate and plenty of family letdowns growing up. However, by God’s grace he has survived.

He spoke of a man who called him a “nig*er” when he was 16 years old, right before patronizingly loaning him one of his dinner jackets to play to his Christmas party guests. When Foxx completed the job, he went to return the jacket to the man, who told him he didn’t want the jacket back, as it was no good now that he (a black man) had worn it.

Pity he didn’t know that 16 year old black boy he kept referring to as a “ni*ger” would go on to win an Oscar as best actor in a motion picture.

But then again, to a racist, it would only cause outward embarrassment to be called out for that, because in the heart of a bigot, he still wrongfully believes he is better because he is white.

Which is really ironic because God doesn’t value any color over another and will deny entry into heaven to anyone, black or white, who discriminately and offensively values their color over that of another.

In the long run, if you don’t change those racists ways, it will destroy your soul.

ENTERTAINMENT: Mariah Carey No Kids Policy

I read an article where Mariah Carey stated she wasn’t going to have kids because she didn’t want to burden them with her fame. Not all celebrities’ kids are messed up...I’m trying to think of a few, but I’m drawing a blank here – quick, somebody name one.

Just kidding.

I thought the article was a bit sad. A little Mariah or a little Mario may not be such a bad idea. Don’t give up on the idea of a husband and kids just yet.

ENTERTAINMENT: Is The Entertainment Industry No Longer About Entertainment?

Los Angeles - a beautiful city. But within it lies a cesspool of corruption known as Hollywood. No, not Hollywood the city. Hollywood the institution.

Sexual harassment, sexism, stalking, verbally mentally and emotionally abusive executives, widespread drug dealing and drug use, criminal copyright infringement, corporate theft, wiretapping, harassment, threats of violence, witness tampering, shareholder unfriendly golden parachutes and sometimes murder.

Whatever happened to making movies and making records? How did a small percentage of industry members, albeit executives and a few famous people, manage to turn Hollywood into something that would make the mafia shake their heads.

How did some veer into such criminal territory and why are so many being affected by their misdeeds.

A recent article in the New York Times that was printed on October 19, 2005, a few days after I went public with my lawsuit via a press release and posting said lawsuit on this site, supports many of the claims I have made in my lawsuit via other credible industry members experiencing the same problems with the criminal wiretapping and harassment. Madonna's lawyer was also mentioned in the article.

The article in the New York Times stated, via wiretapping rivals, unsuspecting entertainers and executives “had the eerie experience of having their words repeated back to them.” People and incidents that had not been previously reported in the press, as it was only apart of the ongoing FBI investigation, were written about in the article.

It is a harassment technique that’s used by some in Hollywood, who erroneously and senselessly feel it scares people, but what it actually does is angers people to the point that they want the culprits behind bars for the gross invasion of privacy and harassment.

It appears it has become difficult for a hand full of law breaking people in Hollywood to distinguish between their movies and real life in that you are not cops and are not allowed to tap innocent people's phones for invasion of privacy, cheating in court, corporate theft and perverse kicks.

One article wrote of a subject of the FBI's wiretapping probe's flawless record in court, as he has never lost. Me personally, I don't believe said lawyer is that good. However, it is easy to appear as such if you are privy to opposing council's legal strategy for the following day via wiretap transcripts of opposing counsel talking to their client(s) and witnesses over the phone about the next day's court strategy. 

Recently, a web site made public government documents detailing a plot Murder Inc Records had to kill then up and coming rapper 50 Cent. For months 50 Cent alluded to being aware of such a plot, which is clearly why he let rip about them on his records in the manner in which he did.

Rappers Biggie Smalls and Tupac Shakur were killed in senseless tragedies. Producer Phil Specter is on trial for murder.

So to answer my own question, Is The Entertainment Industry No Longer About Entertainment – it certainly appears that way.

ENTERTAINMENT: Excuse Making For Celebrities

Phil Spector is on trial for murdering an actress. While he is innocent until proven guilty, he is certainly no angel. I remember a few years ago I read an article where Ronnie Spector, his ex-wife and lead singer of the famous trio he once produced, said he beat her and tossed her out of their mansion penniless with royalties due to her withheld. I never forgot that story (how ironic he recorded Tina Turner whose husband did the same to her).

With Spector, just like several other misbehaving celebrities, the warning signs were there that they were out of control, but it was ignored by the people around them because of their fame and the people on their payroll because they were financially beholden to them.

This is often the case until something really heinous and horrible happens that leaves everyone asking how did this happen.
However, the warning signs are often there, but due to a person’s fame, it is ignored at innocent people’s expense, until that one shocking incident that leaves the public mortified.

In Spector’s case, that incident came via a dead actress on his foyer floor with the smoking gun in his hand.

When are people going to stop making excuses for misbehaving celebrities and do their civic duty. You keep covering and covering for that celebrity, making excuses, rather than staging an intervention or reporting the misconduct, until one day they do something so heinous that wipes out their fame and becomes their legacy – and possibly drags your name right down with them.

But celebrities who do misdeeds rarely think that way. They think they are so famous that they can do and get away with anything and lie to the public, until that incident when they go too far and it becomes what they are negatively associated with, rather than their trade. There are limits.

ENTERTAINMENT: Envelope pushers

I saw a sermon by Billy Graham on TV months ago that brought to mind a few entertainment industry envelope pushers. Mr. Graham spoke of Belshazzer, who was the original publicity-stunt-performing-attention-seeking-envelope pusher. He misinterpreted many people’s shock for approval and God’s silence for indifference to his unethical deeds.

What he viewed as provocative, many viewed as perverse. So he kept pushing the envelope not realizing the mere fact that his unethical behavior hadn’t caught up with him at the time, as it should have was God’s mercy in a grace period He was giving him to clean up his act.

In the sermon, Mr. Graham spoke of how one day Belshazzar took it too far with the envelope pushing and God decided enough was enough.

In an attempt to shock his guests, Belshazzar basically lost his mind and brought out holy chalices used in traditional ceremonies in honor of God for he and his guests to drink liquor out of. A big no-no.

He knew everyone knew what those glasses were consecrated for and that they would be stunned at his irreverence and envelope pushing. However, that very night, God said no more and set off a chain of events that brought about the end of Belshazzar.

Due to his stubbornness and refusal to change, Belshazzar did so much envelope pushing that he ended up pushing himself right over the edge.

LEGAL FILE: Corporate Theft/FBI arrest in Corning vs. Picvue

In my lawsuit I wrote about how corporate theft via stealing files is on the rise. I cited Fred Durst who was the victim of hacking and corporate theft and how he called the CIA then filed suit against the culprits.

Last week, I read about a case filed by Corning against competitor Picvue who were committing corporate theft in the commissioned stealing and usage of Corning's company files for making HD screens. These felonious acts are punishable by imprisonment.

Picvue hired a man who was paid tens of thousands of dollars n two payments to steal Corning’s files. Corning sued Picvue and called the FBI when they realized what Picvue was doing in stealing their company’s files and ideas and using them for their own products. The FBI then arrested the commissioned thief committing corporate theft in conjunction with Picvue and brought charges.

It’s amazing how far some will go in stealing other businesses’ files and ideas all in the name of the almighty dollar. What I wanna know is how they thought they’d get away with it.

LEGAL FILE: Madonna Lawsuit

Well, as many of you know, I filed suit against Madonna and co for the terrible way they’ve stolen from me and violated my rights and that of my family (click here if you have not read the lawsuit).

One of the things I formally accused them of in the lawsuit is violating several of my copyrights' Right Of Attribution numerous times in constantly attributing items I write in this copyrighted Column and on the copyrighted Diary page to themselves…and what does that unoriginal, lobotomized woman do…she starts copying items in my lawsuit and attributing and applying them to herself in her interviews. She's done this five times since the lawsuit was served to her and made public two weeks ago.

Madonna: a professor and U.N. rep?

In my lawsuit under the family background segment, I wrote that one of my aunts served as the United Nations chairwoman for Jamaica’s UNESCO branch and that she is also a professor. Days after the lawsuit was made public, a headline blared “Madonna plays Professor” at Hunter College in NY and another on the same day announced “Madonna a United Nation's Chairwoman.”

The very two distinct things I listed my aunt as in the lawsuit Madonna and co were served – a United Nations rep and a Professor, Madonna disturbingly reinvented herself as days after the lawsuit was made public via a press release and served to her via a process server.

Bad enough she criminally violated my copyrights and privacy and unlawfully mimicked my work to the tee in a sick, unrelenting manner, now she’s mimicking my lawsuit. That's sick.

Warner knows she is unstable, yet continues to give her so much freedom…and with that freedom she continues to commission and undertake unlawful acts that criminally violate people’s rights. That’s called playing with a loose cannon. Here’s hoping one day she doesn’t fly into one of her well publicized neurotic rages, as she did with Dick Clark’s son and then later with 10 year old Keith Serrantino, both of whom it was reported she choked, and doesn't lunge over the desk after Bronfman.

In my lawsuit, I wrote how I had written to Richard Marx's  publishing reps asking him to remake one of his songs. Days after she was served the lawsuit, Madonna stated in an interview how she wrote to Abba begging them to use one of their songs. Since when does she write to anyone. Major label projects usually gain publishing clearance via Harry Fox or a label rep applying for the license, not the artist.

In my lawsuit that she was served, I referred to her as ripping me off and engaging in that unlawful industry practice of passing around copyrighted materials for usage that did not belong to her, as they are mine. Among the people listed in my lawsuit as a Defendant is Gwen Stefani, who I referred to as both she and Madonna are married to Englishmen and both live in London. A few days ago, after receiving service of the lawsuit, Madonna stated in a very public interview for the first time that she and Gwen Stefani are both married to Englishmen and both live in London.

I formally alleged that her partner in an internet film company, Jerry Bruckheimer, via his television show CSI:Miami, which is filmed in my hometown of 20 years, Miami, willfully violated my Sound Off Column's copyrights via articles that were viewed by millions and used as show plot lines and text and as a harassment technique, featured items from the illegal surveillance campaign Madonna commissioned of me, in episodes of CSI:Miami.

Much like he used CSI:NY to harass and taunt rival indie producer Harvey Weinstein via a nasty character his show patterned after him and incriminatingly and unwittingly confirmed this to the public via a leaked casting call sent out to agencies that a web site obtained and published much to Bruckheimer's chagrin.

Madonna announced days after my lawsuit that her (copyright infringing) single "Hung Up" (that she stole from my copyrighted music), will be featured on an episode of CSI:Miami. Thanks for publicly acknowledging a connection that was apart of your criminal misconduct.

She’s been getting bashed quite a lot in the press recently. Many journalists slammed her approach to child rearing because she hypocritically does not allow her children to watch TV, all while she pollutes it for other people’s innocent children to stumble upon. She uses her kids for publicity and photo-ops and doesn’t allow them to watch TV, eat meat, sweets or diary, which several journalists and stars took exception to.

One journalist humorously suggested maybe it was one of Madonna’s kids who “booby-trapped her horse” to throw her from said steed for their “TV free and diary free household.” Sounds more like a fun free household. Not to mention, her kids usually look very sad in pics. Recently, another journalist has taken to calling her Mommy Dearest after Joan Crawford's character in said film, which is ironic, as I had written months ago that she reminded me of Joan Crawford in Mommy Dearest.

Apparently others have noticed Madonna's strange behavior as well. Jon Bon Jovi was quoted as calling Madonna “crazy” and saying she carries those kids to every movie premiere.

Her publicist fired back that she never carries them to movie premiers, but I think what Bon Jovi meant is she uses them as fashion accessories for publicity as various premiers (book) and for arranged photo-ops in public that look staged and unnatural. I saw a clip of a Mad TV skit that lampooned her for this very thing.

When asked about not allowing her kids to watch TV due to Madonna’s very public proclamation, actress Courtney Cox stated she does allow her child to watch TV and it depends what you allow your kids to watch. Good point.

For example, it's not a good idea to let a child watch a Madonna video, which is basically soft-core porn, as several music reviewers wrote.

Besides, how much does Madonna know about raising kids considering she was sued for choking one (and she loves to brag that she has two nannies).

Madonna: The Copy And Paste Artist

BOYCOTT MADONNA'S FORTHCOMING "CONFESSIONS ON A DANCE FLOOR" CD THAT SHE  RIPPED OFF MY COPYRIGHTED WORK AND OTHERS TO MAKE THIS PIECE OF TRASH.

Already, preliminary reviews of her new copyright infringing album "Confessions On A Dance Floor" are rife with statements about her ripping off other people’s music via knock offs of already released copyrighted songs and other people’s ideas she is pathetically passing off as her own.

Last month, a journalist reported and posted a pic of her walking around London with that crazed Joan-Crawford-in-Mommy-Dearest look on her face, while carrying a Goldfrapp CD in her hand (a band that slammed her) only for another reviewer to write shortly after that one of her new songs sounds like a Goldfrapp knock off.

Why was she walking around London prominently displaying a Goldfrapp CD in her hands for all to see - but with no Discman to play it on? That's crazy.

However, it reminds me of a weird incident I wrote about in my lawsuit that happened a few months ago, where a black guy I wrote about in my lawsuit, one of several people who were sent to approach approach me in public, however, he was oddly dressed like Tupac with nothing but a Madonna Greatest Hits CD in his hand that he oddly flashed in my face, before scurrying off. And this wasn't a far distance from my house, which is even more disturbing (read the lawsuit for the background on the other times people were sent to approach me).

He was hardly Madonna's demographic and of all the people around why did he come up to me and do that. A 20 year old, black thug walking around Miami flashing a outdated Madonna Greatest Hits CD is a candidate for some serious taunting.

Others complained that she used the same Donna Summer sample Kylie Minogue previously did in a sound a like track on her new album – never mind another journalist wrote she was front and center for a Kylie concert a few months ago.

She even ripped off a main lyrical line from the Righteous Brothers well known hit I wrote of in this Column about a year ago, titled "Unchained Melody" that goes "Time goes by so slowly." It is repeated several times as a lyric in that cruddy rip off "Hung Up."

Once again, her new CD is a rip off/copyright infringing copy and paste of other people's copyrighted works she willfully stole and ideas other artists have already done that she is calling her new re-invention, which is basically useless.

What kind of artistic contribution to music is deliberately ripping off other people’s copyrighted works, and in some cases criminally so, then glutting the mainstream market with it and fraudulently claiming it as your own. That's complete garbage.

Madonna The Hypocrite

Many journalists slammed her last week for “hypocritically” telling people to “turn from their wicked behavior or they will go to hell.” It's clear the collective public sentiment on that one was - you first, dear.

She is about as nefarious as they come, refuses to change her ways, has a penchant for choking people (among them a child), sent a director to his grave via her “wicked behavior” that he said lead to his heart attack that ultimately killed him, has criminally stolen millions of dollars worth of copyrights and illegally re-copyrighted them, passing them off as her own in violation of US and UN laws, perversely invaded an innocent family’s privacy, ripped of many musicians, writers and filmmakers to the tune of millions to fund her overly lavish lifestyle over the last 20 years, is using sex to sell records (even though she is almost 50), reportedly feigned masturbation on stage with a cross on the "Like A Virgin" tour in front of thousands each night, angered the Vatican with sacrilegious imagery that lead to her almost being excommunicated, violated Jewish law in singing about Jewish Rabbi Isaac Luria, who she later lied and she'd never heard of - yet is hypocritically lecturing everyone else on their “wicked behavior.” You need to do what Michael Jackson said and start with "The Man In The Mirror."

The message will fall on fallow ground when people collectively view the messenger as more corrupt than just about everyone else due to said messenger’s ongoing bad behavior that she herself continues to engage in.

PR Spinning

And what’s with denying the existence of everyone that she wrongs with her “wicked behavior.” As I wrote last week, she played dumb when confronted and sued for criminally choking 10 year old New York boy Keith Serrantino, played dumb when Jewish rabbis told her of the serious sin and violation of Jewish law she committed regarding using deceased Rabbi Isaac Luria’s name in a song for profit (sensing impending flames LOL, she said she'd never heard of him - one of the Kabbalah's primary sages, though she claims to be a Kabbalah expert). A few quotes from that incident:

"Such a woman brings great sin on Kabbalah. I hope that we will have the strength to prevent her from bringing sin upon the holiness of the rabbi." - Rabbi Israel Deri

"This type of woman wreaks enormous sin up the Kabbalah." - Rabbi Yisrael Deri

"There is a prohibition in Jewish law against using the holy name of our master, the Sage Isaac, for profit. This is an inappropriate act, and one can feel only pity at the punishment that she (Madonna) will receive from Heaven. The Sage Isaac is holy and pure, and immodest people cannot sing about him." - Rabbi Rafael Cohen.

Glad I'm not you. Then played dumb once again regarding all the criminal stuff she did in ripping off my copyrights among other things, with her publicist referring to me in an arranged article as misswhatshername (as if my name being called by a washed up, rabbi cussing publicist is some form of validation - get a clue, already).

Never mind my web site has clocked roughly 2,000 hits from them (the Defendants) this year alone year.

You lot visit a web site 2,000 times where you have to type the person’s name as apart of the site address to get to said site and you can’t remember the person’s name in an arranged interview where you tried to discredit said person – or do you have the site book marked eliminating the need to type my name over and over to get to the site to steal from it as you lot have done numerous times. Either that or you’re senile.

Said arranged article wrote “Madonna fixation” regarding me when it is the other way around. I have visited Madonna’s site about 10 times for the year to print out and save the deliberate rip offs of my copyrighted works for the lawsuit I filed against her and her partners/co-defendants.

They however have clocked 2,000 visits to my site this year alone according to my site statistics program used by tens of thousands of webmasters around the world.

Looks to me like you’re the one with the fixation. My site stats show it’s you and not me.

I’ve never been fixated with anyone (too vain, actually). Besides, I’ve never been a Madonna fan. I like artists who can actually sing. My dad is a musicologist. When you grow up listening to people like Mahalia Jackson, Aretha Franklin, Sam Cooke, Elvis Presley and Whitney Houston, it’s hard lowering your standards to the vocal crock(ery) that is Madonna.

Journalist Lloyd Grove, look for said site stats and other items as evidence in the libel and defamation case against you and the New York Daily News for being stupid enough to go along with Madonna and Liz Rosenberg in an arranged defamatory piece, in a vain attempt at trying to save face for a frequently sued, untalented, thieving, child choking pop star.

Also, why did you email me the night before only to write that piece of defamatory drivel that has only served to get you and your employer in legal trouble. Good thing I missed your deadline to go to print.

Then there was the other arranged defamatory piece via Roger Friedman and the Fox News web site, who are supposedly “Fair and Balanced” yet when their butt’s on the line in one of their parent company News Corp’s newspapers (The Sun UK) being named as a defendant in very serious and disgraceful acts of invasion of privacy that violate United Nations laws, once again, toss “Fair and Balance” out the window in ignoring many established facts in a case containing criminal conduct by one of their newspapers. You tried to discredit me, but I ended up discrediting you as a plagiaristic-copyright-infringing journalist.

I’d like to ask you, how can you ignore established facts about the woman you defended as some saint, when she is anything but:

  • It was reported numerous times that she stepped on, used and “trampled” many people on her way to fame.

  • Has been sued numerous times for copyright infringement by artists in America, Belgium and France.

  • Is a grave robber – deliberately stealing from the copyrights of deceased artist Guy Bourdin, whose estate sued her.

  • Has stolen more copyrighted works than any other artist in music history.

  • Choked a 10 year old boy who only wanted her autograph on her day off when she couldn’t be bothered to sign it.

  • Choked Dick Clark’s son.

  • Used her own 6 year old child to usher in her French kissing two 20 year old singers half her age.

  • Sent a director to his grave via a heart attack he said she caused from antagonizing him on the set of what ended up being his last film.

In order to defame me, a Christian who doesn’t drink, doesn’t smoke, has never done drugs, has no criminal record or history of questionable conduct, has given to charity since I was a teen, and spent over 2/3’s of my life authoring a catalog of copyrighted works valued at millions that Madonna criminally procured and used in violation of countless laws - that's in addition to ripping off already copyrighted and released music and lyrics from this web site in clear view of many of my site visitors, who kept emailing me asking if I noticed what Madonna was doing in stealing my work so many people had already seen and heard – for which I have a mountain of proof pointing to her guilt for all of this misconduct. Yet you, Mr. Fair and Balanced – tossed many established, easily verifiable, published facts out the window and flat-out lied and defamed me.

You single handedly proved that Fox News is anything but "Fair and Balanced." That's quite an accomplishment - albeit, a monumentally negative one.

Another thing…why did you mention Kofi Annan in your defamatory article about me in such a distasteful joke. I've never disrespected the United Nations - why did you opt to?

LEGAL FILE: Copyright Infringement, Hollywood and The Court System

Regarding the above mentioned lawsuit, to be frank, I’m going into court with no expectations. Why, you ask.

Not because of a lack of evidence or lack of triable facts. There is a mountain of evidence clearly and indisputably pointing to Madonna and her cohorts’ guilt.

However, in preparing to file suit, I looked at close to 100 copyright infringement lawsuits and in 98% of them against the ever-stealing-copyright-infringing major record companies and film studios like Warner and Disney, the accused conglomerates fed the judges and the court a cock and bull story, moved for a summary judgment, the cases got dismissed and they went right back to stealing more copyrighted works to start the unlawful conduct all over again. That’s called a pattern of corruption.

Copyright infringement is a way of life for the frequently sued Disney and Warner Bros. It accounts for a huge chunk of their income each year. Over the last 5 years, they’ve each made a few billion, not million, a few billion dollars from copyright infringement. They know exactly what their employees like Madonna are doing, but they look the other way in exchange for profits. They are raking in a fortune via copyright infringement; therefore U.S. Law and United Nations Laws are an afterthought.

The only two successful copyright infringement cases out of the roughly 100 cases I reviewed were the Isley Brothers v. Michael Bolton (which really seemed accidental) and Art Buchwald v. Paramount (which seemed totally deliberate). In those cases the plaintiffs whose works were infringed actually won. However, both plaintiffs were famous.

While the Isley's got a reasonable sum for the apparent infringement of their copyrighted music by Bolton, Art Buchwald was completely shafted. He got $1,000,000 in a case where it was established the Defendants committed willful copyright infringement and went on to unlawfully make roughly $500,000,000 off his script "King for a Day" that they renamed "Coming to America." Yea, I’m sure that title rang a bell with many of you.

If it wasn’t for Buchwald, what is now a classic, “Coming To America,” wouldn’t be in existence today, as it was stolen from his script and made from it with very little compensation to him, due to the cock and bull story the studio’s lawyers fed the Court about their mysterious losses from a film that was a huge hit, grossing way more than it cost to make. That movie is still making money to this day in cable and DVD rights.

Call it creative studio accounting. However, there have been books made that addressed what the studio's lawyers did in Court in that fateful lawsuit, namely “How The Movie Wars Were Won.” Said book contains a statement that not even the government and the IRS have been able to infiltrate the corrupt system some Hollywood studios utilize.

The book listed many cases brought against studios and how the artists who filed suit were blacklisted and slandered in Hollywood for daring to sue and speak out. It wrote of shady accounting practices that made huge hits like “Forrest Gump” allegedly appear like financial flops on paper to avoid paying writers (who author the scripts).

The sad and disturbing theme you get from it and other books like it is that people constantly steal copyrighted works and distribute certain major film studios' legal defense work among all the big law firms, so that a person whose copyrights were violated by them or a writer who was defrauded out of royalties that seeks to sue, can’t find a decent lawyer to take the case (conflict of interest).

The article said most law firms are on the studios’ payrolls. That is terrible. It is clear that the motto at some studios and record labels is it is more profitable to break the law and steal copyrights, then worry about the legal consequences later.

These studios make a very healthy profit from stealing copyrighted works, which is illegal. But it is why some of these major studios, major record labels and major artists like Madonna have no fear of the law, the U.S. government or the United Nations - because they know the millions, and sometimes billions they stand to make from breaking the law in stealing copyrighted works, is exponentially greater than the menial sum they'll have to pay in legal fees to get a case tossed and in some cases pay a menial sum far less than the violated works' value for a settlement.

The dollar amount pales in comparison. They know they will turn a huge profit from this internationally illegal activity, so they have no qualms about doing it.

But this is how their little system works. If the victim of their theft gets a lawyer actually brave enough to sue the blacklisting-career-sabotaging-media monopolizing Warner Bros or the Michael Eisner desecrated Disney (no wonder Roy Disney jr. went after him – was he raised by wolves), they pull every trick in the book in court and or move for a summary judgment under dubious premises and get the cases dismissed. End of story. Then go back to the criminal copyright infringing conduct. The court dockets reflect this clear pattern.

They spend little in legal fees on these cases, write it off as a business expense, feed the Court a load of rubbish, the case gets tossed and they walk out the court room confident in their frequently utilized, criminal profit making scheme – also known as racketeering (US RICO laws), copyright infringement and willful violations of United Nations laws. It's no accident and it's always the same exact people getting sued for and accused of this very thing.

They see the equation as such. Spend at worst $50,000 in legal fees, make $700,000,000 – $1,000,000,000 off of brilliant copyrighted works that were willfully and unlawfully stolen and infringed – turn a huge profit, less a few small legal fees.

Warner Bros did it with the copyright infringing "The Matrix" films and Disney did it with “Nemo” and “Pirates of The Caribbean” to name a few. Those films are at the center of very credible lawsuits that show these works were written, copyrighted and owned by others before Disney and Warner Bros. willfully infringed their copyrights and stole them, making billions.

         

And have the nerve to tell these kids on the Internet not to illegally download music and films - when their conduct is far worse. No wonder they don't listen. They see you stealing from people left, right and center. I read one site where they called Bruckheimer "a hypocrite" for his part in the "respect copyrights" campaign.

They just steal and steal and steal. Never mind the United Nations refers to this conduct as criminal and a willful violation of several United Nations member agreed to treaties – as long as Warner and Disney get what they want, who cares if innocent writers in different countries who labored over their works for years, then paid for their copyright registrations lose a fortune and their lives are severely disrupted and destroyed.

Look at the case Sophia Stewart v. Warner Bros and the Wachowski Brothers – over the film The Matrix. This woman has a very, very credible case. Anyone can see that they ripped off her copyrighted works and made 2.5 billion dollars off it in the process via racketeering and criminal copyright infringement.

It was reported the FBI even found evidence to support her claims. Their investigation revealed her copyrighted script was on the set of "The Matrix" films and unlawfully used as a template in making said movies.

When questioned by the FBI, employees on the film set reportedly told the FBI this information. They also discovered 30 minutes of footage was cut out of "The Matrix" in an attempt to dodge copyright infringement charges.

1.) The plaintiff, Sophia Stewart actually has correspondences that date to the time she sent her script to the filmmakers who she sued for illegally using her work.

2.) It was reported the FBI investigation uncovered that her copyrighted work had been used for the Terminator films as well. The published similarities are blatant. You know the catch phrase “I’ll be back” from the Terminator. That is in her script as well, which she copyrighted years before the film was ever made.

3.) She created the characters in the film that the Wachowski’s renamed to hide the theft.
In her script the female lead is named “Trafini," in the matrix the female lead is named “Trinity”.
In her script the lead character is called “The One,” in the Matrix the lead character is called “the One” and “Neo” which is an anagram for the word “One” as in “The One.”

4.) There is a character in her script called "The Gypsy" that "The One" goes to for advice. In The Matrix there is a character called "The Oracle" that "The One" goes to for advice.

5. ) The plot of her script is about a man “The One” who was born to save humanity and because of that his life is in danger. He was approached by rebels who told him who he is and his destiny. As you know if you’ve seen The Matrix… that is the entire plot of The Matrix and The Terminator.

You know what Warner Bros’ attorney said to this evidence, even the FBI stuff,  “The suit is void of merit.” The FBI found all that evidence in favor of the plaintiff…but “The suit is void of merit?”

Your own employees reportedly said to the FBI under investigation that they used the plaintiff’s work under the Wachowski's instruction, but “The suit is void of merit?”

You know, when there is that much incriminating evidence against you and the press calls…it’s best to say, “No comment.”

Another interesting observation I read from fans of the Matrix films on a message board...they said the first "Matrix" film was the best and the other two stunk. One poster even attributed it to the Wachowski’s actually having to write the two follow ups themselves rather than illegally ripping off more of the plaintiff’s copyrighted work, as she had filed suit against them right after she realized what happened with the first "Matrix" film.

As written above, The FBI also uncovered evidence that her innovative script was also unlawfully used to make the movie "The Terminator." A few wondered how the theft spread to both scripts, but it is a common practice in Hollywood.

In Hollywood copyrighted scripts and songs, much like certain actresses, get passed around.

Also, to those of you who know both films, they both have the same synopsis that originated from her script she shopped around Hollywood that they illegally used without her permission or compensation to her - a man born to save the world and computers taking over.

She based her film script on Jesus, but added the computer aspect, which was new technology at the time. Both films have that common thread and other details that originated with her script. Her work was so ground breaking at the time that they used it, but without permission. Some in Hollywood don’t like to share the glory or the money, even if it means cutting you out of what truly belongs to you.

There is no question they deliberately violated her copyrights. They made all this money and gained all this acclaim off of a copyrighted script that they did not write, that predated their works, but they took all the money, all the credit and all the glory for around the world, anyway. Hey, they have established careers and are millionaires based on a sham gained solely through fraud and deceit.

JOURNALISM: Media blackouts

However, most of you don't know about Sophia Stewart v. Warner Bros over the Matrix films, because Warner Bros is owner of Conde Naste, who owns most of the media, and reportedly called for and clearly achieved a mainstream press black out of this thoroughly disgraceful story. Should one company wheel that much influence that they can call for and achieve a press blackout of valid news.

Should a company be allowed to do that? What about freedom of the press? What about equal access to the media? Isn’t that censoring the press? Isn’t that a monopoly of sorts? Isn’t that unethical?

No one company should have the ability to black out stories they dislike from the public to such a degree that they can keep the general public in the dark about important news events. There is something very wrong with that.

JOURNALISM: Plagiarism

Plagiarism - A dirty word in journalism, brought to light over the last few years due to high profile firings of journalists who deliberately plagiarized and fabricated stores disseminated to millions.

The problem – some journalists aren’t good writers and try to compensate for that by ripping off other people’s work, especially the catchy and clever stuff that they think makes them appear witty and funny. While other journalists run out of ideas to do what they are paid for – writing – and decide the way to remedy that is to steal from sources with little liability of getting caught (there’s no such thing).

You see, people who are true writers get really touchy about other people using their words. I read an article where Miami Herald syndicated journalist Leonard Pitts publicly told off another journalist good and proper for plagiarizing his articles in a rival paper. Pitts fumed when said journalist even ripped off an emotional article he'd written about his experience when his mother died from cancer. He was so angry, he wrote the guy’s boss and got him fired. He told him via his column in the paper, “The dictionary is full of words, get your own.”

Like I said, writers get touchy when you rip off their writing, as it is though you are raping their proverbial soul. They don’t take time to craft their work only for someone else to steal it and take credit and a salary for it. That is wrong, lazy and uncreative.

Essentially, plagiarism is cheating and collecting payment for other people’s labor.

SPIRITUAL: Horowitz Murder Case

I read about the tragic Horowitz murder committed by a teenaged Satanist. People often hear these kids talking about worshipping the devil and joke about it in films and sitcoms, but it is very destructive conduct that needs to be paid attention to. When someone becomes so immersed in the occult that they are saying they worship the devil, that's nothing to joke about, as harmful behavior is soon to follow. 

And some singers aren't very helpful. They put put these dark CDs that submerse their fans in that garbage, but if a fan does something serious and the finger is pointed at them, they are quick to disown any responsibility.

SPIRITUAL: Weather Woes

Remember after Katrina how certain terrorists and extremists cheered and attributed it to allah striking his wrath upon America. This month, now that the tables have turned and a devastating earthquake has hit the heavily Muslim populated Pakistan and India, was this allah striking his wrath upon the Muslim based countries? It got awfully quiet.

Like I wrote in my Katrina article last month, natural disasters happen all the time all over the world. We must learn to help each other. Not rub salt into each others' wounds over our weather woes. Just like it can happen to one country, it can happen to another.

SPIRITUAL: Cults

Something I read in the Miami SunPost :

 “I skip town for one week and the entire world crumbles. Katie Holmes is expecting...another big fat check, because there is no way having a baby was part of the original ‘deal.’

In other cult news, a web site lampooning Tom Cruise whose title was a name that was a pun on the Church of Scientology was forced to desist using the name Scientomology. Get it, “ScienTOMology.

Clever name, but it did indeed infringe their trademark. Legally speaking you aren’t supposed to register a site name that rips off someone's trademark/name. No matter how clever the title, it is grounds for litigation.

SPIRITUAL: Discouragement

Discouragement can leave you feeling defeated. Like you won't make it. Like you won’t recover. It is a form of depression, which can leave you feeling very low. However, you should not give in to those feelings.

Think of things that are good, that give you a more optimistic outlook. Don’t imagine the worst. Don’t let your mind run wild with every negative imaginable thing.

Retrain yourself to have hope and faith that no matter how bad your situation is, God can help you get back on your feet again and make something good out of your life.

SPIRITUAL: What would Jesus Do?

I saw an excerpt from a comedy special where the guy said he wants to have a six-pack like Jesus and I couldn’t stop laughing. He said “Jesus was ripped” and come to think of it, all the pics of Him showed Him with the most perfect abs.

Seriously, people use the phrase “What would Jesus do?” all the time when they are faced with tough decisions. We hear it all the time, but do we really think about what it means. It’s not some cliché. It's a good litmus test to base our decisions on.

SPIRITUAL: Parents talk to your Children

Parents need to talk to their children. Even if they are grown children in their twenties and thirties. If you see them going wrong, talk to them. No one is ever too old for a bit of wisdom.

A combination of bad friends and bad choices can still ruin precious lives well after they've left the house. Find out what your children are doing. Talk to them about it.

I thought about it, and God willingly if I have children one day, I'd be protective of them as well and want to know just what they are up to and who they are dating. I'd be protective of my daughters (but being a woman I'd understand them a bit more though - I'd still be overbearing and intrusive though).

However no one would be good enough for my sons. I'd scrutinize anyone they dated. Of course I'd tell them their date was a tramp and not to worry, mommy will find you a virgin from a mountain village somewhere (LOL).

You get my point. Parents need to talk to their kids. They also need to pray for them daily as well. There are so many things they can fall prey to. There are so many people in this world with bad intentions.

Some parents sit by and believe in that "letting kids make their own mistakes," but some mistakes can cost them their lives and take out other people's children with them. There are some avoidable mistakes in life that you don't totally recover from and can only adjust to.

Some people fail their kids in what they fail to talk to them about. They're good parents, but they aren't talking to their kids about certain risky moral choices they are making, as they’ve chalked it up to them being young.

Others are failing their kids in what they do talk to them about. They've taught them by word and example to do whatever they need to and step on whoever they need to get to where they want, but what happens when they start paying for that and make no mistake they will. You need to start telling them you were wrong and not to follow that example.

Some pimp their children off on questionable people because they are wealthy or famous. Men who would beat your daughters and women who would corrupt and mislead your sons. I'm not saying all wealthy or famous people are bad, but some are, and some of notice certain shady things about their character and close their eyes to things that they know are wrong, and pushing your children off on these people anyway. What if they get into a rage and beat your child so badly one day that they end up in the hospital or dead.

Some of you leave your kids up too much (young and adult children). I don't care how busy you think you are or how smart and allegedly self-sufficient your child is. The smartest people make bad choices all the time. They could use your help, even if they act like they don't want it.

It doesn't matter how old your children are, sometimes you as a parent can sense and understand things they can't, partly because you've been through it before.

Once again, you need to talk to your children and find out what they are up to. So, what if they complain you are meddling in their business. It may save their life.

   

 


© Copyright 2002 - 2017 AG. All Rights Reserved. Web site design by Aisha for Sonustar Interactive

Aisha | Goodison Trust | Sonustar | Sonustar News | Judiciary Report | Sound Off Column | Celluloid Film Review | Consumer News Reviews | Compendius | United Peace Initiative | Justice And Truth | American Justice System Corruption | Medicine And Science Times