Posted on 12/10/2003 3:48:40 PM PST by yonif
I would be lying if I didn't admit that the past few weeks have seen my old affection for Michael Jackson return in fair measure. This has little to do with the eroding credibility of his accuser and everything to do with my having gone back and reviewed mementos of our relationship and our public work together in trying to get the world's parents to prioritize their children.
I went back at looked at these things to try and remind myself what it was that so endeared Michael to me in the first place, amid what are undeniable and serious character flaws.
In so much of the public work we did together – the lecture at Oxford University, the symposium at Carnegie Hall, the visit to a synagogue in Manhattan, distributing books to underprivileged children and their parents in Newark – Michael emerges as a highly intelligent, insightful, and inspiring man with a richly developed philosophy of why the child's world is superior to the adult's.
The texts of the speeches we delivered reminded me of something I had begun to forget: I once knew an entirely different Michael Jackson. A Michael Jackson who was not always surrounded by the kind of miscreants of low reputation that seem to be currently running his life. A Michael who, far from coming across as the molesting sicko that many now believe him to be, convinced me that he was serious about helping children the world over, even if he had no direct contact with them.
A Michael who was not the materialistic simpleton who embarrasses himself in a Martin Bashir documentary by spending millions of dollars on trinkets rather than devoting his money to a worthy cause. The Michael who had deep spiritual interests and debated with me the existence of God and the theological problem of human suffering.
The Michael who inspired me to be a more available father and convinced me that all virtue derived from a parent's exposure to his children. The Michael Jackson who was humble and soft-spoken and not the raving lunatic who ran around on a hired New York bus saying that Tommy Mattola, the Sony music boss, was Satan. It was a Michael very different to the one being discussed today on TV. I wonder if that Michael still exists.
TO BE SURE, while I am understandably guarded about my feelings about the current accusations against Michael, I have already said publicly that having witnessed the boy's mother on one occasion at Neverland, she always struck me as overly solicitous of Michael. Now, that doesn't mean that she did anything wrong, just as Michael's strange and at times truly stupid behavior – like dangling his child from a hotel balcony – does not mean that he is a criminal. What it all does mean is that there is a lot more to this story than meets the eye.
Back when I was close to Michael I was asked all the time, since I was publicly defending him, whether I believed there was truth to the 1993 molestation allegations. When I said that I found it difficult to believe them because surely there would be a lot more than one accuser, I was always heartened to see that the majority of people accepted that argument.
After all, experts say that pedophiles can't control themselves. That they're sick and they can never recover. In that case, why weren't hundreds of boys coming forward? Yet, this time, it seems that the majority of people seem to believe that Michael is indeed guilty and even my confidence in Michael's innocence has been seriously shaken. Here's why: Michael stupidly said on TV that he brings children into his bed. He was dumb for saying it, and even dumber for doing it. I don't want to be a broken record here, but the fact that Michael doesn't get the immorality of these actions – even if they are not criminal – is what has led most people to believe he must be guilty.
That is why I practically begged him publicly not to excuse this bizarre behavior and instead come forward and forswear the practice forever. Let him also say that he is going to get his life together; that there is no truth to the molestation allegations; that he may be stuck in a juvenile state, but that doesn't make him a pedophile.
Let him devote his life toward demonstrable change. That from now on he will ensure that Prince and Paris get to see their mother at least twice every month. That he will donate Neverland outright to a children's charity, like Make-A-Wish, and move to Encino where he can be close to his parents and his family.
Let him say that he is arranging with his family to supervise him and protect him from himself, which means that they will ensure that he is never left alone with other people's children (so that there be no suspicion), and that his family will never allow him to have plastic surgery again. That his mother will start taking him back to church with her so that he can have a spiritual foundation in which to anchor his deteriorating life, and that he plans to reconnect with the Jehovah's Witnesses who once played a key role in keeping him stable and humble.
This could all save Michael Jackson, I am sure. But instead, what we see is that some members of his family have instead chosen to play the race card. Indeed, in a conversation that I had with Michael in winter of 2000, he also told me that he thought that some of the attacks against him were motivated by race. That may be. What is certain, however, is that Michael has to begin to get it.
The stupidest thing he can do is blame this whole episode on others and say it's racism. Sure, it worked for O.J. Simpson. But did it? He was vindicated in court. But look where he is today. Is that where Michael Jackson wants to be in a few years' time? The country's No. 1 pariah?
In about March 2001, I was having dinner at a kosher restaurant in Miami when Michael, who was in New York, reached me on a cell phone. "Shmuley," he told me, "did you see the terrible story of all these hundreds of thousands of African kids who are being sold into slavery every year? Can we please do something about it? We have to. We just have to."
I told Michael I would look into it. It turned out that the Rev. Al Sharpton had just gone to Africa, accompanied by The New York Post, to highlight the issue of black children in countries such as Sudan who were being sold into slavery by Islamic slave brokers. As providence would have it, just a few weeks earlier, I had debated Sharpton in New York city in a fiery, take-no-prisoners exchange, on the subject of Black-Jewish relations.
After the event, however, I invited him for dinner to a kosher restaurant and a friendship began to emerge. I called Sharpton and said to him, "Look, you highlighted this cause. So in all fairness, rather than doing this on our own, Michael should join you on a mission to Africa to bring further attention to this unbelievable scourge of child slavery."
Sharpton was understandably excited at the prospects of so big a star joining him. A few days later, The New York Post, having been alerted by Sharpton's publicist, even ran a headline saying that Michael would be joining Rev. Al's campaign to liberate African kids from the slave trade.
The day that headline appeared my phone rang off the hook. One of Michael's managers called me and said, "Are you insane? Sharpton? You know he's controversial. We just announced that Michael is performing a 30th anniversary concert at Madison Square Garden in September. Now sponsors will pull out."
I responded, "Actually, I think you're the one who's insane. Michael needs to be reconnected to his people. He needs to be seen working on behalf of the black community. It's good for his image, but more important, it's good for him. We all need to be connected with our roots if we are to have an authentic and healthy identity. Going to Africa to highlight the plight of enslaved African children is honorable. And Sharpton was the one who brought this to America's attention, so no matter what you think of him, we should go with Sharpton. I believe in gratitude."
The manager came back. "We're not going to discuss this. It's over. Michael simply will not travel with him and ruin his concert."
NOT KNOWING what to do, I called my old friend and New York's leading PR whiz, Howard Rubenstein, who was advising me and Michael at the time. Heavily involved in many worthy causes, Howard is one of the finest and most decent professionals I know.
We got Sharpton on the phone and in a three-way conversation, Howard explained to him what was going on. Sharpton said, correctly, that he had not approached Michael. Rather, we had approached him, and there was no way he was going to let Michael's people embarrass him by distancing themselves from him.
He further said that if Michael's people were to utter a single word against him, he would organize a public protest against Michael's concerts. I told him that I understood how he felt, that his disappointment was justified, but since I had nothing to do with Michael's career, I had no control over this situation. In the end we settled for a simple press release that said that due to Michael's pressing recording and concert responsibilities, he would not be traveling to Africa as announced.
I felt this was all a great shame because the cause was righteous and I knew that Michael himself wished to work on its behalf.
Later, as many readers know, I arranged for Sharpton to visit Israel on a solidarity mission for Israeli victims of terror, and Sharpton, while offering real and impressive comfort to the Israeli victims he met, famously decided to visit Yasser Arafat, which caused a serious rift in our relationship and undermined all the goodwill Sharpton had generated through the trip.
Still, Sharpton and I have remained friends, and he was a frequent guest on my radio show. As he once said to me, "Shmuley, we have disagreed with one another without becoming disagreeable."
Such are the issues in Michael Jackson's life where greedy advisers and sycophants have often led him down a ruinous path. This of course does not excuse Michael's own choice of these clueless intimates who surround him.
His advisers should be telling Michael to focus on getting his life together, even as he fights these heinous allegations. Because even a vindication in the courtroom does not equal a healthy and balanced existence later in life.
The writer, a rabbi and author, has long been involved in African-American-Jewish relations.
I think he could have worded this a bit better!
Would you listen to this? Al Sharpton doesn't care about anything but himself, obviously.
I have heard the Rabbi interviewed many times. This is a very good article. Glad you posted it. I am not defending Jackson, but I don't know the truth yet, so we shall see.
I didn't get that impression. The rabbi said:
Let him [Michael] say that he is arranging with his family to supervise him and protect him from himself, which means that they will ensure that he is never left alone with other people's children (so that there be no suspicion), and that his family will never allow him to have plastic surgery again. That his mother will start taking him back to church with her so that he can have a spiritual foundation in which to anchor his deteriorating life, and that he plans to reconnect with the Jehovah's Witnesses who once played a key role in keeping him stable and humble.
Thank you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.