[EMI_Guy]

I read both of those about Culkin and Gibson.

Pretty danged disturbing to say the least. The claims made in both are top level incredible. Six months ago those claims would have been thrown in the trash, but now...? Not so much anymore.

I want to know why Gibson, who tends to go against the H-wood grain anyway, didn’t say or do something?

Easy for me to say I guess. Gibson has already been branded somewhat of a loose cannon some of that through his own choices, so perhaps if he had gone rather public the claims could readily be laughed off. Maybe the negatives about Gibson starting years ago was a plan all along? Establish him as a nut job therefore most anything sensational he says has no foundation?

Both this Culkin and Gibson stuff might be some support for the methods Q is using: carefully plant the seeds, we water them, find out better ways of caring for them while maturing and growing, and then divide the plants for propogation once fully established?

[Cboldt]

Re: Gibson, like all of us, isn't an angel. Not saying he's the sort of pervert we take off the street, just that he may have kept quiet to shield his own little skeletons - or to protect somebody he cares about.

I don't think he gives a rip about being ridiculed - but I base that on the image he presents to the public.