[Howlin]

So, according to you, if yesterday I didn't think the charge of child molesting had been proven, I am defending a sexual predator?

And if today, on a completely different thread, I ask somebody if that is the same boy that was in the video, you contend that you somehow have "connected the dots" that I'm once again defending Michael Jackson?

With desparation thinking like that, it's no wonder you need such big icons to draw attention to yourself!

[Hildy]

Don't even bother trying to have a discussion with Sabertooth. It will only infuriate you.

[Sabertooth]

So, according to you, if yesterday I didn't think the charge of child molesting had been proven, I am defending a sexual predator?

Not a good parse.

Your "can we make it a threesome?" post was chiming along with "I don't think he's a child molester," "I just don't think he's a sexual predator," and "We seem to be in the minority here."

That's a long walk from "[you] didn't think the charge of child molesting had been proven."

And if today, on a completely different thread, I ask somebody if that is the same boy that was in the video, you contend that you somehow have "connected the dots" that I'm once again defending Michael Jackson?

Again, this won't work.

Your post on this thread was "You don't suppose this is the cancer boy who was in that disturbing video with him, do you?"

The point-counterpoint is that yesterday you didn't think Jackson was a child molester, or a sexual predator, but today you think the video of Jackson and the boy with cancer was "disturbing."

I find a rather vast difference beteen your sentiment of yesterday and that of today.

What changed for you?