yes. If religious people can put up religious symbols or try to convert you, why not do the same for atheism?

can it play mkv video files?

[QUOTE="smilingjack682"][QUOTE="Asim90"]

Some interesting thoughts here, but I personally do not think Michael molested children for several reasons:

1. He was practically a big kid himself, his love of water balloon and pie fights isn't exactly the behaviour of an adult. This guy was an adult from the age of five, so as he got older he started acting more child like to make up for his lost childhood. Kids dont get it on with other kids.

2. He admitted to sharing a bed with kids, this to me shows that he genuinely believes that there is nothing wrong with it as long as it is not sexual. This isn't the action of a criminal. Usually, a criminal will simply deny all actions, if he was guilty he would deny sharing a bed at all.

3. The fathers accuser was in hundreds of thousands of debts and was taped in a conversation that showed his jealousy and hatred for Michael. Even the boys mother said she wouldn't believe Michael would do such a thing.

4. There were hundreds of other kids in that house and none of them or their parents expressed any concern or belief that Michael was a molester.

5. The kids so called description of Michael did not match the photos that were taken of him.

6. Michael has literally helped thousands of kids, donating money to find cures and saving lives. This to me, again isn't the actions of a criminal. These are the actions of someone who genuinely just loves kids.

7. There was NEVER any actual evidence against him.

The biggest argument from people that believed he was a molester is that he paid an out of court settlement. Anyone that knows the full story would know that Michael refused the settlement twice but was advised to simply pay it as there was no guarantee of justice. He simply wanted it to be over since it was taking longer then expected and was severely tarnishing his name. Anyway, thats my personal thoughts.

Asim90

How does that make him a child molester? All that shows is that the guy was not happy with his face and went WAY overboard with plastic surgery. There are quite a few celebrities that have done that.

That's one kid that was bought off. So what?

Pirate700

heres the link...http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=101499685845&h=yRN0t&u=xJmxw&ref=nf

heres another link with more description of the trialhttp://surftofind.com/jackson

"His career would not have been jeopardized, his image would not have been tarnished and, again, assuming he was indeed a pedophile he could have carried on with his activities without people suspecting anything. The only logical reason to explain why he didn't pay off Evan Chandler is because he was INNOCENT and naively assumed that justice would be on his side."

"Remember, before carrying out his plan, Evan Chandler went to Michael Jackson first and asked for money. "

"There is a taped phone conversation between Evan Chandler (the alleged victim's father) and Dave Schwartz (the allged victim's stepfather) where Chandler says, "Everything's going according to a certain plan that isn't just mine... and if I go through with this, I win big time. There's no way I lose. I've checked that inside out. I will get everything I want, and they will be destroyed forever. June will lose [custody of the son]... and Michael's career will be over." This tape was played all over news networks and also on the Prime Time Live interview with Michael Jackson and Lisa Marie Presley in 1994. It seems, however, that the media has conveniently forgotten about it. "

Those are just a few lines that I thought were pretty significant.

This caught my attention.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090204/ap_on_re_us/highway_signs_zombies

[QUOTE="Superbored"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Buyugold"]

This has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment, the guy got the assault rifle illegaly off the street.

Theokhoth

The article doesn't say that at all, and if he bought it illegally, he would have been charged for that as well, which he was not.

Distribution of firearms to anyone who wants one without any sort of mental check-up or history review based on some primitive chest-beating amendment invariably leads to this nonsense. The worst part of this tragedy is that it is completely avoidable.

I'm pretty sure in most states is completely illegal to own an automatic rifle of any kind.

No, it is not. Again, if he got it illegally, he would have been charged with illegal possession of firearms, which he was not.

I don't think u can get automatic rifles, especially an ak-47. I've been in a gun shop and they only sell normal rifles and handguns.

Wow this really sucks. This kid was killed while trick-or-treating at someone's house. This is one reason not to go trick-or-treating.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081101/ap_on_re_us/trick_or_treat_killing

This one made me laugh. I wonder wat is god's home address.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/suing_god