BBC bans Michael Jackson music amidst child abuse claims

[GoldHeart]

"She talks a pile of wild, unsubstantiated nonsense except when I agree with her - then it's true."

Pearl is one person , trust you to pick up on her .
I didn't post her videos as I knew people would get distracted , I posted other videos debunking wade & Jimmy . Other forum members have posted credible factual videos about them as well . This isn't about "mj death hoax" it's about the wade & Jimmy & all the inconsistencies & contradictions with their stories. That's where the focus is :idc:.

And who says you have to agree 100% with someone?, I've watched plenty of videos about different topics where people have different opinions to me but we might still agree on some points :shrug: . It doesn't write off the parts WE DO agree on .

[user104658]

Pearl is one person , trust you to pick up on her .
I didn't post her videos as I knew people would get distracted , I posted other videos debunking wade & Jimmy . Other forum members have posted credible factual videos about them as well . This isn't about "mj death hoax" it's about the wade & Jimmy & all the inconsistencies & contradictions with their stories. That's where the focus is :idc:.

And who says you have to agree 100% with someone?, I've watched plenty of videos about different topics where people have different opinions to me but we might still agree on some points :shrug: . It doesn't write off the parts WE DO agree on .

I'm not saying the original documentary is balanced - but I have yet to see a video debunking it from ANY impartial source that isn't quite blatantly an MJ family member, fan-site, or general MJ fan. Every video that has been linked is from sites or YouTube accounts called things like "MICHAEL JACKSON IS INNOCENT!!111!1!" ... it's not unbiased information, quite obviously.

[Beso]

Paris jackson....why does she self harm, why did she supposedly attempt suicide last week....why is she saying she won't defend her father?

[user104658]

Paris jackson....why does she self harm, why did she supposedly attempt suicide last week....why is she saying she won't defend her father?To be fair it seems like she just wants nothing to do with any of it...

[Kazanne]

Paris jackson....why does she self harm, why did she supposedly attempt suicide last week....why is she saying she won't defend her father?

This might explain Parmnion, the media doing a job on her now it seems,as she says she did NOT attempt suicide and explains about her dad.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/celebrity/paris-jackson-rubbishes-reports-of-attempted-suicide/ar-BBURyD3?ocid=spartanntp

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/celebrity/paris-jackson-its-not-my-role-to-defend-dad-michael/ar-BBUM6dO?ocid=spartanntp

[Beso]

This might explain Parmnion, the media doing a job on her now it seems,as she says she did NOT attempt suicide and explains about her dad.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/celebrity/paris-jackson-rubbishes-reports-of-attempted-suicide/ar-BBURyD3?ocid=spartanntp

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/celebrity/paris-jackson-its-not-my-role-to-defend-dad-michael/ar-BBUM6dO?ocid=spartanntp




You might want to read the last paragraph of the first link hun.:idc:

[GoldHeart]

You might want to read the last paragraph of the first link hun.:idc:

Obviously affecting all his kids of course they're going to be having issues , doesn't make him guilty! :nono:. Wouldn't you be emotionally upset if your loved one was accused years later of horrible abuse despite being cleared of all charges??, his family thought all this crap was behind them and now Wade Robber & Jimmy safebox want to drag Mj 's name and legacy through the mud :bored:.

[Beso]

Obviously affecting all his kids of course they're going to be having issues , doesn't make him guilty! :nono:. Wouldn't you be emotionally upset if your loved one was accused years later of horrible abuse despite being cleared of all charges??, his family thought all this crap was behind them and now Wade Robber & Jimmy safebox want to drag Mj 's name and legacy through the mud :bored:.

The last paragraph....:shrug:

[GoldHeart]

ISkSOoV848c

[Kazanne]

You might want to read the last paragraph of the first link hun.:idc:

I have Parmy and 'maybe' that is true it was 2 years ago, she says this time she has NOT so why disbelieve her of you believe her the first time ,no need for her to deny it is there? so it seems the tabloids are rolling with untruths again.:nono:

[chuff me dizzy]

Jill Dando wasn't murdered she was assassinated. It sounds like an insane conspiracy theory but it's actually the facts of the case; the man who was initially charged with her killing was later found not to have done it and was released, no one else has ever been caught, and the police are certain that it was a professional paid killer.

There's a lot of debate over why she was killed and no one really knows 100% but she clearly knew something that people with power and influence wanted kept secret.

Its a bizarre case.

Dando was about to open up a serious can of worms re high ranking child abuse ,CR befriended her close to her murder and was said at the time to be the last person to talk to her before she was killed

[chuff me dizzy]

Paris jackson....why does she self harm, why did she supposedly attempt suicide last week....why is she saying she won't defend her father?

I doubt very much any of the children have a drop of MJ blood running in their veins

[GoldHeart]

I doubt very much any of the children have a drop of MJ blood running in their veins

And what business is that biological or not who cares !? , MJ raised those kids & brought them up therefore he's their Father .

[user104658]

I doubt very much any of the children have a drop of MJ blood running in their veins

I'm sure it was confirmed at some point that none of the children are his biologically? Although I do actually agree with GoldHeart that that doesn't really matter.

[Nancy.]

So much for Dan Reed being a "respected documentary maker".

1107693863551094787


From MJ's ex lawyer HIMSELF....

https://i.ibb.co/cLqtMk2/Capture.jpg

Now click on the video that Greg posted in response to Dan Reed.
1107746454653857794

[GoldHeart]

So much for Dan Reed being a "respected documentary maker".

1107693863551094787


From MJ's ex lawyer HIMSELF....

https://i.ibb.co/cLqtMk2/Capture.jpg

Now click on the video that Greg posted in response to Dan Reed.
1107746454653857794


Dan Reed is the definition of a sleazy scumbag :suspect: , he had his own agenda throughout his fictional BS film . Even when he's called out with evidence he still talks utter garbage :facepalm:.

[user104658]

Nancy as he specifically references "charges and allegations", one has to assume that he is talking about both the XtraJet issue and the trial, as the XtraJet dispute had absolutely nothing to do with any "charges and allegations" as all that was happening there was them trying to sell footage from the flight (they actually said there was nothing dodgy in the footage at all; they were trying to sell it on the basis that it showed he WASN'T behaving strangely on the flights, but yes they were trying to sell it to the media).

But yeah. He says "charges and allegations" so the insistence now that he was only talking about the XtraJet footage, and not the wider legal situation, is clearly false.

[GoldHeart]

Nancy as he specifically references "charges and allegations", one has to assume that he is talking about both the XtraJet issue and the trial, as the XtraJet dispute had absolutely nothing to do with any "charges and allegations" as all that was happening there was them trying to sell footage from the flight (they actually said there was nothing dodgy in the footage at all; they were trying to sell it on the basis that it showed he WASN'T behaving strangely on the flights, but yes they were trying to sell it to the media).

But yeah. He says "charges and allegations" so the insistence now that he was only talking about the XtraJet footage, and not the wider legal situation, is clearly false.

TS if you can't see the issue here then I'm done :facepalm:

All you have to do is see the clear differences in the actual footage as opposed to the edited version Dan used , it's more misleading BS to fit his agenda .

[user104658]

TS if you can't see the issue here then I'm done :facepalm:

All you have to do is see the clear differences in the actual footage as opposed to the edited version Dan used , it's more misleading BS to fit his agenda .

It is a deliberately misleading edit but that doesn't mean he isn't talking about both cases; they were going on concurrently. What do you think he means when he says "charges and allegations", if he isn't talking about the 2005 trial? There were no charges or allegations against Michael in relation to the XtraJet footage.

[GoldHeart]

I also find Reed's whole editing of the film suspicious and deceptive . It's more so obvious with Safechuck's shots that it wasn't all taken in 1 or even 3 days . It looks like it took several months to film . The clip with the pathetic rings and
ridiculous wedding ceremony story looks like it was an after thought to add in the film :bored: .

Wade's shots also look like they were re done alot , but safechuck's stand out more. And when a film is this choppy and padded out it's easy for 2 actors to lie and follow a script and even re film a scene so it's more "believable" :suspect: .

If safechuck & Wade were sat for 4 hours straight in a court room raw UNEDITED i guarantee the outcome would be different and they'd crack under pressure , there's no director saying "cut" or telling them what to say when a court of law is involved . Even the Oprah interview was cringy .

[Livia]

Paris jackson....why does she self harm, why did she supposedly attempt suicide last week....why is she saying she won't defend her father?

Maybe because she's as ****ed up as he was.

[Nancy.]

I also find Reed's whole editing of the film suspicious and deceptive . It's more so obvious with Safechuck's shots that it wasn't all taken in 1 or even 3 days . It looks like it took several months to film . The clip with the pathetic rings and
ridiculous wedding ceremony story looks like it was an after thought to add in the film :bored: .

Wade's shots also look like they were re done alot , but safechuck's stand out more. And when a film is this choppy and padded out it's easy for 2 actors to lie and follow a script and even re film a scene so it's more "believable" :suspect: .

If safechuck & Wade were sat for 4 hours straight in a court room raw UNEDITED i guarantee the outcome would be different and they'd crack under pressure , there's no director saying "cut" or telling them what to say when a court of law is involved . Even the Oprah interview was cringy .

Have you seen this, Goldheart?

7TQ9Tpc_-NU

Here's more from the person who made that video...

"In response to the more frequent disagreements in the comment section here.

... Yes, a lot of documentaries have interviews that are filmed with multiple takes and very brief shots of the interviewees ... and it's arguably a deception in those films too - it makes the interviewees seem less credible. However, most documentaries actually involve evidence as well as interviews. In a case like this, where the "victims" already lack credibility on account of their own previous court testimonies and TV interviews, it was essential to get interview footage that was as honest and raw as possible. Multiple takes with selective editing was a very poor choice. It has resulted in the interviews having a scripted and acted appearance.

A few people saying that the director has already stated that the interviews were filmed over 2 or 3 days ... good. And I'm glad to bring more attention to that particular aspect of the production as a lot of people would miss the implication of multiple takes - the effort to try and get a strong acting performance that's actually dishonestly spliced together to appear like a natural flow of dialogue.

Regarding the people going on about the body language stuff, I did say in the video I'll be making a separate video on that so please feel free to respond that video when I post it.

Regarding the people asking if I've met any sexual abuse survivors, yes I have. I worked 17 years in the social care field and interacted with thousands of people in that line of work ... probation, homeless, learning difficulties, mental health, and yes ... I met and interacted with dozens of pedophiles and sex abuse victims so I have a personal experience take on both the victims and their abusers.

Regarding the folks who think that Jackson sleeping in the same bedroom as child visitors amounts to proof of sexual abuse. That's witch-hunt logic. A lot of people, adults and kids, sleep in the same bed or bedroom under various circumstances and it's not a foregone conclusion that sexual interaction has occurred. Yes, it does cast suspicion on Jackson and without that particular facet of his life there would be very little grounds for suspicion, but sexual intent is not the only possible motive. Jackson clearly had a child-like mentality in a lot of ways so it is perfectly logical that he enjoyed sleep overs with visitors to compensate for his loneliness and lack of family at the time. Yes, there is a possibility of sexual molestation, but possibility doesn't equal proof. And you need proof to convict in a court of law unless you believe in witch hunts.

Regarding the folks who say that there have been tons of accusers ... there have been a handful and it all kicked off with the discredited Jordy Chandler case. As Razorfist has aptly pointed out,Jackson made the mistake of settling the civil case out of court (without admission) so that he could defend the criminal case (the one that could actually lead to jail time). He defended and was acquitted on all charges, but the pay out given on the civil case gave the green light for other snakes in the grass to come out seeking multi-million payouts. From what I can tell, that has what has been happening on and off since.

"You just can't handle him being a pedo because you like his music". Yes, there are some who would defend Jackson even if proof were found of sexual abuse just as there are some who will keep calling him an abuser despite lack of evidence. Like most people, I fit into neither camp. I loved Kevin Spacey as an actor, Rolf Harris was a great cartoonist and Bill Cosby I found hilarious ... but I'm not trying to defend them.

Thanks for your thoughts folks."

[Nancy.]

The mockumentary is being released on Blu Ray/DVD? WTF!

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Leaving-Neverland-Blu-ray-Dan-Reed/dp/B07PGPZXF9/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8

So much for Dan Reed claiming "it's not about money".

[Beso]

Maybe because she's as ****ed up as he was.

I doubt that.

[rusticgal]

Maybe because she's as ****ed up as he was.

I think she is...hardly surprising. :wavey:

[Nancy.]

"I do the projects that I like and the projects that for some reason turn me on".

So Dan Reed's documentaries on Peodophilia turned him on? :umm2:

09:40
3l6VJgyjwbU

[GoldHeart]

Have you seen this, Goldheart?

7TQ9Tpc_-NU

Here's more from the person who made that video...

"In response to the more frequent disagreements in the comment section here.

... Yes, a lot of documentaries have interviews that are filmed with multiple takes and very brief shots of the interviewees ... and it's arguably a deception in those films too - it makes the interviewees seem less credible. However, most documentaries actually involve evidence as well as interviews. In a case like this, where the "victims" already lack credibility on account of their own previous court testimonies and TV interviews, it was essential to get interview footage that was as honest and raw as possible. Multiple takes with selective editing was a very poor choice. It has resulted in the interviews having a scripted and acted appearance.

A few people saying that the director has already stated that the interviews were filmed over 2 or 3 days ... good. And I'm glad to bring more attention to that particular aspect of the production as a lot of people would miss the implication of multiple takes - the effort to try and get a strong acting performance that's actually dishonestly spliced together to appear like a natural flow of dialogue.

Regarding the people going on about the body language stuff, I did say in the video I'll be making a separate video on that so please feel free to respond that video when I post it.

Regarding the people asking if I've met any sexual abuse survivors, yes I have. I worked 17 years in the social care field and interacted with thousands of people in that line of work ... probation, homeless, learning difficulties, mental health, and yes ... I met and interacted with dozens of pedophiles and sex abuse victims so I have a personal experience take on both the victims and their abusers.

Regarding the folks who think that Jackson sleeping in the same bedroom as child visitors amounts to proof of sexual abuse. That's witch-hunt logic. A lot of people, adults and kids, sleep in the same bed or bedroom under various circumstances and it's not a foregone conclusion that sexual interaction has occurred. Yes, it does cast suspicion on Jackson and without that particular facet of his life there would be very little grounds for suspicion, but sexual intent is not the only possible motive. Jackson clearly had a child-like mentality in a lot of ways so it is perfectly logical that he enjoyed sleep overs with visitors to compensate for his loneliness and lack of family at the time. Yes, there is a possibility of sexual molestation, but possibility doesn't equal proof. And you need proof to convict in a court of law unless you believe in witch hunts.

Regarding the folks who say that there have been tons of accusers ... there have been a handful and it all kicked off with the discredited Jordy Chandler case. As Razorfist has aptly pointed out,Jackson made the mistake of settling the civil case out of court (without admission) so that he could defend the criminal case (the one that could actually lead to jail time). He defended and was acquitted on all charges, but the pay out given on the civil case gave the green light for other snakes in the grass to come out seeking multi-million payouts. From what I can tell, that has what has been happening on and off since.

"You just can't handle him being a pedo because you like his music". Yes, there are some who would defend Jackson even if proof were found of sexual abuse just as there are some who will keep calling him an abuser despite lack of evidence. Like most people, I fit into neither camp. I loved Kevin Spacey as an actor, Rolf Harris was a great cartoonist and Bill Cosby I found hilarious ... but I'm not trying to defend them.

Thanks for your thoughts folks."

Yes Nancy
I watched the video this morning on youtube. And i saw Reed's comment about doing projects that "turn him on" he's a disgusting creep .
I always said he reminds me of those movie directors that get pleasure from making the viewers feel sick :yuk: .

It's like the makers of hostel / saw movies etc who like pushing boundaries for the shock factor , they really feel they've achieved something by doing grotesque stuff .


I'm only just hearing about releasing Leaving Neverland on dvd/blueray , omg Dan Reed is a greedy con artist!!! and i wish him , Wade & James would all be punished & muted !.

Another concern aswell is that the sleaze bag has used an MJ impersonator to stand infront of a video of Hitler !, i knew that image wasn't really MJ all we see is the back of his head :suspect: .

Another MJ impersonator who is actually a big MJ fan of course was asked to be apart of ruining MJ's legacy by posing in incriminating ways. How can people have the nerve to do this to try and bribe an impersonator to make MJ look like a monster , just when i thought Reed couldn't sink any lower.

[Nancy.]

Yes Nancy
I watched the video this morning on youtube. And i saw Reed's comment about doing projects that "turn him on" he's a disgusting creep .
I always said he reminds me of those movie directors that get pleasure from making the viewers feel sick :yuk: .

It's like the makers of hostel / saw movies etc who like pushing boundaries for the shock factor , they really feel they've achieved something by doing grotesque stuff .


I'm only just hearing about releasing Leaving Neverland on dvd/blueray , omg Dan Reed is a greedy con artist!!! and i wish him , Wade & James would all be punished & muted !.

Another concern aswell is that the sleaze bag has used an MJ impersonator to stand infront of a video of Hitler !, i knew that image wasn't really MJ all we see is the back of his head :suspect: .

Another MJ impersonator who is actually a big MJ fan of course was asked to be apart of ruining MJ's legacy by posing in incriminating ways. How can people have the nerve to do this to try and bribe an impersonator to make MJ look like a monster , just when i thought Reed couldn't sink any lower.

Exactly.

He claims to have "no interest in Jackson" but seems hell bent on destroying MJ's legacy while making money off of his name.
I didn't like the look of Reed when I first saw him a few years ago, and this documentary (along with his creepy comments) have made me dislike him even more. Do you know he wants to make a "sequel" to his sh!tty documentary and is trying to coax Gavin Arvizo and Jordan Chandler out from under their stones?

https://www.nme.com/news/music/leaving-neverland-director-dan-reed-wants-to-make-a-sequel-featuring-more-victims-2458470

Of course, this is purely for the accusers to tell "their story" and has nothing whatsoever to do with money. :umm2:

[GoldHeart]

Exactly.

He claims to have "no interest in Jackson" but seems hell bent on destroying MJ's legacy while making money off of his name.
I didn't like the look of Reed when I first saw him a few years ago, and this documentary (along with his creepy comments) have made me dislike him even more. Do you know he wants to make a "sequel" to his sh!tty documentary and is trying to coax Gavin Arvizo and Jordan Chandler out from under their stones?

https://www.nme.com/news/music/leaving-neverland-director-dan-reed-wants-to-make-a-sequel-featuring-more-victims-2458470

Of course, this is purely for the accusers to tell "their story" and has nothing whatsoever to do with money. :umm2:

I'd never heard of the greedy slimeball prior to all this , when I first ever heard about 'Leaving Neverland' I actually assumed it was some American director . then I was surprised to found out he was a Brit . He's definitely making a name for himself on the dead body of MJ :bored: .

Any idiot that makes a film with "Neverland " in the title is just profiting off a famous person . He knows it gets attention that way . And I was sick of seeing his ugly mug on TV self promoting his BS job & crap directing skills .

Yeah I heard about Arvizo & Chandler :facepalm: , Reed is delusional!! . is he being serious, all the accusers are proven greedy liars . He basically wants to dig up old cases that were debunked and were a complete joke in the court room.

Good luck to him getting Arvizo & Chandler when both admitted their parents were scammers & crooks getting them to lie for money :crazy: . Both have disappeared out the public eye . Can't see them showing their faces again as it's embarrassing.

[user104658]

This thread has just become a full on MJ Stan circlejerk, hasn't it...

[GoldHeart]

This thread has just become a full on MJ Stan circlejerk, hasn't it...

Why ? Just because not everyone agrees with you :idc:

[Tony Montana]

And there was me thinking this thread had died

[user104658]

Why ? Just because not everyone agrees with you :idc:No, because the only people still posting are MJ fans telling each other how innocent he is :umm2:.

[Beso]

Soggy biscuit..Michaels favourite game?

[Nancy.]

No, because the only people still posting are MJ fans telling each other how innocent he is :umm2:.

Except for you rushing in to comment whenever there's a new post, of course. :hmph:

[Beso]

Except for you rushing in to comment whenever there's a new post, of course. :hmph:

It's tea time :joker:

[Marsh.]

No, because the only people still posting are MJ fans telling each other how innocent he is :umm2:.

And they're not allowed to because?

[GoldHeart]

Except for you rushing in to comment whenever there's a new post, of course. :hmph:

:joker:

[Kazanne]

Except for you rushing in to comment whenever there's a new post, of course. :hmph:

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

[user104658]

And they're not allowed to because?Who said they weren't allowed to :think:.

[Beso]

Who said they weren't allowed to :think:.

It's tea time.:joker:

[user104658]

Except for you rushing in to comment whenever there's a new post, of course. :hmph:What can I say? It's important for there to be someone to keep people's feet on the ground when the conspiracy theories start flying. It's a tough job and thankless. And unpaid. But it's a sacred duty.

[Marsh.]

Who said they weren't allowed to :think:.

Well there would be no other reason for you to make the comment unless people who don't believe the allegations commenting in the thread was a problem. :hee:

[user104658]

Well there would be no other reason for you to make the comment unless people who don't believe the allegations commenting in the thread was a problem. :hee:The reason for commenting was in the comment itself; to point out that the thread has become a pointless circle jerk.

I didn't say or even imply that circle jerks "aren't allowed" :think:. People can do what they want and I can comment on that however I see fit :hee:.

I mean, I also find literally every thread in chat + games pointless... But if people want them :shrug: it's not really a problem.

[bots]

The reason for commenting was in the comment itself; to point out that the thread has become a pointless circle jerk.

I didn't say or even imply that circle jerks "aren't allowed" :think:. People can do what they want and I can comment on that however I see fit :hee:.

I mean, I also find literally every thread in chat + games pointless... But if people want them :shrug: it's not really a problem.

#justiceforneem

[Marsh.]

The reason for commenting was in the comment itself; to point out that the thread has become a pointless circle jerk.

I didn't say or even imply that circle jerks "aren't allowed" :think:. People can do what they want and I can comment on that however I see fit :hee:.

I mean, I also find literally every thread in chat + games pointless... But if people want them :shrug: it's not really a problem.

People discussing their defence of Jackson against the allegations is pointless?

Literally no different to those discussing how they believe the allegations.

[Alf]

Barbara Streisand has had something to say on this.

Look it up

[Nicky91]

can this topic stop already ffs how long will this go on and on

[user104658]

People discussing their defence of Jackson against the allegations is pointless?

Literally no different to those discussing how they believe the allegations.

People discussing their defence against the allegations with other people who already believe that Jackson is innocent of those allegations? Posting "evidence" when it's quite clear that everyone's mind is set in stone on this issue and people have accepted that and moved on seems like a pointless circle-jerk TO ME, Marsh and I'm allowed to say so :idc:. You might not think so, they might not think so, and no one said they're not allowed to do it as you falsely suggested before, so please stop telling me what I'm "allowed and not allowed" to do and think :nono:.

[Beso]

Barbara Streisand has had something to say on this.

Look it up

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nme.com/news/music/barbra-streisand-sparks-controversy-michael-jackson-abuse-allegations-sexual-needs-sexual-needs-2465866/amp




She's playing in Hyde Park this year. :dance:

[chuff me dizzy]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nme.com/news/music/barbra-streisand-sparks-controversy-michael-jackson-abuse-allegations-sexual-needs-sexual-needs-2465866/amp




She's playing in Hyde Park this year. :dance:

"His sexual needs were his sexual needs " would she be saying that it was her childs innocence he had taken for his own perverted pleasure ?

[Beso]

"His sexual needs were his sexual needs " would she be saying that it was her childs innocence he had taken for his own perverted pleasure ?

No.

[Kazanne]

Babs probably knows he is innocent and treating the claims as absurd as they are

E7KkbdF4-Mo

[GoldHeart]

Babs probably knows he is innocent and treating the claims as absurd as they are

E7KkbdF4-Mo

Yeah Streisand's comments do sound strange , I'm wondering that as well but it's just unfortunate wording , unless its been taken out of context .

[Kazanne]

Seriously ,it's hearsay again,do we know for certain she said this or is it just media frenzy again,tbh,I don't believe a word any of the media say,word of mouth is different,we see them say it and explain their comments whereas the media just makes up any missing pieces.

[AnnieK]

Barbara put the blame firmly at the parent's door,she said they were to blame for letting their kids sleep with MJ (true in part), she believed he molested them but the kids were glad to be there and it didn't kill them (WTF). She absolutely will have said that or she would sue for libel. Just goes to show how ****ed up celebrity status makes you I guess that you can believe it and justify it.

[chuff me dizzy]

Barbara put the blame firmly at the parent's door,she said they were to blame for letting their kids sleep with MJ (true in part), she believed he molested them but the kids were glad to be there and it didn't kill them (WTF). She absolutely will have said that or she would sue for libel. Just goes to show how ****ed up celebrity status makes you I guess that you can believe it and justify it.

:clap1: I agree it is in part the parents fault for allowing it ,but they saw £$ signs and sold their kids innocence to the dirty scrote ,and yes i too believe she did say it

[Marsh.]

People discussing their defence against the allegations with other people who already believe that Jackson is innocent of those allegations? Posting "evidence" when it's quite clear that everyone's mind is set in stone on this issue and people have accepted that and moved on seems like a pointless circle-jerk TO ME, Marsh and I'm allowed to say so :idc:. You might not think so, they might not think so, and no one said they're not allowed to do it as you falsely suggested before, so please stop telling me what I'm "allowed and not allowed" to do and think :nono:.

I've not said you're not allowed to do anything.

I just wonder why you feel the need to mock them when, you regularly post and discuss things with people who believe the allegations as you do. I suppose it's a "conversation" then and not a "circle jerk". :idc:

[AnnieK]

I've not said you're not allowed to do anything.

I just wonder why you feel the need to mock them when, you regularly post and discuss things with people who believe the allegations as you do. I suppose it's a "conversation" then and not a "circle jerk". :idc:

I agree with TS, this thread had faded into a MJ fan YouTube thread. There has been little conversation between those who believe the allegations, more refuting of the vids posted that lead to yet more fan based vids posted. Most people who believe the allegations gave up weeks ago, because of the absolute mockery and animosity anything they said was met with. TS was merely posting an observation and a pretty astute one

[Marsh.]

I agree with TS, this thread had faded into a MJ fan YouTube thread. There has been little conversation between those who believe the allegations, more refuting of the vids posted that lead to yet more fan based vids posted. Most people who believe the allegations gave up weeks ago, because of the absolute mockery and animosity anything they said was met with. TS was merely posting an observation and a pretty astute one

Again, its nobody's fault that the people who believe the allegations have grown bored or finished with the thread ages ago.

TS, however, has far from finished with it. (Actually sitting pretty comfortably at the top of the thread post count alongside Kazanne :hehe:) But to come in here and ridicule people's discussion as a "circle jerk" is just immature and unnecessary.

[Kazanne]

Again, its nobody's fault that the people who believe the allegations have grown bored or finished with the thread ages ago.

TS, however, has far from finished with it. (Actually sitting pretty comfortably at the top of the thread post count alongside Kazanne :hehe:) But to come in here and ridicule people's discussion as a "circle jerk" is just immature and unnecessary.

:laugh: Oh blimey Marsh, once I get on that soap box there is no stopping me, you all know I am a mouthy sod anyway:wavey: but yes you are right ,we are all entitalled to comment on stuff without ridicule .

[user104658]

TS, however, has far from finished with it. (Actually sitting pretty comfortably at the top of the thread post count alongside Kazanne :hehe:) But to come in here and ridicule people's discussion as a "circle jerk" is just immature and unnecessary.

Not Marsh trying and failing miserably to redefine his forum role :omgno:

https://media.tenor.com/images/1e74168715dee7eab308036fbf2405a2/tenor.gif

[GoldHeart]

People can believe Wade & James all they want, but there's a million inconsistencies & contradictions. Their stories don't add up.

Plus why is there no mention of Brandi dating Wade for 8 years! , or the fact Wade tried to get married at neverland back in 2005 !! , also Wade's brother is a cop why didn't he tell him he'd been abused? . And why would you want to get married at neverland if you'd been abused by the owner for years ?? .

Why did Wade's mother want custody of MJ's kids after he died when mj has a huge family including his own mother Katherine .

James' mother must be extremely lazy If she was still in bed between 2.30- 300 pm when it was announced MJ died :facepalm: .

James' story about the wedding ring was filmed months after the rest of the film ,I wonder why that is if he allegedly had the jewellery all along?? Even the furniture is different . Interesting how there's no written vows though .

It's funny how the film is called LEAVING neverland when it looks more like they wanted to permanently LIVE at Neverland . Also why call it that title , it's all about making money off MJ. Why not call it
' Robson & Safechuck story' :suspect: .

[user104658]

I mean literally all of those questions have been discussed on this thread multiple times and that's sort of what I was talking about but hey Marsh says it's all good so by all means, post the same questions tomorrow.

[Niamh.]

Never leavingland

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[GoldHeart]

Never leavingland

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Well Wade & James wanted to practically move in Neverland !! .

If they were abuse victims why did they still want to be apart of MJ 's life especially Wade ?? Wade wanted to get married there and get his hands on the estate when MJ died .

[user104658]

*thread weeks old and 1500 posts long with literally hundreds of those posts discussing the complex emotional attachments that stem from abuse*

"Err if he got abused why was he still MJ's friend and why isn't he CRYING MORE??"

[Nancy.]

People can believe Wade & James all they want, but there's a million inconsistencies & contradictions. Their stories don't add up.

Plus why is there no mention of Brandi dating Wade for 8 years! , or the fact Wade tried to get married at neverland back in 2005 !! , also Wade's brother is a cop why didn't he tell him he'd been abused? . And why would you want to get married at neverland if you'd been abused by the owner for years ?? .

Why did Wade's mother want custody of MJ's kids after he died when mj has a huge family including his own mother Katherine .

James' mother must be extremely lazy If she was still in bed between 2.30- 300 pm when it was announced MJ died :facepalm: .

James' story about the wedding ring was filmed months after the rest of the film ,I wonder why that is if he allegedly had the jewellery all along?? Even the furniture is different . Interesting how there's no written vows though .

It's funny how the film is called LEAVING neverland when it looks more like they wanted to permanently LIVE at Neverland . Also why call it that title , it's all about making money off MJ. Why not call it
' Robson & Safechuck story' :suspect: .

Exactly. Here's something else that doesn't make sense...

Joy Robson "liking" facebook posts on MJ (AFTER she knew about the "abuse")

Watch the video in this tweet.
1108897018531868672

[GoldHeart]

Suing MJ's estate DOES NOT heal their abuse & traumatic ordeal . And making a one sided film with important information missing just screams suspicious. Reed says its not about MJ then why call it NEVERLAND ,and it's all about MJ as the abuse allegations are about HIM

plus even the 4 hours that was filmed has later been edited down ! ,which again doesn't look good on Dan Reed's part , especially falsely using Bret Barnes name which is why he's suing HBO .

They had their agenda & narrative to push while ignoring facts & getting timelines messed up that only a time machine would make sense :facepalm: .

[GoldHeart]

Exactly. Here's something else that doesn't make sense...

Joy Robson "liking" facebook posts on MJ (AFTER she knew about the "abuse")

Watch the video in this tweet.
1108897018531868672

:facepalm: Absolutely

[Kazanne]

:facepalm: Absolutely

:laugh::laugh: all this is pointed out and yet no real answers by the nay sayers, other than calling MJ names :laugh:

[GoldHeart]

:laugh::laugh: all this is pointed out and yet no real answers by the nay sayers, other than calling MJ names :laugh:

I guess MJ was still grooming everyone beyond the grave ? :whistle:

[GoldHeart]

hxZ24h6wqXs

[user104658]

[emoji23][emoji23] all this is pointed out and yet no real answers by the nay sayers, other than calling MJ names [emoji23]There have been dozens of answers. "I don't understand your answer" does not mean there was no answer, and people having given up on repeating those answers when the same questions are asked ad infinitum doesn't mean there hasn't been an attempt.

[Kazanne]

hxZ24h6wqXs

That one is really interesting Goldheart,I don't know what it is about Dan Reed but didn't he say he only does subjects that "turn him on" surely that should raise flags, maybe he is trying to cover up his own naughty thoughts by deflection :conf: he certainly looks shifty to me, at best his body language looks uncomfortable.

[Kazanne]

There have been dozens of answers. "I don't understand your answer" does not mean there was no answer, and people having given up on repeating those answers when the same questions are asked ad infinitum doesn't mean there hasn't been an attempt.

If you say so TS,but I have not seen one proper answer to several things brought up in some of these vids ,they are just brushed off as MJ supporters covering for him when not everyone is a fan, I am, as I have said .but Joey wasn't a particular fan,not sure Marsh was either It's not about who is right and wrong it is pointing out the inconsistances of those two in that mockumentary and no one really answers them, which smacks of people aren't really bothered about whether he did it or not,they just want to be right ,without being questioned.

[Marsh.]

I mean literally all of those questions have been discussed on this thread multiple times and that's sort of what I was talking about but hey Marsh says it's all good so by all means, post the same questions tomorrow.

Well, why wouldn't it be?

Do you police every thread on the forum for repetition? Not all members are online at the same time, so it happens.

[GoldHeart]

That one is really interesting Goldheart,I don't know what it is about Dan Reed but didn't he say he only does subjects that "turn him on" surely that should raise flags, maybe he is trying to cover up his own naughty thoughts by deflection :conf: he certainly looks shifty to me, at best his body language looks uncomfortable.

This french debate is probably the best one i've seen when it comes to questioning Reed & the motives of Wade & Jame . They bring up all the important stuff and they grill him about his garbage film .

Everything about Reed is slimy and shifty , yeah what kind of statement is that to make about projects that "turn him on" regarding a graphic film about child abuse !!:umm2: . Did he enjoy reading Guittierez' book , i can just imagine him sat with a glass of wine and a smirk on his face and dollar signs in his eyes when he read that book back to front ! :suspect: .

He also describes himself as a "gun for hire" ,is that because he enjoy's destroying people's legacies without using facts or real information to back things up? . If his film was the "truth" and if this all was factual then the film WOULDN'T cut 45 mins out! , and the stories & dates would make sense without needing a time machine :facepalm: lol .

[Marsh.]

Not Marsh trying and failing miserably to redefine his forum role :omgno:

https://media.tenor.com/images/1e74168715dee7eab308036fbf2405a2/tenor.gif

No response to what was said? Now who's posting unnecessarily. :idc:

[user104658]

No response to what was said? Now who's posting unnecessarily. :idc:

What you said didn't warrant a response and no one is trying to police threads other than you, Marsh. What I was pointing out is that the idea of you suddenly lecturing people on what is and isn't unnecessary is utterly bizarre and given that it seems to be pretty much confined to this thread, I'm comfortable enough in putting it down to being agenda-driven.

[Marsh.]

What you said didn't warrant a response and no one is trying to police threads other than you, Marsh. What I was pointing out is that the idea of you suddenly lecturing people on what is and isn't unnecessary is utterly bizarre and given that it seems to be pretty much confined to this thread, I'm comfortable enough in putting it down to being agenda-driven.

Didn't warrant a response, yet gave one anyway. Kind of sums it up. :joker:

Yes, I think you coming in and being personal with a bunch of people for daring to have a different opinion to you and daring to continue to discuss the ongoing story/interviews/developments in the thread (despite you apparently having grown bored of it) is unnecessary. Think what the hell you want about me, I don't care.

Now, I have an "agenda". :joker: Ok.
Whether Michael Jackson was or was not a pedophile, whether Wade and James are telling the truth or a pack of lies, whether they want justice or money makes ZERO difference to my life. But, yeah, call it whatever makes you comfortable.

The only "agenda" I may have is being sick and tired of the likes of you deciding when "enough is enough" in a discussion. The thread will continue for as long as the story is in the headlines, and as long as members on here care enough to contribute to it. Regardless of what you find pointless or repetitive or boring.

[Kazanne]

Didn't warrant a response, yet gave one anyway. Kind of sums it up. :joker:

Yes, I think you coming in and being personal with a bunch of people for daring to have a different opinion to you and daring to continue to discuss the ongoing story/interviews/developments in the thread (despite you apparently having grown bored of it) is unnecessary. Think what the hell you want about me, I don't care.

Now, I have an "agenda". :joker: Ok.
Whether Michael Jackson was or was not a pedophile, whether Wade and James are telling the truth or a pack of lies, whether they want justice or money makes ZERO difference to my life. But, yeah, call it whatever makes you comfortable.

The only "agenda" I may have is being sick and tired of the likes of you deciding when "enough is enough" in a discussion. The thread will continue for as long as the story is in the headlines, and as long as members on here care enough to contribute to it. Regardless of what you find pointless or repetitive or boring.

https://media.giphy.com/media/c4rB7DMXKgktG/giphy.gif

[user104658]

Didn't warrant a response, yet gave one anyway. Kind of sums it up. :joker:

Yes, I think you coming in and being personal with a bunch of people for daring to have a different opinion to you and daring to continue to discuss the ongoing story/interviews/developments in the thread (despite you apparently having grown bored of it) is unnecessary. Think what the hell you want about me, I don't care.

Now, I have an "agenda". :joker: Ok.
Whether Michael Jackson was or was not a pedophile, whether Wade and James are telling the truth or a pack of lies, whether they want justice or money makes ZERO difference to my life. But, yeah, call it whatever makes you comfortable.

The only "agenda" I may have is being sick and tired of the likes of you deciding when "enough is enough" in a discussion. The thread will continue for as long as the story is in the headlines, and as long as members on here care enough to contribute to it. Regardless of what you find pointless or repetitive or boring.

I mean it's a decent attempt however, unfortunately, we don't get to change the narrative on a forum because it only takes a click to check the facts;



Sorry, but if we're condemning a dead man for accusations he can't defend himself against on the basis that said man was weird and eccentric then the entire frigging world has gone stark raving mad.

Yes, he was strange (the whole bloody family are rather weird) but that itself is not evidence of anything.

Post #29 on a 1500 post thread before the doc had even aired. Your leanings have been evident since literally the second page but you're trying to argue that you don't have one and are just now, today, saying something because of something I said yesterday.

Come on Marsh. At least try. Own your bias and by all means make an argument from that point but don't just start screeching that the sky is green and that you have no personal or emotional stake in the topic. Not when you tilted your hand in that regard on your first post in the thread, several weeks ago. :idc:

[Marsh.]

Post #29 on a 1500 post thread before the doc had even aired. Your leanings have been evident since literally the second page but you're trying to argue that you don't have one and are just now, today, saying something because of something I said yesterday.

Come on Marsh. At least try. Own your bias and by all means make an argument from that point but don't just start screeching that the sky is green and that you have no personal or emotional stake in the topic. Not when you tilted your hand in that regard on your first post in the thread, several weeks ago. :idc:

I'd return the favour but this is an appalling attempt at... whatever it is you're attempting to do.

The post you quote was pretty much my response to a bunch of people using the "Well, Michael Jackson WAS weird wasn't he guys?" as "evidence" of his guilt as a pedophile. I have no idea how that gives me an emotional stake in the topic but, yeah keep trying. I never suggested I had no opinions on the topic and everything that has been going on with this documentary. Just that whatever the actual TRUTH is, not what he or she said, or what is suggested by a certain piece of evidence on either side, but the actual TRUTH makes zero impact on my life.

So... still not quite sure what you're getting at. But, as I said earlier, whatever makes you comfortable in your ruling that the discussion is over.... seemingly because you have finished contributing.... apparently when your frequent postings in the thread say otherwise.

[user104658]

I'd return the favour but this is an appalling attempt at... whatever it is you're attempting to do.

The post you quote was pretty much my response to a bunch of people using the "Well, Michael Jackson WAS weird wasn't he guys?" as "evidence" of his guilt as a pedophile. I have no idea how that gives me an emotional stake in the topic but, yeah keep trying. I never suggested I had no opinions on the topic and everything that has been going on with this documentary. Just that whatever the actual TRUTH is, not what he or she said, or what is suggested by a certain piece of evidence on either side, but the actual TRUTH makes zero impact on my life.

So... still not quite sure what you're getting at. But, as I said earlier, whatever makes you comfortable in your ruling that the discussion is over.... seemingly because you have finished contributing.... apparently when your frequent postings in the thread say otherwise.OK Marsh. You haven't chosen a side on this topic at all, you've been totally neutral throughout, and have swooped in in outrage at the suggestion that the thread has become an obvious circlejerk, not because of any personal leaning on the topic, but because you felt a duty to protect the innocents of the thread against such heinous accusations. How dare!

Its a fun story so we'll go with it I guess.

Let's go back to the original point;


I don't think the thread is a debate or a discussion if its just people posting painfully dumb YouTube videos at each other and clapping each other on the back. I think it's a pointless circle-jerk. I don't care if you think that's harsh or disagree and I don't understand why you would think it's your place to step in "on principle" for the people posting them but again, I'm willing to accept that's what you're doing if you say it is, it doesn't change my opinion either way. 'tis in my opinion a pointless, boring circle-jerk and if saying so is against the rules then someone will infract me for it. Fair?

[Marsh.]

OK Marsh. You haven't chosen a side on this topic at all, you've been totally neutral throughout, and have swooped in in outrage at the suggestion that the thread has become an obvious circlejerk, not because of any personal leaning on the topic, but because you felt a duty to protect the innocents of the thread against such heinous accusations. How dare!

Its a fun story so we'll go with it I guess.

Where did I say I hadn't debated a side of the discussion when it comes to the validity of Wade Johnson or the Leaving Neverland documentary itself or comments made by others discussing it?

Where did I say "I'm neutral guys, I'm not saying a bad word about anyone and I'm not defending any sides or giving my opinion on the statements or "evidence" given on either side"? Oh, that's right, I didn't.

You quoted an opinion I gave on people jumping on the "Well, Michael Jackson was eccentric" as though that's any kind of proof of anything, just as much as I think I've pointed out the entirely ludicrous comments of the documentary maker himself, including his disastrous interview on GMB.

What I denied was an insinuation made by you that I have some kind of emotional stake in all of this whereby I refuse to believe Jackson was guilty and therefore cannot bear any argument against him. I've come in and pointed out I don't see the documentary as "proof" he was guilty. But if he IS guilty it has zero impact on me, just as if it's proven he is not. So you're attempt at labelling me biased is ludicrous.

That doesn't prevent me from commenting and giving my opinion on the validity of Johnson and the families, the stories, the history of the allegations against Jackson, his trial and 'Leaving Neverland'.

Have I defended Jackson and argued his innocence? No, don't think I've done that either. I've commented on people, comments, stories and allegations. The same as anyone else.

My response to you wasn't because you believe Wade's allegations, but because you're trying to stop the discussion because you apparently don't wish to continue with it. "I've said everything I want to say guys, anything else to be said is repetition, so why don't you all shush!" :idc: I'd have responded to that attitude regardless of which side of the debate you fell on.

[user104658]

Where did I say I hadn't debated a side of the discussion when it comes to the validity of Wade Johnson or the Leaving Neverland documentary itself or comments made by others discussing it?



Where did I say "I'm neutral guys, I'm not saying a bad word about anyone and I'm not defending any sides or giving my opinion on the statements or "evidence" given on either side"? Oh, that's right, I didn't.



You quoted an opinion I gave on people jumping on the "Well, Michael Jackson was eccentric" as though that's any kind of proof of anything, just as much as I think I've pointed out the entirely ludicrous comments of the documentary maker himself, including his disastrous interview on GMB.



What I denied was an insinuation made by you that I have some kind of emotional stake in all of this whereby I refuse to believe Jackson was guilty and therefore cannot bear any argument against him. I've come in and pointed out I don't see the documentary as "proof" he was guilty. But if he IS guilty it has zero impact on me, just as if it's proven he is not. So you're attempt at labelling me biased is ludicrous.



That doesn't prevent me from commenting and giving my opinion on the validity of Johnson and the families, the stories, the history of the allegations against Jackson, his trial and 'Leaving Neverland'.



My response to you wasn't because you believe Wade's allegations, but because you're trying to stop the discussion because you apparently don't wish to continue with it. "I've said everything I want to say guys, anything else to be said is repetition, so why don't you all shush!" :idc: I'd have responded to that attitude regardless of which side of the debate you fell on.Yes I already said that I'm willing to pretend accept that this was the reason for your cavalry charge but I also already responded with that being the case;

I don't think the thread is a debate or a discussion if its just people posting painfully dumb YouTube videos at each other and clapping each other on the back. I think it's a pointless circle-jerk. I don't care if you think that's harsh or disagree and I don't understand why you would think it's your place to step in "on principle" for the people posting them but again, I'm willing to accept that's what you're doing if you say it is, it doesn't change my opinion either way. 'tis in my opinion a pointless, boring circle-jerk and if saying so is against the rules then someone will infract me for it. Fair?

[Marsh.]

Aww, I know it's hard to accept you were wrong and apologise. But it will get easier when you grow up.

No hard feelings.

[Marsh.]

Interesting, I've just found a grand total of ONE Michael Jackson track currently sitting in my iTunes account. I'm pretty much the biggest fan of his alive now, yes? D:

Wow, I'm sorry guys, I'll leave it to the non-biased people to discuss. I do apologise.

[user104658]

Interesting, I've just found a grand total of ONE Michael Jackson track currently sitting in my iTunes account. I'm pretty much the biggest fan of his alive now, yes? D:

Wow, I'm sorry guys, I'll leave it to the non-biased people to discuss. I do apologise.I didn't say you were a Michael Jackson fan I said you had a bias on the thread and that was the reason for you jumping on the circle jerk comment. You made your leanings clear early and thus the idea that you "simply" decided to comment on an injustice that occurred two weeks into a thread for unbiased reasons is utter nonsense :idc:.

[user104658]

I mean jesus christ Marsh, you have Kazanne posting clapping gifs at you. Take a look at yourself fgs.

[Marsh.]

I didn't say you were a Michael Jackson fan I said you had a bias on the thread and that was the reason for you jumping on the circle jerk comment. You made your leanings clear early and thus the idea that you "simply" decided to comment on an injustice that occurred two weeks into a thread for unbiased reasons is utter nonsense :idc:.

So, I pointed out a dick comment you made was a dick comment because you believe the allegations against Jackson? :joker:

Have you read a single word?

Oh dear. :laugh2:

[Marsh.]

I mean jesus christ Marsh, you have Kazanne posting clapping gifs at you. Take a look at yourself fgs.

So...?

She's not posted a clapping gif at me saying "OMG GUYS JACKSON WAS INNOCENT!!" so I'm not sure what bias you're possibly referring to at all.

If anything, you can't take criticism and are inventing things.

I don't believe Jackson was innocent anymore than I believe he was guilty. My opinion on the documentary and the documentary maker do not dispute either of those things.

[Kazanne]

I didn't say you were a Michael Jackson fan I said you had a bias on the thread and that was the reason for you jumping on the circle jerk comment. You made your leanings clear early and thus the idea that you "simply" decided to comment on an injustice that occurred two weeks into a thread for unbiased reasons is utter nonsense :idc:.

I wouldn't say Marsh was biased ,just fair,I mean to debate we should listen to BOTH sides of a story, which is why I watched the mockumentary although I didn't want to as I didn't want to add to the ratings of this biased program,but I watched so I could debate both sides but really it was hashed up old news in the guise of 'fresh' evidence,I think TS you would just like the last word on the thread,you do always claim you are right, which is what we all do but surely by listening and watching BOTH sides not just poo pooing the YouTube videos,they are probably more truthful than the glossy Mockumentry. Marsh never said he was a fan,he just sees things from the outside.

[user104658]

So, I pointed out a dick comment you made was a dick comment because you believe the allegations against Jackson? :joker:



Have you read a single word?



Oh dear. :laugh2:

You chose to point it out because you picked your tribe early in this thread and it's been a heated and polarised discussion, yes, 100%.

Well OK maybe 95%, I think 5% was probably just because you wanted to try swinging your net wang around a bit?

[Kazanne]

I mean jesus christ Marsh, you have Kazanne posting clapping gifs at you. Take a look at yourself fgs.

I posted that Gif as imo Marsh is being fair,he is not on either side,but there is an air of arrogance about you :shrug: there is always one that thinks they are smarter than everyone else,we all have our own opinions,no one is smarter, you seem to want to put people down of they have a differing opinion,I mean the 'circle jerk' comment, was there really any need ?

[user104658]

I posted that Gif as imo Marsh is being fair,he is not on either side,but there is an air of arrogance about you :shrug: there is always one that thinks they are smarter than everyone else,we all have our own opinions,no one is smarter, you seem to want to put people down of they have a differing opinion,I mean the 'circle jerk' comment, was there really any need ?

Any need for the phrasing? Debatable I suppose, I could have shared the same opinion using different words but it would have been far less succinct. I could have referred to it as "watching people preaching to the choir" but that's not very well phrased. I suppose I could have called it an echo chamber, or a back-patting circle? But circlejerk still seems like the quickest way to say those things and we're all grownups here.

[Marsh.]

You chose to point it out because you picked your tribe early in this thread and it's been a heated and polarised discussion, yes, 100%.

Well OK maybe 95%, I think 5% was probably just because you wanted to try swinging your net wang around a bit?

Oh dear. That may be how you think. Not me.

I comment on the topic and agree/disagree with comments and opinions, not forum members. Hence why Kazanne has certainly not posted clapping smileys in response to my posts in many other threads and I've agreed with you in some others.

Wouldn't say I've been in any heated discussion with anyone on this particular topic until the last 2 pages when you declared the discussion over as you were no longer interested.

I've debated the very shaky foundations of this new documentary, does that mean I am a passionate defender of Jackson and declare him innocent? No. Not at all.

But, seriously, "tribe"? Think you need to grow up.

[Niamh.]

Michael Jackson still causing problems from beyond the grave :oh:

[Marsh.]

Michael Jackson still causing problems from beyond the grave :oh:

We shall call it 'Never Leaving TiBB'.

[Kazanne]

I think Riley should get an award for one of the longest threads and still going.

[user104658]

Yes Marsh I'm aware that you're mainly known as the level-headed champion of the middle ground on Tibb. That much is undeniable. I'm sorry for accusing you of bias and tribalism. Again, how dare.

However...



Wouldn't say I've been in any heated discussion with anyone on this particular topic until the last 2 pages when you
declared the discussion over as you were no longer interested. .

Again you need to stop making these sorts of statements when the thread is searchable

This thread has just become a full on MJ Stan circlejerk, hasn't it...

"Declared the discussion over". OK Judge Judy. Good call :thumbs:

[Marsh.]

Yes Marsh I'm aware that you're mainly known as the level-headed champion of the middle ground on Tibb. That much is undeniable. I'm sorry for accusing you of bias and tribalism. Again, how dare.


Not what was said was it? But by all means continue making stuff up. Desperation at its worst and most obvious. You said I was biased in what I said, I wasn't. Instead of acknowledging that and moving on you're now moving the goalposts and reaching for anything and everything. Sad.

[GoldHeart]

What kind of director refers to a project regarding child abuse as " something that turns him on " & he calls himself "a gun for hire" . The guy is the definition of a creepy movie villain .

Also when making a film , you're supposed to do research & fact checking instead of relying on graphic grim stories of 2 accusers who have lied & contradicted themselves so much that even a time machine would be confused .

It takes 2 minutes to do a background search on Wade & James, Dan doesn't care about the truth or getting information right . Fans & viewers are better film makers & journalists & it's not even their job .

[Marsh.]

Again you need to stop making these sorts of statements when the thread is searchable



"Declared the discussion over". OK Judge Judy. Good call :thumbs:

Not sure where you get the impression I said "circle jerk" was where you said that. You've implied it ten-fold over the last two pages.

People who believe the allegations are either offline, said everything they want to say, or have no wish to respond to the posts continuing to be posted by those who don't believe the allegations.

You had a problem with that despite it being no one else's responsibility to get others to comment. If Kazanne, Nancy etc still have things they want to discuss, still find things they want to bring into the discussion because they're still actively engaged with the topic on here and other forums then they can do so without the insinuation that they've driven away members of the other side of the debate or prevented them from posting.

BUT, I step back now. I have a Jacko single in my iTunes library I'd forgotten about so I am FAR too biased to be able to comment.

[Tony Montana]

I think Riley should get an award for one of the longest threads and still going.

If this goes on for another week or 2, it’ll probably get stickied

[user104658]

Not what was said was it? But by all means continue making stuff up. Desperation at its worst and most obvious. You said I was biased in what I said, I wasn't. Instead of acknowledging that and moving on you're now moving the goalposts and reaching for anything and everything. Sad.You responded to the comment about how I thought the thread had gone (pointless and circlejerky) from a biased position, yes. I acknowledge that you claim otherwise but countless (every?) other post you've made on the thread lead me to believe otherwise. I acknowledge that you're not an MJ Stan and that you don't really have an opinion either way on his guilt. However I think, like Joey, you were frustrated and irritated that some people are strongly stating a belief in him being guilty with supposedly insufficient evidence, and I think that frustration is what prompted your response to my observation about the direction the thread had taken (and in turn, the lie that I had insisted that "the discussion was over").

[user104658]

If this goes on for another week or 2, it’ll probably get stickiedIt's already sticky because of how much Marsh loves Michael Jackson.

[Marsh.]

You responded to the comment about how I thought the thread had gone (pointless and circlejerky) from a biased position, yes. I acknowledge that you claim otherwise but countless (every?) other post you've made on the thread lead me to believe otherwise. I acknowledge that you're not an MJ Stan and that you don't really have an opinion either way on his guilt. However I think, like Joey, you were frustrated and irritated that some people are strongly stating a belief in him being guilty with supposedly insufficient evidence, and I think that frustration is what prompted your response to my observation about the direction the thread had taken (and in turn, the lie that I had insisted that "the discussion was over").

Frustration?

From a post I made THREE WEEKS ago? Which was responding to a very specific point that "eccentric person = guilty of heinous crime" that wasn't even a comment on the documentary or the two guys making the allegations but flippant remarks I'd seen made all over the place.

I also hadn't posted on the topic for over a week between my last post and the one responding to your circle jerk comment. Wow, my frustration with people believing him as guilty was clearly at PEAK LEVELS. :laugh2:

And now we have Joey's name being brought in too. Seems like you are frustrated with every member not agreeing with everything you're saying underneath all of this. That's an issue you shall have to deal with mate, not me.

[joeysteele]

Didn't warrant a response, yet gave one anyway. Kind of sums it up. :joker:

Yes, I think you coming in and being personal with a bunch of people for daring to have a different opinion to you and daring to continue to discuss the ongoing story/interviews/developments in the thread (despite you apparently having grown bored of it) is unnecessary. Think what the hell you want about me, I don't care.

Now, I have an "agenda". :joker: Ok.
Whether Michael Jackson was or was not a pedophile, whether Wade and James are telling the truth or a pack of lies, whether they want justice or money makes ZERO difference to my life. But, yeah, call it whatever makes you comfortable.

The only "agenda" I may have is being sick and tired of the likes of you deciding when "enough is enough" in a discussion. The thread will continue for as long as the story is in the headlines, and as long as members on here care enough to contribute to it. Regardless of what you find pointless or repetitive or boring.



Quite a thing for the forum this thread being made.

I gave up on it a while ago but all I had to say is there over many pages in the first 50.

Just come back to commend your post above Marsh.
Oh and also your patience.

Really well done and I agree with all you say above.

[Marsh.]

FGS Joey, don't AGREE. It makes me biased. :omgno:

[user104658]

I mean I'm just trying to figure out if clapping seals can actually partake in a circlejerk? :think: it seems like it would be difficult, and certainly painful but life finds a way I guess.

[user104658]

......... "patience" though :hehe:

[Marsh.]

Aww, will SOMEBODY who is on TS's side give him a bloody biased clapping smiley. He's getting frustrated and upset here.

[GoldHeart]

Quite a thing for the forum this thread being made.

I gave up on it a while ago but all I had to say is there over many pages in the first 50.

Just come back to commend your post above Marsh.
Oh and also your patience.

Really well done and I agree with all you say above.

Welcome back Joey :wavey:

[user104658]

Aww, will SOMEBODY who is on TS's side give him a bloody biased clapping smiley. He's getting frustrated and upset here.No one is on my side Marsh how does it feel to realise that you're ganghanded? Kazanne posted a smug clapping gif. At your post. You pretended that you didn't know what that means but you do. You know. You know.

[GoldHeart]

No one is on my side Marsh how does it feel to realise that you're ganghanded? Kazanne posted a smug clapping gif. At your post. You pretended that you didn't know what that means but you do. You know. You know.

All I see is sour grapes as not everyone agrees with you :idc:

[user104658]

All I see is sour grapes as not everyone agrees with you :idc:It's true I am used to everyone agreeing with me in SD's. That has indeed been a comforting trend in the time that I've been a member here. The fact that not everyone agrees with me in this thread has confused and bewildered me and I've been unsure about how to handle that.

[Marsh.]

No one is on my side Marsh how does it feel to realise that you're ganghanded? Kazanne posted a smug clapping gif. At your post. You pretended that you didn't know what that means but you do. You know. You know.

Oh no. Kazanne agreed with 1 of my posts. You know, the poster you called circle-jerky.

WHATEVER NEXT!

[user104658]

Oh no. Kazanne agreed with 1 of my posts. You know, the poster you called circle-jerky.

WHATEVER NEXT!I see you pretending but I also see that you know.

[Marsh.]

Did I sleep with Kazanne and forget?

[user104658]

Did I sleep with Kazanne and forget?No but you're on the right track.

[Marsh.]

https://media.tenor.com/images/3bbd686c1660aead2e08b977726f22d9/tenor.gif

[user104658]

There's no coming back from it Marsh, not even with gifs. You're in bed with the enemy and the duvet is tucked.

[Marsh.]

Kazanne is my enemy? :worry:

[user104658]

Kazanne is my enemy? :worry:You know.

[Niamh.]

I'm so confused now [emoji23]

[Marsh.]

Me too, Niamh, me too.

https://media.giphy.com/media/a4K7jjmwg0DyE/giphy.gif

[Beso]

Anyone for popcorn?

[user104658]

Me too, Niamh, me too.

https://media.giphy.com/media/a4K7jjmwg0DyE/giphy.gifNiamh knows too.

[Niamh.]

Niamh knows too.:o

[thesheriff443]

Niamh knows too.

We all know the score ts.

[Kazanne]

No one is on my side Marsh how does it feel to realise that you're ganghanded? Kazanne posted a smug clapping gif. At your post. You pretended that you didn't know what that means but you do. You know. You know.

Oh dear,why has that upset you so much,it's a gif ,get over it, I posted it not Marsh's fault, I applauded his post.

[user104658]

Oh dear,why has that upset you so much,it's a gif ,get over it, I posted it not Marsh's fault, I applauded his post.Obviously Marsh had no say in you posting it; but now he knows.

[Kazanne]

Kazanne is my enemy? :worry:

:joker::joker::joker: Oh dear Marsh, what a starnge turn this thread has taken,that bloody gif,lol.

[Kazanne]

Obviously Marsh had no say in you posting it; but now he knows.

Of course he knows, it's in reply to his post :shrug: love me ,love me ,I'm thick :hehe:

[chuff me dizzy]

Babs confirms she DID say what was reported about MJ


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-47680378

[Niamh.]

Babs confirms she DID say what was reported about MJ


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-47680378

Her comments are about the most disgusting thing I've read about this so far, her apologising means nothing, she actually thought that, what kind of a mind could come out with that. Surely even those who think he's innocent wouldn't excuse her comments about it?

[Nicky91]

honestly, it is disgusting what La Streisand had said, to bring up what i find most disgusting what she said

''His sexual needs were his sexual needs, coming from whatever childhood he has or whatever DNA he has.''


like ffs you don't say stuff like that :facepalm: first saying she believes wade and james and then saying this disgusting crap

bit hypocrite of Babs if you ask me

[user104658]

Honestly talking about it being in his childhood or "DNA" (by which I assume she just means part of his psychology) isn't the worst part or all THAT bad, there are always reasons for people being who or what they are unless you believe in silly fairytale concepts like "evil"... the really horrendous part was when she said "hey it didn't kill them so..." as though something as despicable and scarring as childhood abuse can be brushed off as nothing because "you're still alive right?". A really misguided thought process.

[Niamh.]

Honestly talking about it being in his childhood or "DNA" (by which I assume she just means part of his psychology) isn't the worst part or all THAT bad, there are always reasons for people being who or what they are unless you believe in silly fairytale concepts like "evil"... the really horrendous part was when she said "hey it didn't kill them so..." as though something as despicable and scarring as childhood abuse can be brushed off as nothing because "you're still alive right?". A really misguided thought process.

Yes but there is a difference between feeling a certain way and acting on it when you know that doing so is going to destroy a persons life, a childs life. What made the part about his childhood making him the way he was bad was by saying "he has sexual needs" as if he was somehow entitled to those at the expense of those boys, if you get what I mean?

But I wholeheartedly agree with you about the it didn't kill them comment

[user104658]

Yes but there is a difference between feeling a certain way and acting on it when you know that doing so is going to destroy a persons life, a childs life. What made the part about his childhood making him the way he was bad was by saying "he has sexual needs" as if he was somehow entitled to those at the expense of those boys, if you get what I mean?

But I wholeheartedly agree with you about the it didn't kill them comment

True, I suppose using the word "needs" makes it seem like acting upon it is somehow "not his fault", and it would be more accurate to say "he had his desires" or even "he had his compulsions". A "Need" almost makes it sound like she was saying he had some sort of right to pursue it which is obviously very wrong.

[GoldHeart]

I don't think Streisand believes Wade & James , maybe she's thinking what some of us are thinking that their stories make no sense . Like i said if anyone bothers to do a 2 minute research they'd see what Wade & James are all about :whistle: .

Her comment about "it didn't kill them" is maybe because they're suing the estate for billion dollars while they're happy to get fame on again, which makes people doubt their intentions.

However if i'm wrong and if she actually bizarrely believes Wade & James then it's very weird what she said . Unless she's unsure if MJ is guilty or innocent but he still feels some kind of loyalty to him? . I don't know i think it can be interpreted in many ways what she's thinking and saying :shrug: .

[Niamh.]

True, I suppose using the word "needs" makes it seem like acting upon it is somehow "not his fault", and it would be more accurate to say "he had his desires" or even "he had his compulsions". A "Need" almost makes it sound like she was saying he had some sort of right to pursue it which is obviously very wrong.

mmm her comments as a whole just seemed to be saying that because of what MJ gave the kids he was entitled to take something back from them to satisfy his "needs", like the trade off was worth it or something

[Niamh.]

I don't think Streisand believes Wade & James , maybe she's thinking what some of us are thinking that their stories make no sense . Like i said if anyone bothers to do a 2 minute research they'd see what Wade & James are all about :whistle: .

Her comment about "it didn't kill them" is maybe because they're suing the estate for billion dollars while they're happy to get fame on again, which makes people doubt their intentions.

However if i'm wrong and if she actually bizarrely believes Wade & James then it's very weird what she said . Unless she's unsure if MJ is guilty or innocent but he still feels some kind of loyalty to him? . I don't know i think it can be interpreted in many ways what she's thinking and saying :shrug: .

Well she said she believed them and she made excuses for MJ's "needs" that's an unforgivable thing to say even if you believe MJ was innocent and Wade and James were lying what she said could apply to any abuser and victim which is disgusting

[user104658]

I don't think Streisand believes Wade & James , maybe she's thinking what some of us are thinking that their stories make no sense . Like i said if anyone bothers to do a 2 minute research they'd see what Wade & James are all about :whistle: .

Her comment about "it didn't kill them" is maybe because they're suing the estate for billion dollars while they're happy to get fame on again, which makes people doubt their intentions.

However if i'm wrong and if she actually bizarrely believes Wade & James then it's very weird what she said . Unless she's unsure if MJ is guilty or innocent but he still feels some kind of loyalty to him? . I don't know i think it can be interpreted in many ways what she's thinking and saying :shrug: .

Streisand: "I didn't mean to dismiss the trauma these boys experienced in any way. Like all survivors of sexual assault, they will have to carry this for the rest of their lives. I feel deep remorse and I hope that James and Wade know that I truly respect and admire them for speaking their truth."

TiBB MJ thread: "Very ambiguous I don't think she believes proven liars Wade and James."

[Niamh.]

Streisand: "I didn't mean to dismiss the trauma these boys experienced in any way. Like all survivors of sexual assault, they will have to carry this for the rest of their lives. I feel deep remorse and I hope that James and Wade know that I truly respect and admire them for speaking their truth."

TiBB MJ thread: "Very ambiguous I don't think she believes proven liars Wade and James."

:laugh:

[GoldHeart]

Streisand: "I didn't mean to dismiss the trauma these boys experienced in any way. Like all survivors of sexual assault, they will have to carry this for the rest of their lives. I feel deep remorse and I hope that James and Wade know that I truly respect and admire them for speaking their truth."

TiBB MJ thread: "Very ambiguous I don't think she believes proven liars Wade and James."

It's not that ridiculous that she may doubt Wade & James hence her weird comments so you can say what you want but we all know some people are just jumping on the bandwagon regarding the #metoo movement .

She's probably thinking about genuine victims out there but because she knew MJ maybe she can't imagine it happening , the comments about "sexual needs" i can't explain why she'd say that . But i think it's interesting she said James & Wade are speaking "their " Truth instead of "the" Truth . as that's the culture we live in now where anyone's truth is considered gospal :bored: .

[Nancy.]

Advertising watchdog ends investigation into controversial ‘Michael Jackson is innocent’ posters

https://www.nme.com/news/music/advertising-watchdog-ends-investigation-into-controversial-michael-jackson-is-innocent-posters-2466418

The UK’s advertising watchdog has announced the end of its investigation into outdoor posters controversially claiming Michael Jackson is innocent of child sex abuse.

The organisers of the website MJInnocent.com purchased ad space across London buses and bus shelters, showing photos of Jackson with the words “innocent” across his mouth and the slogan “Facts don’t lie, people do.”

Transport for London also came under fire for permitting the adverts, before confirming the removal of the adverts.

Now, the Advertising Standards Authority have announced they are ending the investigation and say there is “little practical action” that they are able to take.

“We received 34 complaints in total. In assessing whether there were grounds for further action, we took into account the fact that TfL had removed the ads following concern from the public,” said The ASA.

https://i.ibb.co/X7zYj5g/D0u-Fm-AW0-AEmb9r.jpg

“In this instance, as the ads had already been removed, there was very little practical action left for us to take.”

The adverts first emerged in the wake of Leaving Neverland, a joint documentary from Channel 4 and HBO that detailed allegations of child abuse sex abuse against the star.

****

Were you one of the 34 people who complained, TS?

[Niamh.]

Facts don't lie, people do...... yes the problem was with MJ lying with children

[Crimson Dynamo]

so every time Jackson said he wasnt a raging paedo he was lying?

[thesheriff443]

Facts don't lie, people do...... yes the problem was with MJ lying with children

A real example of real life,I used to to do lunch time duty at my daughters first little school but being a man I had to stop as it was seen as inappropriate.

Mj was sleeping in the same bed as boys but nothing was done.

[GoldHeart]

Facts don't lie, people do...... yes the problem was with MJ lying with children

Can I ask why you're so convinced he shared a bed with kids while sleeping? .

It's always that same argument ,while people ignore the fact that MJ's bedroom was the size of a house . Kids always insisted they wanted to share his room with him .

Gavin Arvizo actually slept in Mj's bed with his brother while MJ had the floor , but people like to ignore that information . And even if MJ was in the same bed as children why do people always assume child molestation happened? . I understand people thinking it's inappropriate , mj's fans don't defend that . But you have to understand MJ had a different upbringing

MJ said he'd always give his bed to guests while he slept elsewhere. MJ's own ex Debbie said if she had guests over she would probably watch telly in bed with them .

[Niamh.]

Can I ask why you're so convinced he shared a bed with kids while sleeping? .

It's always that same argument ,while people ignore the fact that MJ's bedroom was the size of a house . Kids always insisted they wanted to share his room with him .

Gavin Arvizo actually slept in Mj's bed with his brother while MJ had the floor , but people like to ignore that information . And even if MJ was in the same bed as children why do people always assume child molestation happened? . I understand people thinking it's inappropriate , mj's fans don't defend that . But you have to understand MJ had a different upbringing

MJ said he'd always give his bed to guests while he slept elsewhere. MJ's own ex Debbie said if she had guests over she would probably watch telly in bed with them .

Yeah i believe that MJ gave up his bed to random kids and then slept on the floor instead of going to another bed in his massive house mmhhmm

[Nancy.]

Goldheart, here's another excellent video...
We already knew the stuff about Robson, but the information about Safechuck is interesting to say the least, but I expect this will be ignored or brushed aside, as usual. :laugh:

l_NuDKG_ro4

[Beso]

Goldheart, here's another excellent video...
We already knew the stuff about Robson, but the information about Safechuck is interesting to say the least, but I expect this will be ignored or brushed aside, as usual. :laugh:

l_NuDKG_ro4





What am I supposed to be taking in?
...the red writing, is that the shocking revelations taken as fact this time?

[Nancy.]

What am I supposed to be taking in?
...the red writing, is that the shocking revelations taken as fact this time?

Don't be silly, Parmy. Ignore the red font and focus on the information provided...pay particular attention to the documents about Safechuck and his family being sued for 1 million before realizing shortly afterwards that he had been "abused".

No doubt someone will claim these documents are fake too. :laugh:

[GoldHeart]

Goldheart, here's another excellent video...
We already knew the stuff about Robson, but the information about Safechuck is interesting to say the least, but I expect this will be ignored or brushed aside, as usual. :laugh:

l_NuDKG_ro4

Hey Nancy
Yeah i know all about Safechuck's failing garbage disposal business (how fitting that he's in the CRAP business lol ) . And his family being sued. Yeah it's very convenient that then that's when Safechuck realised he'd been abused all along by MJ .

[GoldHeart]

Numourous videos have been posted with facts and information and many people have closed their eyes and put their fingers in their ears shutting them down as rubbish.

Not sure what more evidence you expect . It's funny how all the proof out there shows Wade & James are DISHONEST GREEDY FLIP FLOPPERS ,yet a propaganda movie about serious child abuse allegations is instantly believed with zero hard evidence.


And it's boring hearing the same argument about "ohh it's mj fans posting videos defending him" ACTUALLY NO they're not all MJ fans , and even MJ fans admit his actions were poorly made and he made bad choices through his naivety .

There's plenty of people who are unsure of Mj's guilt or innocence but they know Wade & James' story is inconsistent & contradictory. Some people were even convinced MJ was GUILTY then as soon as they watched
' leaving neverland' it left them even more confused scratching their heads.

And some people changed their minds after watching it and thought MJ was now INNOCENT as non of it makes sense.

[bots]

cut out the middleman and just ban the bbc, sorted

[Beso]

Numourous videos have been posted with facts and information and many people have closed their eyes and put their fingers in their ears shutting them down as rubbish.

Not sure what more evidence you expect . It's funny how all the proof out there shows Wade & James are DISHONEST GREEDY FLIP FLOPPERS ,yet a propaganda movie about serious child abuse allegations is instantly believed with zero hard evidence.


And it's boring hearing the same argument about "ohh it's mj fans posting videos defending him" ACTUALLY NO they're not all MJ fans , and even MJ fans admit his actions were poorly made and he made bad choices through his naivety .

There's plenty of people who are unsure of Mj's guilt or innocence but they know Wade & James' story is inconsistent & contradictory. Some people were even convinced MJ was GUILTY then as soon as they watched
' leaving neverland' it left them even more confused scratching their heads.

And some people changed their minds after watching it and thought MJ was now INNOCENT as non of it makes sense.

Let's face it, all these videos are damage limitation excersises by the jackson family who are using thier dead brothers money to keep them in the lifestyle they are used to and only want to keep it that way...and I would guess that the percentage of people who thought he was innocent but now guilty will be far far higher than the opposite way around.

[GoldHeart]

Let's face it, all these videos are damage limitation excersises by the jackson family who are using thier dead brothers money to keep them in the lifestyle they are used to and only want to keep it that way...and I would guess that the percentage of people who thought he was innocent but now guilty will be far far higher than the opposite way around.

Damage limitation for what??? why don't you talk about Leaving Neverland cutting out 45 minutes ermmm pretty sure that's some kind of damage limitation but it's a messy attempt :suspect: .

And Wade's wife removing from their charity page that she was a "survivor of abuse" when in the film she clearly says she has no knowledge or understanding of abuse :facepalm: , give me a break!!! also why remove stuff if they're all telling the truth?? it reeks of guilt! .

People are posting facts and information and NO it isn't the Jackson family it's youtubers, fans and other members of the public .

[GoldHeart]

This thread has lasted a good while so that in itself is a miracle on here .

Back on topic , Wade & James don't even look sincere at the Sundance Q&A they're laughing in the faces of real victims practically :bored: .

[Beso]

Goldheart I've watched that and they do sound sincere..poor wade was nearly crying when he was saying how they hope to raise awareness of abused children to church leaders etc.

[user104658]

Wade & James don't even look sincere at the Sundance Q&A they're laughing in the faces of real victims practically :bored: .

I hadn't seen it but I've just watched it and (you'll be surprised to hear) I completely disagree, and I wonder if you believe they're "laughing in the faces of abuse victims" simply because they happen to smile a couple of times during the Q&A? If so then, again, this comes down to a misunderstanding of what is and isn't appropriate emotional response and presentation.

Abuse survivors often laugh and smile WHILST recounting details of their abuse. You might not like or understand that but it is simply the facts.

[GoldHeart]

I hadn't seen it but I've just watched it and (you'll be surprised to hear) I completely disagree, and I wonder if you believe they're "laughing in the faces of abuse victims" simply because they happen to smile a couple of times during the Q&A? If so then, again, this comes down to a misunderstanding of what is and isn't appropriate emotional response and presentation.

Abuse survivors often laugh and smile WHILST recounting details of their abuse. You might not like or understand that but it is simply the facts.


There's a difference between awkward smiling & nervous laughing to inappropriate smirking & guilty laughing.

Nothing is genuine , even when people are talking about real life abuse happening to children all over , both Wade James' faces were blank & cold .

[GoldHeart]

:bored:


https://i.postimg.cc/0jdKG3ZZ/maxresdefault-1.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

[Nancy.]

Here's something else to add to the list of lies spun by Robson and Safechuck...

1111040474419220481


Here's the part where Safechuck specifically mentions having sex with MJ in a room above the Train Station...
1111148103111983104

[thesheriff443]

The fundamental question is, should mj of had young boys sleeping in his bedroom, the only sensible answer is no.

Why would a grown man want young boys sleeping in his room?, it was not to read them a goodnight story.

[GoldHeart]

The fundamental question is, should mj of had young boys sleeping in his bedroom, the only sensible answer is no.

Why would a grown man want young boys sleeping in his room?, it was not to read them a goodnight story.

If you did your research you'd know it wasn't just "young boys" as the stupid media makes out , there were MJ's own family & girls & his friends as well as the kids parents .

MJ was usually with other people as well as kids , he wasn't just left alone kids 24/7 .

[Nancy.]

The fundamental question is, should mj of had young boys sleeping in his bedroom, the only sensible answer is no.

Why would a grown man want young boys sleeping in his room?, it was not to read them a goodnight story.

But MJ's bedroom was two storeys high, and not the average size of a bedroom that we think of. There weren't just boys sleeping over either, Sheriff, there were girls too...including his own family (as Goldheart said).

[Niamh.]

I've deleted some more posts in here along with the numerous posts Vicky deleted yesterday. I'm going to reopen it but anyone, on any "side" who starts picking at members in here or bringing them up in posts to have a dig will be infracted.If it turns into a mess like it was previous to the deletions it will be permanently locked

[bots]

So this thread is a bit like MJ .... cleaned himself up, brushed himself down and gave it another go :laugh:

[Niamh.]

So this thread is a bit like MJ .... cleaned himself up, brushed himself down and gave it another go :laugh:

:hehe:

[GoldHeart]

prpXd6gvKt4

[Nancy.]

prpXd6gvKt4

Another great video, Goldheart. :clap1:

I had no idea about the fan who broke into his bedroom and hid in his closet for days before finally getting caught.
So that explains the reason for the bedroom "security system" that everyone was talking about which is mentioned from 18.00 onwards.

[GoldHeart]

Another great video, Goldheart. :clap1:

I had no idea about the fan who broke into his bedroom and hid in his closet for days before finally getting caught.
So that explains the reason for the bedroom "security system" that everyone was talking about which is mentioned from 18.00 onwards.

Exactly nobody thinks it's weird when other celebrities have high security & alarm systems to protect their home & themselves.

Yeah how scary is that , people say MJ was paranoid and is it any wonder when there's crazy stalkers like that :umm2: .

Plus Gavin Arvizo's brother claimed he saw his brother get abused by MJ , so somehow the brother who's a larger kid managed to sneak pass the alarm system without being heard ??.

But then the contradiction of that is how MJ is using the alarm to warn him so he doesn't get caught ,yet somehow Arvizo's brother managed to bypass the alarm :conf: :facepalm: .

[Nancy.]

Exactly nobody thinks it's weird when other celebrities have high security & alarm systems to protect their home & themselves.

Yeah how scary is that , people say MJ was paranoid and is it any wonder when there's crazy stalkers like that :umm2: .

Plus Gavin Arvizo's brother claimed he saw his brother get abused by MJ , so somehow the brother who's a larger kid managed to sneak pass the alarm system without being heard ??.

But then the contradiction of that is how MJ is using the alarm to warn him so he doesn't get caught ,yet somehow Arvizo's brother managed to bypass the alarm :conf: :facepalm: .

:laugh::laugh::laugh: I know. It's completely and utterly ridiculous.

[chuff me dizzy]

Let's face it, all these videos are damage limitation excersises by the jackson family who are using thier dead brothers money to keep them in the lifestyle they are used to and only want to keep it that way...and I would guess that the percentage of people who thought he was innocent but now guilty will be far far higher than the opposite way around.

100%

[Nancy.]

Here's something else to add to the list of lies spun by Robson and Safechuck...

1111040474419220481


Here's the part where Safechuck specifically mentions having sex with MJ in a room above the Train Station...
1111148103111983104

Verification from the operator of the Neverland Amusement Park who says the Train Station wasn't contructed until mid 93 - yet Safechuck claims he and MJ had sex there and that the "abuse" stopped in 92. :laugh:

https://i.ibb.co/LzHhJ0F/D2wg-S2-X0-AYUJsx.jpg

[Niamh.]

Nancy re quoting your own posts is spamming

[Nancy.]

Nancy re quoting your own posts is spamming

I quoted my post but forgot to add the additional information but must've edited at the exact time as you replied, so people would know what I was talking about, but thanks anyway.

[GoldHeart]

Yeah how was Safechuck abused on a train that wasn't built yet ??? :conf: :facepalm: .

The pool area was another place of abuse apparently ? , but there was surveillance & people around.

The famous bedroom with the mirror is actually 2 way and Oprah & MJ were sat looking at it .

[Kazanne]

Wouldn't you think if someone was a peadophile with such a career MJ had that they would have been VERY secretive about it as they would know such a claim would ruin them,but MJ was completely open about it all,like he had nothing to hide and I believe he didn't. I wonder why as soon as you say you have slept in the same bed as a child ,you are automatically branded a molester or potential one,there are other things to enjoy in bed, why does the worst always come to peoples minds ? You can love kids and their company without anything sinister going on up top( or bottom),if he had been a woman would the story be different ?

[Vicky.]

Nancy re quoting your own posts is spamming

I quoted my post but forgot to add the additional information but must've edited at the exact time as you replied, so people would know what I was talking about, but thanks anyway.

Yeah, quoting your own post and adding info is fine, have done it myself a few times. Just quoting it with a '.' or something is just spamming really.

Seems this was maybe the second, then was changed to the first? Or something. Either way, how the quoted post is now is obviously fine..I can't actually see what it was, as my 'view edits' button is not working right for some reason..

Possibly a pointless post (mine) :p

[GoldHeart]

Wouldn't you think if someone was a peadophile with such a career MJ had that they would have been VERY secretive about it as they would know such a claim would ruin them,but MJ was completely open about it all,like he had nothing to hide and I believe he didn't. I wonder why as soon as you say you have slept in the same bed as a child ,you are automatically branded a molester or potential one,there are other things to enjoy in bed, why does the worst always come to peoples minds ? You can love kids and their company without anything sinister going on up top( or bottom),if he had been a woman would the story be different ?

And according to Safechuck & Robson he spent alot of time abusing them both without being seen. Wasn't he busy writing music or spending time with his family or friends . or having business meetings and going on tour and being interviewed??? .

The places they claim MJ abused them have plot holes and doesn't make sense like the Train for example that hadn't been built yet .

When Bashire stitched MJ up with that badly edited documentary , he hurt MJ with the whole "kids sleeping in bed" . You could see he was upset and he said "you're thinking sexual but it isn't" .

Yeah Kaz i can't help but think the same if he was Shania Twain or Dolly Parton what would the reaction of been then to kids having sleepovers ?? interesting we'll never know . And would the media twist the truth and say Dolly only prefers little girls in her bedroom .

We can all agree that Mj's behaviour was inappropriate to have kids stay at his home and sleep there , but to automatically think "paedophile" is a serious leap and damaging accusation which taints his legacy.

MJ was used to sharing bedrooms and beds as he was growing up , what's normal to him is different to other people .


Innocent things get taken out of context and sadly there's a perverse distorted view of things .

Even the old Batman tv series was considered weird by some corrie actress who thought it was weird looking back at Batman being friends with Robin who's a young boy , people see what they want to see and we all know there was nothing perverted about Batman & Robin :bored: .

[Kazanne]

And according to Safechuck & Robson he spent alot of time abusing them both without being seen. Wasn't he busy writing music or spending time with his family or friends . or having business meetings and going on tour and being interviewed??? .

The places they claim MJ abused them have plot holes and doesn't make sense like the Train for example that hadn't been built yet .

When Bashire stitched MJ up with that badly edited documentary , he hurt MJ with the whole "kids sleeping in bed" . You could see he was upset and he said "you're thinking sexual but it isn't" .

Yeah Kaz i can't help but think the same if he was Shania Twain or Dolly Parton what would the reaction of been then to kids having sleepovers ?? interesting we'll never know . And would the media twist the truth and say Dolly only prefers little girls in her bedroom .

We can all agree that Mj's behaviour was inappropriate to have kids stay at his home and sleep there , but to automatically think "paedophile" is a serious leap and damaging accusation which taints his legacy.

MJ was used to sharing bedrooms and beds as he was growing up , what's normal to him is different to other people .


Innocent things get taken out of context and sadly there's a perverse distorted view of things .

Even the old Batman tv series was considered weird by some corrie actress who thought it was weird looking back at Batman being friends with Robin who's a young boy , people see what they want to see and we all know there was nothing perverted about Batman & Robin :bored: .

Excellent post Goldheart and of course I agree,I think him having those kids there in this climate was ill thought out , but in no way was it to hurt any of them. but they say karma is a bitch,lets see how this 'claim' progresses.

[GoldHeart]

Excellent post Goldheart and of course I agree,I think him having those kids there in this climate was ill thought out , but in no way was it to hurt any of them. but they say karma is a bitch,lets see how this 'claim' progresses.

Alot of what Mj was doing was charity work to help kids and he had sick kids stay there , and that bedroom Safechuck lied about is actually set up so that kids can watch movies /cartoons. it was in an old Oprah interview which i can't find atm . And the other kids that stayed there were allowed because MJ always asked the parents permission.

From the old home movies i've from Nerverland , MJ just looks like a big kid himself enjoying himself doing things he missed out on as a kid.

Notice Kaz how these accusations seem to be every 10 years aswell :bored:.

VVodduqP11M

[Kazanne]

From The mirror, isn't this the truth ?by Will-I-am
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/celebrity/william-michael-jackson-allegations-are-part-of-racist-smear-campaign/ar-BBVpqsK?ocid=spartanntp

[thesheriff443]

From The mirror, isn't this the truth ?by Will-I-am
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/celebrity/william-michael-jackson-allegations-are-part-of-racist-smear-campaign/ar-BBVpqsK?ocid=spartanntp

It’s no more the truth than the accusers.

It’s not for money it’s for racist reasons.

Come on kazanne the opinion of a another black singer don’t make it the truth.

Common sense makes you question why a grown man wants kids in his bed.

[user104658]

I've deleted some more posts in here along with the numerous posts Vicky deleted yesterday. I'm going to reopen it but anyone, on any "side" who starts picking at members in here or bringing them up in posts to have a dig will be infracted.If it turns into a mess like it was previous to the deletions it will be permanently locked

This leaves me with a bit of a predicament Niamh because if the posts since reopening are anything to go by, it's pretty clear that this is still (and will forever be) a YouTube / Twitter spamming circlejerk but saying so is what caused all of the personal stuff to begin with.

I'm not picking on members individually / calling them names, I'm calling the thread out for what it has become and if that's considered personal then infract away I guess :shrug:. I'd still rather say it than sit back and watch two probable - or even if only POSSIBLE - abuse victims be smeared as villains through trashy social media propaganda.

[Beso]

This leaves me with a bit of a predicament Niamh because if the posts since reopening are anything to go by, it's pretty clear that this is still (and will forever be) a YouTube / Twitter spamming circlejerk but saying so is what caused all of the personal stuff to begin with.

I'm not picking on members individually / calling them names, I'm calling the thread out for what it has become and if that's considered personal then infract away I guess :shrug:. I'd still rather say it than sit back and watch two probable - or even if only POSSIBLE - abuse victims be smeared as villains through trashy social media propaganda.

There's saying it once..but to continue to drone on and on about when it would be much easier just not to comment after making your opinion clear.

Perhaps the thread only looked like a circle jerk to you because nobody else was replying, that's not down to kez goldheart or nancy though.

[user104658]

There's saying it once..but to continue to drone on and on about when it would be much easier just not to comment after making your opinion clear.

Sure it would be easier but it would also be making it easy for people alleging abuse to be accused of being villains and liars, which again, I'm not willing to step back and allow. What ever gave you the impression that I like things "easy"? :think:



Perhaps the thread only looked like a circle jerk to you because nobody else was replying, that's not down to kez goldheart or nancy though.

That's literally exactly what I said Parm; my opinion is about the thread and the things being posted here, it's not a personal judgement of the people posting those things and never has been.

[GoldHeart]

From The mirror, isn't this the truth ?by Will-I-am
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/celebrity/william-michael-jackson-allegations-are-part-of-racist-smear-campaign/ar-BBVpqsK?ocid=spartanntp

The Elephant in the room is most definitely RACISM , if it wasn't then Harvey Weinstein's documentary & the publicity surrounding it wouldn't get pushed on the back burner . Oprah is protecting Weinstein her friend despite numerous women saying he took advantage & abused them . Why isn't Oprah interviewing these women? When there's a lot more evidence to back their claims up .

Why is MJ being used as the scape goat for the #metoo movement & child abuse awareness campaign .

H & M has removed any clothing with MJ on , yet they keep rock stars & rock & roll people who have been accused of sleeping / having intimate relationships with under age girls.

There's a lot of perverse behaviour in Hollywood that Corey Feldman tried to address ,but that gets ignored by people. And so much hypocrisy . MJ was found innocent.

It's ridiculous how they're trying to erase history & mute MJ , the bandwagon & outcry is ludicrous , they're painting him as a monster :facepalm: :bored: .

[Beso]

Sure it would be easier but it would also be making it easy for people alleging abuse to be accused of being villains and liars, which again, I'm not willing to step back and allow. What ever gave you the impression that I like things "easy"? :think:





That's literally exactly what I said Parm; my opinion is about the thread and the things being posted here, it's not a personal judgement of the people posting those things and never has been.


Ok..I doubted you did want to single out anyone..:wavey:

[Beso]

The Elephant in the room is most definitely RACISM , if it wasn't then Harvey Weinstein's documentary & the publicity surrounding it wouldn't get pushed on the back burner . Oprah is protecting Weinstein her friend despite numerous women saying he took advantage & abused them . Why isn't Oprah interviewing these women? When there's a lot more evidence to back their claims up .

Why is MJ being used as the scape goat for the #metoo movement & child abuse awareness campaign .

H & M has removed any clothing with MJ on , yet they keep rock stars & rock & roll people who have been accused of sleeping / having intimate relationships with under age girls.

There's a lot of perverse behaviour in Hollywood that Corey Feldman tried to address ,but that gets ignored by people. And so much hypocrisy . MJ was found innocent.

It's ridiculous how they're trying to erase history & mute MJ , the bandwagon & outcry is ludicrous , they're painting him as a monster :facepalm: :bored: .



He bloody was a monster..I believe he was a rampant as Saville.

[GoldHeart]

1107487761961881600

[Cherie]

1107487761961881600

:joker:

[Beso]

1107487761961881600

I'm assuming he turned the invite down.:shrug:

[Beso]

Thanksgiving Day in 1987 is on Thursday, November 26



He had some free time I see...perhaps he went after all.

[GoldHeart]

Thanksgiving Day in 1987 is on Thursday, November 26



He had some free time I see...perhaps he went after all.


November 13, 1987 Melbourne Australia Olympic Park Stadium
November 20, 1987 Sydney Parramatta Stadium
November 21, 1987
November 27, 1987 Brisbane Brisbane Entertainment Centre
November 28, 1987

[Kazanne]

Thanksgiving Day in 1987 is on Thursday, November 26



He had some free time I see...perhaps he went after all.

C'mon now Parmy ,surely you have to admit those two at at least are guarded with the truth,whatever you think of MJ is your belief but some of this doesn't really add up .

[AnnieK]

This is going to sound sarcastic, but please believe me, it isn't but IF some irrefutable evidence came out to prove MJ did have sexual relationships with these or other boys, would you guys then condemn him or still believe, as Streisand obviously does, that his upbringing were to blame and so in some way his actions can be excused?

[Beso]

C.mon now Parmy ,surely you have to admit those two at at least are guarded with the truth,whatever you think of MJ is your belief but some of this doesn't really add up .

I honestly believe it's because mj turned them into paedophiles as well..a bit like the lost Boys. MJ as the leader grooming all the outcasts like fagan.

And sorry m8 but I do honestly think they acted as a group together to entice and engage with many many hidden visitors to the ranch in the end once they became a little to old for michael.

[Beso]

November 13, 1987 Melbourne Australia Olympic Park Stadium
November 20, 1987 Sydney Parramatta Stadium
November 21, 1987
November 27, 1987 Brisbane Brisbane Entertainment Centre
November 28, 1987

Plenty time to visit if he accepted the invitation, has that question been answered yet, wether michael accepted the invitation or declined it?

[GoldHeart]

Plenty time to visit if he accepted the invitation, has that question been answered yet, wether michael accepted the invitation or declined it?

:facepalm:
He was touring in Australia , Safechuck says MJ had thanksgiving dinner but he couldn't of if he was touring ,you saw the dates .

That's like saying someone spent Christmas with you but actually they were on holiday during the whole Christmas period :conf: .

[Beso]

:facepalm:
He was touring in Australia , Safechuck says MJ had thanksgiving dinner but he couldn't of if he was touring ,you saw the dates .

That's like saying someone spent Christmas with you but actually they were on holiday during the whole Christmas period :conf: .



It just says he invited him, it doesn't say if he accepted or not...plus he could have flew back and forth in time...I doubt he would do that though so I am assuming mj just declined the invitation...I dunno but wasnt robson Australian? ...maybe in Michaels sick tiny mind he would have seen it as cheating.

[GoldHeart]

It just says he invited him, it doesn't say if he accepted or not...plus he could have flew back and forth in time...I doubt he would do that though so I am assuming mj just declined the invitation...I dunno but wasnt robson Australian? ...maybe in Michaels sick tiny mind he would have seen it as cheating.

Inviting someone & them declining is different from him actually supposedly having thanksgiving with Safechuck when he was actually busy on tour in Australia at the time.

MJ was one of the most photographed & documented person , the timelines contradict.

And this isn't the only inconsistency from James .

And at some point MJ met wade & the family in Australia I think , Wade is a few years younger than James .

[user104658]

Not that anyone will be listening but again... Contradicting timeliness mean nothing. These are events from decades in the past and it's perfectly feasible that some of the exact dates and times (and even locations) would be misremembered.

[Beso]

Inviting someone & them declining is different from him actually supposedly having thanksgiving with Safechuck when he was actually busy on tour in Australia at the time.

MJ was one of the most photographed & documented person , the timelines contradict.

And this isn't the only inconsistency from James .

And at some point MJ met wade & the family in Australia I think , Wade is a few years younger than James .

All I can think if is darts. And james wade.

Where is the proof of Michael saying yes or no to the invitation?

[Nancy.]

Going back to the room above the Train Station where Safechuck claimed he had sex with MJ before the abuse stopped in 92, Here's the building permits for it dated Sept 93 - January 94.

https://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f257/magicsart/55563322_10156547165966622_5657072966555402240_o.j pg

https://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f257/magicsart/55704714_10156547166111622_4925509941487206400_o.j pg

https://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f257/magicsart/55604976_10156547167181622_4296453685396897792_o.j pg

I guess Safechuck must've been a time traveller. :joker:

[Beso]

Not that anyone will be listening but again... Contradicting timeliness mean nothing. These are events from decades in the past and it's perfectly feasible that some of the exact dates and times (and even locations) would be misremembered.

We went through this on about page 4 or maybe earlier...I forgot to say then that my niece and I reinacted a picture of me sat feeding my niece at the xmas dinner table from toddler age in the first photo to God knows how many years later for the 2nd photo.


Can I remember the dates years..course not, but I know it was a memory I won't forget...and that's one I'm trying not to forget...you are spot on TS...and loved.

[Beso]

Going back to the room above the Train Station where Safechuck claimed he had sex with MJ before the abuse stopped in 92, Here's the building permits for it dated Sept 93 - January 94.

https://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f257/magicsart/55563322_10156547165966622_5657072966555402240_o.j pg

https://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f257/magicsart/55704714_10156547166111622_4925509941487206400_o.j pg

https://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f257/magicsart/55604976_10156547167181622_4296453685396897792_o.j pg

I guess Safechuck must've been a time traveller. :joker:

How old was he then nancy?

Michael could have been telling him about how he was so excited about making this special room...so I think it's very important to find out his age at the time.

[Nancy.]

How old was he then nancy?

Michael could have been telling him about how he was so excited about making this special room...so I think it's very important to find out his age at the time.

He would've been around 16 when the Station was completed in 94 and a little too old to be getting excited about steam trains and special rooms after travelling the world in private Jets with Michael, don't you think?

[GoldHeart]

Going back to the room above the Train Station where Safechuck claimed he had sex with MJ before the abuse stopped in 92, Here's the building permits for it dated Sept 93 - January 94.

https://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f257/magicsart/55563322_10156547165966622_5657072966555402240_o.j pg

https://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f257/magicsart/55704714_10156547166111622_4925509941487206400_o.j pg

https://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f257/magicsart/55604976_10156547167181622_4296453685396897792_o.j pg

I guess Safechuck must've been a time traveller. :joker:

Apparently inconsistent timelines & contradictory dates doesn't matter Nancy .

As Wade & James were so traumatised they changed their stories a million times so we're all meant to accept it :sleep: .

If James says MJ lost interest in him after 93 that makes no sense , as he's seen holding an umbrella for him aged 16 or something. And the train station was built after MJ "moved on " from James :conf:

[Beso]

He would've been around 16 when the Station was completed in 94 and a little too old to be getting excited about steam trains and special rooms after travelling the world in private Jets with Michael, don't you think?



16...far to old for michael. .


But that's where the abuse happened..nothing but a bunch of grooming paedophiles, unfortunately the kids doing the grooming then we're kids already groomed by Michael Jackson.

[Nancy.]

Apparently inconsistent timelines & contradictory dates doesn't matter Nancy.

As Wade & James were so traumatised they changed their stories a million times so we're all meant to accept it :sleep: .

If James says MJ lost interest in him after 93 that makes no sense , as he's seen holding an umbrella for him aged 16 or something. And the train station was built after MJ "moved on " from James :conf:

:joker:

Apparently so.

[Beso]

I have swayed from thinking these 2 boys are innocent now...I think yes..they were innocent, then michael got his hands on them...them out of all the thousands of pics he would have been sent? Why them...to me that's a big question.

Why did michael chose them out of all the requests he must have had?

Is he just a really really unlucky guy that 3 of his closest friends that he chose out of thousands have turned out not to be nice little boys after all?


Is he, is he really that unlucky?

[GoldHeart]

I have swayed from thinking these 2 boys are innocent now...I think yes..they were innocent, then michael got his hands on them...them out of all the thousands of pics he would have been sent? Why them...to me that's a big question.

Why did michael chose them out of all the requests he must have had?

Is he just a really really unlucky guy that 3 of his closest friends that he chose out of thousands have turned out not to be nice little boys after all?


Is he, is he really that unlucky?

Well the biggest MISTAKE was letting Wade , James , Gavin & Jordy into his life .



It wasn't about being unlucky , MJ sadly was too trusting and got taken advantage of .

If Peter Andre won the dance contest instead of Wade ,I wonder what Wade's mother would of done then .

If MJ was a serial molestor why has only 4 accused him with contradictory stories that are easily debunked with zero proof .
These accusations seem to be every 10 years as well .

[user104658]

:joker:



Apparently so.That sounds a lot like mocking to me :shrug:.

Do you know anything about developmental psychology? Or trauma? Or just the normal formation of memory in general? It's perfectly feasible (if not likely) that they have muddled up the locations and exact dates of some of these incidents, because no one has a perfect recollection of their childhood in detail. E.g. The one about the train station, he's likely just mixing up his memory of an incident of abuse with another memory of being there at at later date.

Here's even a personal example;

I distinctly, clearly, in vivid detail remember being in the kitchen of my last house when I got home from work and my wife told me that my mum had died. I remember it in detail, down to the counter I was leaning against, the lighting, everything. Except I moved out of that house in January 2014, and my mum died in March 2014. The memory itls literally impossible and it must have been the kitchen of my current house; but I don't remember it that way no matter how hard I try.

[user104658]

Well the biggest MISTAKE was letting Wade , James , Gavin & Jordy into his life .







It wasn't about being unlucky , MJ sadly was too trusting and got taken advantage of .



If Peter Andre won the dance contest instead of Wade ,I wonder what Wade's mother would of done then .



If MJ was a serial molestor why has only 4 accused him with contradictory stories that are easily debunked with zero proof .

These accusations seem to be every 10 years as well ."Only" four :umm2:.

[Beso]

Well the biggest MISTAKE was letting Wade , James , Gavin & Jordy into his life .



It wasn't about being unlucky , MJ sadly was too trusting and got taken advantage of .

If Peter Andre won the dance contest instead of Wade ,I wonder what Wade's mother would of done then .

If MJ was a serial molestor why has only 4 accused him with contradictory stories that are easily debunked with zero proof .
These accusations seem to be every 10 years as well .



I think it's probably because each boy is telling a different story, but each boy are being judged as one..

MJ fans are so determined to dispel each one that they forget the fact that the four boys probably ended up aiding and abetting michael in the furthwr abuse of different boys..

Maybe now though they realise the guilt they have felt for doing that should be firmly pushed onto michael..I don't know though..:shrug:

[GoldHeart]

Gavin Arvizo was proved a liar and was coerced by his mother who was an unstable con artist . She falsely accused JC penny of sexual harassment & her kids lied for her .

Evan chandler himself admitted he drugged his own son Jordy with a drug people thought wasa truth serum but it just made Jordy very suggestive.

previously Jordy denied MJ did anything innapropriate & same goes for Gavin but with Gavin he was bitter MJ didn't pay him attention anymore as he could see the family were using him . And with Chandler the father abused Jordy & he wanted to get money out of MJ .

Now 2 more accusers James & Wade previously sang Mj's praises and they saw him as a friend until they both hit financial troubles then all of a sudden MJ abused them :bored: .

[Beso]

Evan chandler himself admitted he drugged his own son Jordy with a drug people thought wasa truth serum but it just made Jordy very suggestive.



I'm not surprised.

[Beso]

Have we discussed jesus juice yet?


Here's a thought.....imagine living on a shirty life..then all of a sudden you are in Mj's bedroom...?

[GoldHeart]

The " Jesus juice " was another ridiculous fantasy made up . it was later revealed that kids broke into Mj's cellar and helped themselves to wine .

[Beso]

The " Jesus juice " was another ridiculous fantasy made up . it was later revealed that kids broke into Mj's cellar and helped themselves to wine .

There is no way the little boys sneeked past all those security cameras..:shrug:

[Beso]

The " Jesus juice " was another ridiculous fantasy made up . it was later revealed that kids broke into Mj's cellar and helped themselves to wine .

He was quite the manipulator and master paedophile. ..force feeding the kids the jesus juice and turning them into children that ended up loving his abuse so much they turned alcoholic. Addicted to the only drug that made them tolerate the life they had been dealt.

[GoldHeart]

He was quite the manipulator and master paedophile. ..force feeding the kids the jesus juice and turning them into children that ended up loving his abuse so much they turned alcoholic. Addicted to the only drug that made them tolerate the life they had been dealt.


:notimpressed:

[AnnieK]

This is going to sound sarcastic, but please believe me, it isn't but IF some irrefutable evidence came out to prove MJ did have sexual relationships with these or other boys, would you guys then condemn him or still believe, as Streisand obviously does, that his upbringing were to blame and so in some way his actions can be excused?

Can you answer this? I only ask after a discussion I had with another MJ fan....am interested.if their opinion is shared amongst other fans / supporters

[Beso]

:notimpressed:

Sounds ridiculous to you don't it :shrug:

[Marsh.]

This is going to sound sarcastic, but please believe me, it isn't but IF some irrefutable evidence came out to prove MJ did have sexual relationships with these or other boys, would you guys then condemn him or still believe, as Streisand obviously does, that his upbringing were to blame and so in some way his actions can be excused?

But... they don't believe that he did. So if some irrefutable evidence came out then that would be it.

When discussing his own upbringing, I've only ever seen people use it to understand or explain his behaviour, never excuse it.

[GoldHeart]

Fans and other people just want evidence , Leaving Neverland is propaganda to shock the viewers and to play on their emotions.

I could make UP a graphic traumatic story up right now but doesn't make it FACT.

Old tabloid fantasy stories are being dug up on MJ that were debunked, the FBI & Tom Sneddon has it in for MJ for years .

If any of these ridiculous rumours were true about MJ they would of indited him , as the saying goes
'even a ham sandwich can get indited '.

[thesheriff443]

Famous or unknown, no one is beyond question and if as a grown man you want young boys to sleep in your bedroom it will raise questions.

No one is stopping anyone listening to his music it’s just not being played on the bbc.

This story has not and may never come to a close but life goes on regardless.

[GoldHeart]

Famous or unknown, no one is beyond question and if as a grown man you want young boys to sleep in your bedroom it will raise questions.

No one is stopping anyone listening to his music it’s just not being played on the bbc.

This story has not and may never come to a close but life goes on regardless.

Its not just the BBC , h&m decided to remove his clothing while they continue to sell rock star clothing who have been rumoured to sleep with underage girls.

Starbucks stopped playing his music , Simpsons got rid of his episode and accused him of "grooming" . And i think Spotify removed him aswell .

[AnnieK]

But... they don't believe that he did. So if some irrefutable evidence came out then that would be it.

When discussing his own upbringing, I've only ever seen people use it to understand or explain his behaviour, never excuse it.

Which is why I asked the question :shrug:

For some fans its wouldn't be "it". My friend is a lifelong MJ fan and defender and he said even if photographic/ video evidence came out, although it would dent his adoration, he would still attribute the main blame on mjs upbringing, which to me, personally is abhorrent as he was an adult but I wanted to see if other MJ fans felt the same or if they felt the way that I did??

As I said it was not a sarcastic or baiting question, it was a legitimate question without judgement. I am just interested, although the fact that after twice asking no-one but you has answered tells me one of two things, either I am on ignore, or its an uncomfortable question for his fans

[GoldHeart]

Which is why I asked the question :shrug:

For some fans its wouldn't be "it". My friend is a lifelong MJ fan and defender and he said even if photographic/ video evidence came out, although it would dent his adoration, he would still attribute the main blame on mjs upbringing, which to me, personally is abhorrent as he was an adult but I wanted to see if other MJ fans felt the same or if they felt the way that I did??

As I said it was not a sarcastic, it was a legitimate question without judgement.

I don't believe MJ is guilty and many other people feel the same way, we want proper evidence that's all coherent stories of the alleged abuse.

There's too many inconsistencies and contradictions . So yes although there's probably SOME fans out there that will never accept MJ might be guilty there's other people who just can't see him as a child molester as it doesn't fit together , plus he was investigated for a long time and was found innocent.

And finding MJ strange and child like doesn't automatically mean he abused kids. But i think he made poor decisions through naivety . I also think his upbringing had alot to do with it . He was a mega star and one of the biggest targets for extortion scams .

[Marsh.]

Which is why I asked the question :shrug:

For some fans its wouldn't be "it". My friend is a lifelong MJ fan and defender and he said even if photographic/ video evidence came out, although it would dent his adoration, he would still attribute the main blame on mjs upbringing, which to me, personally is abhorrent as he was an adult but I wanted to see if other MJ fans felt the same or if they felt the way that I did??

As I said it was not a sarcastic or baiting question, it was a legitimate question without judgement. I am just interested, although the fact that after twice asking no-one but you has answered tells me one of two things, either I am on ignore, or its an uncomfortable question for his fans

I thought you meant if irrefutable evidence came out would his fans still be defending him as innocent.

[AnnieK]

I don't believe MJ is guilty and many other people feel the same way, we want proper evidence that's all coherent stories of the alleged abuse.

There's too many inconsistencies and contradictions . So yes although there's probably SOME fans out there that will never accept MJ might be guilty there's other people who just can't see him as a child molester as it doesn't fit together , plus he was investigated for a long time and was found innocent.

And finding MJ strange and child like doesn't automatically mean he abused kids. But i think he made poor decisions through naivety . I also think his upbringing had alot to do with it . He was a mega star and one of the biggest targets for extortion scams .

I understand that but its not the question I have asked, twice.

What if there were irrefutable evidence, what would your stance be then? Read back for full question as its late and ive quoted it twice

[AnnieK]

I thought you meant if irrefutable evidence came out would his fans still be defending him as innocent.

No, not at all....my friend said he said it still wouldn't be MJs fault if he had molested those kids as he hadn't had the chance to mature emotionally or sexually due to his upbringing

At that point I had to walk away

[Niamh.]

Its not just the BBC , h&m decided to remove his clothing while they continue to sell rock star clothing who have been rumoured to sleep with underage girls.



Starbucks stopped playing his music , Simpsons got rid of his episode and accused him of "grooming" . And i think Spotify removed him aswell .The BBC haven't actually stopped playing his music

[GoldHeart]

I understand that but its not the question I have asked, twice.

What if there were irrefutable evidence, what would your stance be then? Read back for full question as its late and ive quoted it twice

I would honestly be devastated , like many other people . It's a difficult one really .

I was a Lost Prophets fan before it was revealed the lead singer was a paedophile , i was shocked and felt disgusted as i didn't see it coming. I stopped listening to their music .

Some people can separate the artist from the music , there's people out there that think MJ is guilty but they DON'T want his music to be muted and they'll STILL happily listen to his music .

It depends how strongly you feel , obviously anything to do with violence & abuse can completely change things regarding how you feel about that person . But celebrities get cancelled all the time and people are very fickle.

[Twosugars]

No, not at all....my friend said he said it still wouldn't be MJs fault if he had molested those kids as he hadn't had the chance to mature emotionally or sexually due to his upbringing

At that point I had to walk away

You know the answer really. Some would condemn him but some wouldn't. I'd imagine it would also depend on the evidence.

[Niamh.]

Which is why I asked the question :shrug:

For some fans its wouldn't be "it". My friend is a lifelong MJ fan and defender and he said even if photographic/ video evidence came out, although it would dent his adoration, he would still attribute the main blame on mjs upbringing, which to me, personally is abhorrent as he was an adult but I wanted to see if other MJ fans felt the same or if they felt the way that I did??

As I said it was not a sarcastic or baiting question, it was a legitimate question without judgement. I am just interested, although the fact that after twice asking no-one but you has answered tells me one of two things, either I am on ignore, or its an uncomfortable question for his fansI just don't get how anyone could just blindly excuse someone because they're famous and they admire their career. I was in fact faced with that dilemma myself recently and I went off this particular "hero" of mine instantly

[Twosugars]

I just don't get how anyone could just blindly excuse someone because they're famous and they admire their career. I was in fact faced with that dilemma myself recently and I went off this particular "hero" of mine instantly
It's not quite the same, but Richard Wagner, a famous composer, was a virulent antisemite. Yet many Jewish musicians, conductors and fans continue admiring his music. Stephen Fry, who is half-Jewish, said that he couldn't imagine life without Wagner's operas even though he knows Wagner's views on people like him.
I think if somebody is a genius people are more willing to separate things.
I'm not saying it's right, but it happens.

[Niamh.]

It's not quite the same, but Richard Wagner, a famous composer, was a virulent antisemite. Yet many Jewish musicians, conductors and fans continue admiring his music. Stephen Fry, who is half-Jewish, said that he couldn't imagine life without Wagner's operas even though he knows Wagner's views on people like him.

I think if somebody is a genius people are more willing to separate things.

I'm not saying it's right, but it happens.Appreciating someone's work and still appreciating that person as a person are different though

[GoldHeart]

Appreciating someone's work and still appreciating that person as a person are different though

Depends what the person has done.

I stopped listening to Lost Prophets because of the lead Singer .

But as I previously said some can separate the art from the person.

[Twosugars]

Appreciating someone's work and still appreciating that person as a person are different though
I probably misunderstood your question.
I thought you meant going off a person as also going off their work or being unable to enjoy it anymore.

[Niamh.]

I probably misunderstood your question.

I thought you meant going off a person as also going off their work or being unable to enjoy it anymore.I would say it would probably taint that enjoyment, for me anyway, but you could still appreciate the fact that it was good or great

[Marsh.]

I just don't get how anyone could just blindly excuse someone because they're famous and they admire their career. I was in fact faced with that dilemma myself recently and I went off this particular "hero" of mine instantly

But Annie's point was about them absolving him of blame due to his upbringing, not his work.