ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums

ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/index.php)
-   Serious Debates & News (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=61)
-   -   BBC bans Michael Jackson music amidst child abuse claims (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=354764)

Twosugars 11-03-2019 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier (Post 10474377)
Yes, Vicky posted the Saville thread yesterday, it was jammed full of familiar faces insisting that Saville's accusers were "after money". Honestly a fascinating read given that it was a full 7 years ago. So I guess you have to assume that social media was similar.

TBH quite a few people STILL defend ol' Harris.

what exactly are you suggesting here TS? It's not the first time you've gone for fms rather than their arguments :suspect:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier (Post 10474417)
We ploughed through the R Kelly documentary (it's called "Surviving R Kelly") yesterday, it's pretty long (about 5 and a half hours) but honestly, in some ways it's an even wilder ride than this one.

Plus like I said a couple of pages back, it illustrates a lot about the power of stardom. He went to trial on child porn charges and was found guilty. THERE WAS A VIDEO! The jury saw it! The press and even the lawyers were considering the trial to be practically a formality, everyone saw the tape and knew it was real, and yet the jury was like "nah" :facepalm:. His own lawyer from the trial admits that he was definitely guilty and yet :shrug:.

Was also interesting to note that he was an acquaintance of MJ at one point.

Interesting to note Liza Minelli was an acquintance of MJ and she was never accused of anything.
MJ had probably thousands of aquaintances. He was bezzy mates with Elizabeth Taylor. Does it meant she was a nonce too?

Kazanne 11-03-2019 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy (Post 10474560)
I seem to think R Kelly defended him at his trial ?

Not found any evidence to that at all.

Marsh. 11-03-2019 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 10474582)
Actually I would probably wank him off for 5g

He wants your bum for that price.

Beso 11-03-2019 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marsh. (Post 10474681)
He wants your bum for that price.

He can pretend he had it for that price, I will charge him 1.75m

bots 11-03-2019 07:21 PM

Linda McCartney told me to fook off once. I think all Beatles and Wings music should be banned.

Beso 11-03-2019 07:22 PM

In fact. ..at the time I would probably be moonwalking about the school going, I got tossed of by Michael Jackson last night......so I dunno maybe these rumours ain't true after all...cause at that age....ask yourself. Could you keep it in?

GoldHeart 11-03-2019 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kazanne (Post 10474673)
Not found any evidence to that at all.

Me niether and even if there was ,why does other people defending MJ get ignored?? .

There's also a theory that safechuck got that grooming jewellery from a tacky pawn shop cheap :whistle:

Kazanne 11-03-2019 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldHeart (Post 10474690)
Me niether and even if there was ,why does other people defending MJ get ignored?? .

There's also a theory that safechuck got that grooming jewellery from a tacky pawn shop cheap :whistle:

Really ? I wonder if the media will relay that,doubt it,lets face it they were always vile about MJ.

Beso 11-03-2019 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldHeart (Post 10474690)
Me niether and even if there was ,why does other people defending MJ get ignored?? .

There's also a theory that safechuck got that grooming jewellery from a tacky pawn shop cheap :whistle:



He did or michael did???..maybe Michael thought he just didn't do it for him that night so decided to further humiliate him by making fun of him by buying cheap **** saying it was great....mbut secretly giggling to himself about his scrawny ass being useless that night as he slept.

GoldHeart 11-03-2019 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kazanne (Post 10474692)
Really ? I wonder if the media will relay that,doubt it,lets face it they were always vile about MJ.

Why did safechuck Keep jewellery from a "child abuser" , plus wouldn't police take it as evidence?? :suspect: .

user104658 11-03-2019 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twosugars (Post 10474638)
what exactly are you suggesting here TS? It's not the first time you've gone for fms rather than their arguments :suspect:

That they were wrong then and I suspect they're wrong now. Going for their arguments - by demonstrating that their logic was flawed in the past yet they're using the same reasoning now - is exactly what I'm doing.

As for playing the "Das against da rules" game 2S... It's lame even from the people who are relatively good at it and you're doing a mediocre job of copying them :suspect:. Be yourself! Or if you're not going to be yourself, goodness gracious don't be LT :umm2:.

Beso 11-03-2019 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldHeart (Post 10474694)
Why did safechuck Keep jewellery from a "child abuser" , plus wouldn't police take it as evidence?? :suspect: .

Because he loved him....it really is as easy as that goldheart.:shrug:


Edit bit....they would also have to take every playstation game, etc etc etc etc.

GoldHeart 11-03-2019 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 10474696)
Because he loved him....it really is as easy as that goldheart.:shrug:

I don't think so :bored: , and usually victims no matter how much they've been groomed don't usually keep jewellery neatly displayed in a box of trinkets :facepalm:

Beso 11-03-2019 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldHeart (Post 10474706)
I don't think so :bored: , and usually victims no matter how much they've been groomed don't usually keep jewellery neatly displayed in a box of trinkets :facepalm:

You don't think a young boy moonwalking on stage in a sparkly hat and white coat loves the guy he's imitating?


Oh, ok..guess it's joke time now...it's been long enough, don't you think?

GoldHeart 11-03-2019 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 10474712)
You don't think a young boy moonwalking on stage in a sparkly hat and white coat loves the guy he's imitating?


Oh, ok..guess it's joke time now...it's been long enough, don't you think?

Stop twisting things :sleep:

GoldHeart 11-03-2019 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twosugars (Post 10474638)
what exactly are you suggesting here TS? It's not the first time you've gone for fms rather than their arguments :suspect:


Interesting to note Liza Minelli was an acquintance of MJ and she was never accused of anything.
MJ had probably thousands of aquaintances. He was bezzy mates with Elizabeth Taylor. Does it meant she was a nonce too?

Only Mj's male friends get suspected you know how the media works lol

Beso 11-03-2019 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldHeart (Post 10474714)
Stop twisting things :sleep:

How on earth is me putting myself into the mind of a besotted young fan twisting things? I'm confused?

GoldHeart 11-03-2019 08:05 PM

Also why is HBO or website now cutting out bits from the film , that in itself sounds suspicious.

Beso 11-03-2019 08:11 PM

Ok seeing as I have already stayed my experiences earlier in the thread goldheart, and you just ignored me..

The MJ case is so much like my experience.


1..young, impressionable moving to a new house with my family next door to our cousins..instantly looking up to my stronger older by 2 and a half years cousin...

2..he pitches a tent in his back garden in the summer and obvioysly I'm up for camping..

3..normal jokey nights to begin with, then a little experimenting..


4..the doing it because you looked up to him..it felt ok, didn't it...at the time.


5..just guilt for years really, guilt for it feeling ok.

6..ah **** this, am no having this **** anymorem

Beso 11-03-2019 08:14 PM

I'm imagining that's how it feels for them...pretty confusing, and a lot of soul searching and guilt...

GoldHeart 11-03-2019 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 10474722)
Ok seeing as I have already stayed my experiences earlier in the thread goldheart, and you just ignored me..

The MJ case is so much like my experience.


1..young, impressionable moving to a new house with my family next door to our cousins..instantly looking up to my stronger older by 2 and a half years cousin...

2..he pitches a tent in his back garden in the summer and obvioysly I'm up for camping..

3..normal jokey nights to begin with, then a little experimenting..


4..the doing it because you looked up to him..it felt ok, didn't it...at the time.


5..just guilt for years really, guilt for it feeling ok.

6..ah **** this, am no having this **** anymorem

I'm not an idiot I understand all that but it doesn't fit with James & Wade's stories :facepalm:

I'm not going to believe 2 well known pathological liars ! , its as simply as that . plus if they've lived under oath what makes you think suddenly they're telling the truth??? I can't understand that.

joeysteele 11-03-2019 08:17 PM

Some of us, and I'd hope most of the population.
Just like to balance things and fully explore all and particularly both sides.

I have one of the most suspicious minds imaginable, however that works both ways too.
I am suspicious of both accusers and accused.

Words are easy to say and anything can be said either way too.
However when it happens that for near decades someone has said and sworn one thing.
Then changes their minds years after that sends my suspicious bells ringing.

These 2 were around at the Chandler issue and the other charges brought against MJ.

They saw no one go to prison.
So saw they could speak out.
To do so when who they are accusing is dead and adding a claim for money.
That has really fired up my suspicious mind, to the point I don't trust them and don't believe their testimony can be trusted.

It is serious to abuse children, it's one of the worst crimes.
It also is equally serious to accuse someone of it too.

To do so.
After never doing so all the time the person was alive to put their side, is worrying.

I know, and have come across groomed and sexually abused individuals.
Of all of them,.I have yet to find one who even wanted to keep anything that reminded them of their abuser, never mind doing so.

I weigh all up.
I would be the first to say MJ was really strange.
Even that I consider it inappropriate to share a bed with children.

However, that in itself does NOT prove he molested them.
All the investigations in the rooms they were in,the thorough checks done, all produced no evidence of sexual abuse.

So that's why I do not believe these 2 now and stay with the not guilty verdicts on all charges at his trial.
Where he, Michael Jackson defended himself and was submitted to cross examination as to his defence.

Something these 2 are never likely to have to do despite their changed minds and their accusations now.

I for one, just like to explore all sides and hear what all involved say, in any of these cases.
As to accusers and the one/s accused.

We've heard here and elsewhere, this is why sexual abuse cases fail because the accusers are not believed.

On the other side, the point is as I've come across, so many cases are rooted in false accusations at times too.
Which often can have equally devastating effects on the accused, even at times too after acquittal.

GoldHeart 11-03-2019 08:20 PM

Didn't Wade's wife claim she didn't have any knowledge of sexual abuse yet they've both set up a charity page to help victims as she's a survivor of abuse . Yet said she had no experience of abuse .

The charity page asking for donations sounds like a scam :suspect:

user104658 11-03-2019 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeysteele (Post 10474731)
Some of us, and I'd hope most of the population.
Just like to balance things and fully explore all and particularly both sides.

I have one of the most suspicious minds imaginable, however that works both ways too.
I am suspicious of both accusers and accused.

Words are easy to say and anything can be said either way too.
However when it happens that for near decades someone has said and sworn one thing.
Then changes their minds years after that sends my suspicious bells ringing.

These 2 were around at the Chandler issue and the other charges brought against MJ.

They saw no one go to prison.
So saw they could speak out.
To do so when who they are accusing is dead and adding a claim for money.
That has really fired up my suspicious mind, to the point I don't trust them and don't believe their testimony can be trusted.

It is serious to abuse children, it's one of the worst crimes.
It also is equally serious to accuse someone of it too.

To do so.
After never doing so all the time the person was alive to put their side, is worrying.

I know, and have come across groomed and sexually abused individuals.
Of all of them,.I have yet to find one who even wanted to keep anything that reminded them of their abuser, never mind doing so.

I weigh all up.
I would be the first to say MJ was really strange.
Even that I consider it inappropriate to share a bed with children.

However, that in itself does NOT prove he molested them.
All the investigations in the rooms they were in,the thorough checks done, all produced no evidence of sexual abuse.

So that's why I do not believe these 2 now and stay with the not guilty verdicts on all charges at his trial.
Where he, Michael Jackson defended himself and was submitted to cross examination as to his defence.

Something these 2 are never likely to have to do despite their changed minds and their accusations now.

I for one, just like to explore all sides and hear what all involved say, in any of these cases.
As to accusers and the one/s accused.

We've heard here and elsewhere, this is why sexual abuse cases fail because the accusers are not believed.

On the other side, the point is as I've come across, so many cases are rooted in false accusations at times too.
Which often can have equally devastating effects on the accused, even at times too after acquittal.

That's fair enough Joey but if you truly had a suspicious mind surely the most you could say is "Maybe he did it, maybe he didn't, we may never know"... but thus far you have been adamant that he definitely did not do it so I'd suggest your suspicious mind in this case, for whatever reason, only appears to work one way.

user104658 11-03-2019 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldHeart (Post 10474730)
I'm not an idiot I understand all that but it doesn't fit with James & Wade's stories :facepalm:

I'm not going to believe 2 well known pathological liars ! , its as simply as that . plus if they've lived under oath what makes you think suddenly they're telling the truth??? I can't understand that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldHeart (Post 10474736)
Didn't Wade's wife claim she didn't have any knowledge of sexual abuse yet they've both set up a charity page to help victims as she's a survivor of abuse . Yet said she had no experience of abuse .

The charity page asking for donations sounds like a scam :suspect:

They're "pathological" liars and the charity is probably "a scam"? Your reaching is getting more and more desperate, here, surely. Do you even actually know what the term "pathological liar" means?


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:47 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.