"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.

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

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 .

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.

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

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

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 .

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

https://media.tenor.com/images/1e741...05a2/tenor.gif

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: .

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.

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 .

*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??"

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.

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: .

:facepalm: Absolutely

: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:

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.

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.