Leaving Neverland - heehee

[Truthspeaker]

I like how this went from talking about a simple documentary to conspiracies involving the US president and his children.

It's not a conspiracy. Ivana Trump, in Raising Trump, her own book, published in October of 2017, admitted, “the only person who had an open invitation to come to the triplex for playdates whenever he wanted was Michael Jackson.”

This'd be like George W. Bush admitting "I knew Usama for eleven years. Terrific guy! He was alwaysed pissed when people transliterated his name wrong. I even let him look at the Daily Briefing three-sixty-five so he could make a summary for me. Isn't that considerate? I tell ya, a true friend."

Nobody should get a pass for this. If the Woods and Radcliffes could figure out not to let a freak in a sequin jumpsuit with a melting face who never seems interested in hanging around women hang out with their between-eight-and-sixteen-years-old sons, why does Ivana not only insist nothing inappropriate happen, but not even express a hint of concern that the celebrity who lived in her family's tower at the time who played with her sons for hours didn't have his hear in the right place nearly a generation after the first of many times occused of sexually abusing prepubescents?

Furthermore, why haven't Eric and Donny June defended their friend and neighbor of many years at all?

I don't just mean, "since Daddy got his own ICBMs". I mean "at all". Even Mark Ronson and Corey Feldman stood up for Jacko being on the level. It was at the same time they admitted he watched porn in the same bed as them, but they still did so.

Donny June and Eric were Jacko's friends and neigbors for years. Why neither have spoken a word in his defense is as legitimate a question as why Mitt Romney never made any moves against the LDS blood libel against the Children of Cain for committing the first murder when he was over forty by the time it was overturned.

It's as likely to receive an answer.

 

[tyjc]

It's not a conspiracy. Ivana Trump, in Raising Trump, her own book, published in October of 2017, admitted, “the only person who had an open invitation to come to the triplex for playdates whenever he wanted was Michael Jackson.”

You took an innocuous article and came up with wild and delusional conclusions. You are crazy dude.

 

[Raging Capybara]

So from what I was reading, the Police had watched Neverland Ranch for 10 years, the FBI had a 300 page report on him, the police did 2 raids. MJ was acquitted of all charges, the jury was interviewed years later after the men in Leaving Neverland made their case to a judge(which was thrown out). And they said even in light of that, they'd still vote not guilty.

Anyone who says they think MJ is guilty after a decade of investigations from multiple agencies and 2 raids, and an 18 month trial, after a few internet searches on MJ blog and watching a documentary. Is either incredibly gullible, or so arrogant they believe they can do better than a team of prosecutors, the FBI, and the police, over a decade, all by themselves.

Ok, man, but where's the evidence that Tom Hanks is a serial rapist and that he and Spielberg themselves create all this false narrative that Jackson is a pedo just to shield them from the public scrutiny?

I'm still waiting.

And please, everybody, keep going with the autism, this thread is being my favorite lately.

 

[sperginity]

Do we have reports of any other adult celebrity hanging with kids? Ever? In any case or context; fucking in the history of the world?
How can you even defend MJ based on that fact alone? That a childish man who hung around kids, as the only character to ever having done this, wouldn't fiddle their trunks?

Having kids in your bed overnight (and not just any kids, kids of one sex/one age range ONLY) isn't "hanging out with kids". Conflating the two is extremely dishonest and you know that. And no, I don't know of any other celebrity that openly admits to having other people's children sleep in their bed.

 

[Saffronette]

It's pretty hilarious you think those videos are evidence of anything other than how fucking gay Jackson was. Elton John and RuPaul are way more masculine and seem more interested in pussy than Jackson.

I mean would a gay man dedicate various songs to women he's dated or pined for over the years? And would a gay man have codewords (fish) for attractive women in his presence? This just my opinion, but I think going through the trouble of pretending you're straight to the general public is rather useless. Considering the timeframe people were already accepting of existing gay celebrities and entertainers.

What's more interesting to me is why the fuck this dude is devoting so much time to defending Jackson. Do you really think this dude carefully combed through every second of both documentaries to find an edit within 24 hours of it airing in the UK? Do you maybe think he's being paid to put out these videos? I mean this dude claims to be a heavy metal fan/ hatebit dude why the fuck is he doing FOUR videos defending a gay pedo pop star from the 1980's that wanted to "heal the world with love"??? Huh?

Razorfist didn't find it that quickly. He recorded his 3rd rebuttal video already and someone pointed out to him via Twitter that the UK version had a scene removed. He also streamed himself watching the entire documentary via periscope, Oprah segment included. I doubt he's getting paid to defend him, he just doesn't like bullshit period.

 

[MirnaMinkoff]

Because it calls into question the validity of documentary? When they silently remove contradicting evidence that is extremely dodgy and should raise red flags.


Oh fuck off. Are you really suggesting the guy is a shill? Why is this your go-to argument for everyone that disagrees with you?
You ask "why should I take this guys word for it?" but are happy to take Wade and James at face value? It sounds like to me you already made up your mind a long time ago and are working backwards to prove your conclusions.

As much as you don't want to admit it, this isn't an open and shut case. It's not black or white (ignore the pun), but very very grey.

I’m absolutely suggesting he’s a shill to be clear. He makes his living doing online YT content. If he had done one video or just made comments he thinks Jackson is innocent? Sure I’d maybe think it was just his opinion.

This dude, who claims to love heavy metal and gaming is supposed to care so much about an 80’s pop star he’s got cued up and ready a four-part, well edited, detailed critique of the Leaving Neverland documentary along with entire “Jackson is innocent” talking points? What about his fan base indicates they were hungry to hear four hours of Jackson isn’t a pedo content?

So this YT dude carefully combed through all the Jackson family media interviews and separate airings of the doco to compare and contrast them just because he cares about Jackson’s reputation that much?

He’s also a professional YTuber which means money talks. There’s some sweet ad money and sponsorships from firms that do ad buying for Sony-subsidies for anyone willing to take up the Jackson is not a pedo banner, besides just getting a lot of views for a hot-take. As the defenders would say he’s got financial incentives for doing such content.

The pedo-defense force has been saying the word of any person that could possibly make a dollar accusing Michael of child rape is suspect, so why isn’t the same true of the people who have financial incentive for defending him? Isn’t it strange that someone who makes their living doing online content and who never gave two shits about Jackson suddenly devotes four highly detailed videos defending him?

The words of pro-YTubers money who make their living off of ad money and sponsorships are not unbiased and are motivated by ad revenue, sponsorships and view counts. Paid content work is bread and butter shit for ppl who want to make money on YT.

 

[tyjc]

Isn’t it strange that someone who makes their living doing online content and who never gave two shits about Jackson suddenly devotes four highly detailed videos defending him?

His first video on MJ was posted 3 years ago. Your argument doesn't hold water.

 

[Truthspeaker]

I mean would a gay man dedicate various songs to women he's dated or pined for over the years? And would a gay man have codewords (fish) for attractive women in his presence? This just my opinion, but I think going through the trouble of pretending you're straight to the general public is rather useless. Considering the timeframe people were already accepting of existing gay celebrities and entertainers.

Gaylor Swift's currently coming up with the next yag-fag to credit her next album to with Camila Cabello's pussy sitting on her strapon.

And didn't that queer Timbergay credit his last terrible album to that dyke he artificially insemenated?

Don't even get me started on Whitney Houston and Michael Jackson's "good friend" Liberace.

Razorfist didn't find it that quickly. He recorded his 3rd rebuttal video already and someone pointed out to him via Twitter that the UK version had a scene removed. He also streamed himself watching the entire documentary via periscope, Oprah segment included. I doubt he's getting paid to defend him, he just doesn't like bullshit period.

Gayzorfist is happy to defend Vince Russo creating the most dangerous bump in WWF/E history to work a comedy angle on Owen Hart. He blasts Kojima, justifiably, for being a terrible writer; but defends the exactly as terrible writing in The Nomad Soul for the same reason Doug Walker bashed Logan but loved TDK.

He's a fantard. He's admitted it himself. If he's a fan of something, he abandons critical thinking no matter the effort he'd spend otherwise. He did the same fantarding for Microsoft when they tried to sucker in "always online" to the X-bone, and there's absolutely nothing he's doing differently here aside from defending a nastier abuse.

 

[Ruin]

I’m absolutely suggesting he’s a shill to be clear. He makes his living doing online YT content. If he had done one video or just made comments he thinks Jackson is innocent? Sure I’d maybe think it was just his opinion.

This dude, who claims to love heavy metal and gaming is supposed to care so much about an 80’s pop star he’s got cued up and ready a four-part, well edited, detailed critique of the Leaving Neverland documentary along with entire “Jackson is innocent” talking points? What about his fan base indicates they were hungry to hear four hours of Jackson isn’t a pedo content?

So this YT dude carefully combed through all the Jackson family media interviews and separate airings of the doco to compare and contrast them just because he cares about Jackson’s reputation that much?

He’s also a professional YTuber which means money talks. There’s some sweet ad money and sponsorships from firms that do ad buying for Sony-subsidies for anyone willing to take up the Jackson is not a pedo banner, besides just getting a lot of views for a hot-take. As the defenders would say he’s got financial incentives for doing such content.

The pedo-defense force has been saying the word of any person that could possibly make a dollar accusing Michael of child rape is suspect, so why isn’t the same true of the people who have financial incentive for defending him? Isn’t it strange that someone who makes their living doing online content and who never gave two shits about Jackson suddenly devotes four highly detailed videos defending him?

The words of pro-YTubers money who make their living off of ad money and sponsorships are not unbiased and are motivated by ad revenue, sponsorships and view counts. Paid content work is bread and butter shit for ppl who want to make money on YT.

Why are you so fucking mad? MJ is a dead gay pedo and I don't like kiddy fiddlers either but spending literal days of your life sperging about how much you hate him seems extreme.

 

[LN 910]

I never thought a thread could make me not care if MJ was a rapist or no. At this point I don’t really give a fuck and am just watching the slap fight.

If he is I hope he’s rotting, if he isn’t then fine I guess

 

[Truthspeaker]

I’m absolutely suggesting he’s a shill to be clear. He makes his living doing online YT content. If he had done one video or just made comments he thinks Jackson is innocent? Sure I’d maybe think it was just his opinion.

This dude, who claims to love heavy metal and gaming is supposed to care so much about an 80’s pop star he’s got cued up and ready a four-part, well edited, detailed critique of the Leaving Neverland documentary along with entire “Jackson is innocent” talking points? What about his fan base indicates they were hungry to hear four hours of Jackson isn’t a pedo content?

So this YT dude carefully combed through all the Jackson family media interviews and separate airings of the doco to compare and contrast them just because he cares about Jackson’s reputation that much?

He’s also a professional YTuber which means money talks. There’s some sweet ad money and sponsorships from firms that do ad buying for Sony-subsidies for anyone willing to take up the Jackson is not a pedo banner, besides just getting a lot of views for a hot-take. As the defenders would say he’s got financial incentives for doing such content.

The pedo-defense force has been saying the word of any person that could possibly make a dollar accusing Michael of child rape is suspect, so why isn’t the same true of the people who have financial incentive for defending him? Isn’t it strange that someone who makes their living doing online content and who never gave two shits about Jackson suddenly devotes four highly detailed videos defending him?

The words of pro-YTubers money who make their living off of ad money and sponsorships are not unbiased and are motivated by ad revenue, sponsorships and view counts. Paid content work is bread and butter shit for ppl who want to make money on YT.

His first video on MJ was posted 3 years ago. Your argument doesn't hold water.

Being a true believer is not incompatible with being an agent of influence.

Indeed, it's ideal. Dalton Trumbo and Arthur Miller were both at once themselves. Jeremy Corbyn and Ayman al-Zawahiri are both at once today.

I could still see Gayzor being just a stan, but nothing about his past behavior -- especially related to Microsoft and Vince Russo -- leads me to believe he has an ethical bone in his body. It's like dismissing the idea that Courtney Love would murder Kurt Cobain just because of the multiple other people she knew who died mysteriously around the same time and her son-in-law accusing her of attempting to have him killed over a guitar sets off your alarm bells.

 

[MrTroll]

Even by KF's famously low standards this thread is a fucking embarrassment. Anyone hurling around accusations of being a paid shill should just be threadbanned and maybe just banned in general for being autistic enough to think MJ's estate is running some kind of Soviet-style propaganda and disinformation bureau that pays youtubers to say MJ dindu nuffin.

 

[Andrei Tarkovsky]

Why are you so fucking mad? MJ is a dead gay pedo and I don't like kiddy fiddlers either but spending literal days of your life sperging about how much you hate him seems extreme.

Even by KF's famously low standards this thread is a fucking embarrassment. Anyone hurling around accusations of being a paid shill should just be threadbanned and maybe just banned in general for being autistic enough to think MJ's estate is running some kind of Soviet-style propaganda and disinformation bureau that pays youtubers to say MJ dindu nuffin.

Guys! Guys! Guys! It's okay!... he worked in PR for over a DECADE! He's GOTTA know a paid shill when he sees one!

Dude knows his shit.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Why are you so fucking mad? MJ is a dead gay pedo and I don't like kiddy fiddlers either but spending literal days of your life sperging about how much you hate him seems extreme.

MJ himself's not the problem. He's dead, and whatever happens to anyone at the end of this life's for the best.

What matters are the victims, the profiting, and the coverup. Jacko's afterlife career's been as mongst the most profitable in human history, and most of that money even now is going directly to most of the worst enablers and coverupers of the abuse and rape.

These victims have every bit as much a claim to reparations from the Jackson Estate and Sony as the Interned Japanese or the Comfort Women, and it's on the public to make sure the victims' fates is more like the former than the latter.

Hopefully better. The Nisei and Company had to wait two generations before they received any money from the Feds. Longer than the Israelites had to wait to re-enter the Promiseland.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Even by KF's famously low standards this thread is a fucking embarrassment. Anyone hurling around accusations of being a paid shill should just be threadbanned and maybe just banned in general for being autistic enough to think MJ's estate is running some kind of Soviet-style propaganda and disinformation bureau that pays youtubers to say MJ dindu nuffin.

This is literally amongst the most common things celebrities do. Basically every story about Kylie Jenner's net worth, that baby she TOTALLY had with Travis Scott, and every reference to Ryan Seacrest's heterosexuality started life in a PR firm.

Usually, this kind of thing's just funny, like when David Geffen said Tom Cruise is straight.

This time, it's still extremely funny, but it's also covering up one of the worst sexual predators in American History for the enrichment of the very people who enabled his behavior.

 

[tyjc]

This is literally amongst the most common things celebrities do. Basically every story about Kylie Jenner's net worth, that baby she TOTALLY had with Travis Scott, and every reference to Ryan Seacrest's heterosexuality started life in a PR firm.

Usually, this kind of thing's just funny, like when David Geffen said Tom Cruise is straight.

This time, it's still extremely funny, but it's also covering up one of the worst sexual predators in American History for the enrichment of the very people who enabled his behavior.

You caught me man, I give up. I'm a shill from a PR firm hired by the Jackson estate. When they hired me I knew the very best place for my time and effort would be on a small sub-board on a shitposting website. What a damn shame that you were able to come along and catch me.

 

[MrTroll]

This is literally amongst the most common things celebrities do. Basically every story about Kylie Jenner's net worth, that baby she TOTALLY had with Travis Scott, and every reference to Ryan Seacrest's heterosexuality started life in a PR firm.

Usually, this kind of thing's just funny, like when David Geffen said Tom Cruise is straight.

This time, it's still extremely funny, but it's also covering up one of the worst sexual predators in American History for the enrichment of the very people who enabled his behavior.

Yeah. Paying off a guy with less than 200k subscribers on YT to defend MJ is definitely what I'd do if I was an elite PR flack working for the Jackson estate. World-famous Instagram influencers? Celebrities on Twitter? PewDiePie? Nah, I'm going to turn some guy who talks about video games and 80's action movies. An MJ dindu nuffin video would go perfectly alongside his Silent Hill retrospective.

 

[iRON-mAn]

Except Safechuck did lie, demonstrably so.

He stated that, at the time of the 2005 trial that he was pressured into testifying. Not just once, but that he continued to get calls from Jackson and his team, wanting him to testify. But that can't be true. There are court records of the judge in the 2005 trial stating that certain children would not be permitted to testify and Safechuck is explicitly named.

So Jackson and his lawyers wouldn't have hounded him because they couldn't have called him as a witness anyway. But that's not even the fullest extent of the lie. Consider why he was lying, because what exactly is the point? Safechuck being ruled out of testimony doesn't hurt his credibility. There's no reason for him to suggest any other reason for it than what happened. So, what are the other possibilities?

It's possible that Safechuck simply didn't know about the ruling, although probably unlikely. But he was a kid so, for arguments sake assume his parents were told but he wasn't. He still came up with the story that Jackson was desperate for him to testify again, likely as a means to make him more sympathetic and brand Jackson as a monster, rather than doing any research into the case. If he did know, then he knowingly lied. Note, this doesn't rule him out from actually being abused. Abuse victims are sometimes very skilled at emotional manipulation, learning from their abusers but unable to stop the actual abuse, in a viscous cycle. But it's still a lie, and while I'm only speculating that it was for manipulation purposes, it brings into question the rest of his account. If he's willing to be misleading there and manipulate the facts in his favour, what else did he do it with?

To be clear, I think it's like 99% likely that MJ was a pedophile and abused young boys, and I'm all for his victims getting some kind of justice. But only if they are actual victims.

 

[Truthspeaker]

You caught me man, I give up. I'm a shill from a PR firm hired by the Jackson estate. When they hired me I knew the very best place for my time and effort would be on a small sub-board on a shitposting website. What a damn shame that you were able to come along and catch me.

I don't care what your motivation is. I care that you're defending a pedophile who has more evidence against him than Dan Schneider and Lou Pearlman combined.

Neither man were ever convicted of sexual abuse, nor have either met the words of anything beyond hearsay. Do you also think they're innocent?

How many credible accusers does a guy who was publicly "special friends" with dozens of boys have to encounter before he no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt? Ten? Twenty? Kevin Spacey had fifteen. Was that enough?

Whatever motivation you have, people like you are exactly the reason men like Ryan Murphy and Axl Rose continue to get away with sexual abuse in the face of overwhelming evidence of their reprehensibility.

 

[Nobunaga]

Even by KF's famously low standards this thread is a fucking embarrassment. Anyone hurling around accusations of being a paid shill should just be threadbanned and maybe just banned in general for being autistic enough to think MJ's estate is running some kind of Soviet-style propaganda and disinformation bureau that pays youtubers to say MJ dindu nuffin.

Those damn glow in the dark michael jackson shills have been pulling gay ops since the 80s, wake up people