Do you believe the Michael Jackson allegations part 2

[AutumnLover1990]

New thread 😀

You're so hilarious 🙄

The people that defend him are indeed like a cult though.

There is an interview from Wade Robson’s mother from the time of the Jordan Chandler accusations and the interviewer asks her if it’s normal for a man in his 30s to be sleeping with children and she says something like ‘Under normal circumstances, no but it’s different with Michael’.

This is the reason he got away with it. He created a cult of people who were prepared to ignore all of the evidence that he’s a pedophile, in favour of a narrative which depicts MJ as one solitary person in the history of mankind who slept with children and took them on dates and was doing it because he’s different and he deserves a free pass to carry on like this because he’s unique.

When you stop lying to yourself, it becomes immediately obvious how ridiculous and impossible that suggestion is.

Instead of accusing me , maybe bother to go back and read it. Because I clearly remember doing so

I think that James Safechuck is believable.

no, there’s no perfect victim, but There are things that make wade robson seem doubtful to me

I have reread it and can’t really find any evidence to the contrary but honestly, I was speaking generally so if you saw yourself in what I said… That says a lot. Hardly accusing either, pointing out the obvious.

Yes it says a lot about you. You're very aggressive. Im literally looking at all the evidence, which I'm entitled to do

I’d love to see where I have been aggressive. In fact I had messages telling me that I was measured and on point from another poster. But hey, if you feel you need to take offense….i actually wasn’t singling you out. You did that yourself.

Just watched the first half of the first episode of the new documentary. It’s a very difficult watch. I find it hard to believe that there are people viewing it who still think he is innocent. It’s so creepy. Michael saying ‘all the kids ask to sleep with me’ and then Gavin Arvizo saying basically completely the opposite that he was coerced to do it by Jackson. On camera. Then Michael suddenly realising he’s fucked up.

Really that accusation is complete nonsense and Missohnoyoubetterdont is always reasoned and polite on this discusssion.

Yes what kind of level of delusion is this.
"Martin Bashir made him look bad".........Michael is the one who said and did those things ffs.
People say the same about the book with the Rabbi because the Rabbi says he has a Messiah complex and talks about his views about women etc, but his sections of the book are intertwined with Michael Jacksons very own words on the subjects, it's what Michael says and does that make him look bad, no one else.

It's always everyone else making him look bad, even though Michael is the one behaving a certain way 🙄

From what I've seen with your posts you 'always like to see both sides' so that you can completely tear down anyone who says something you don't like and then latch on to anything anyone says which defends Michael whether it's true or not or whether it proves anything you say or not.

That's not what the term means.
"The term "see both sides" refers to the cognitive ability or practice of understanding different, often conflicting, perspectives in a debate or conflict. It involves looking beyond personal biases to fairly evaluate the validity of an opposing viewpoint."

You do not do this.

Honestly bizarre that you would blame Martin Bashir when you know well that MJ did in fact have these relationships with kids.

The people who defend him are like a cult

It's a very emotive subject. Not everyone who looks at the evidence and comes to the conclusion he wasnt necessarily guilty is completely of the same mindset and vice versa The temperature of those conversations can lead to people being unfairly labelled. In some online spaces, defenders get lumped together and stereotyped, which isn’t a fair or accurate way to evaluate individuals’ motives or reasoning.

It would be nice if we could discuss controversial figures without the conversation collapsing into assumptions and labels.

I think it's fine to call out people who repeatedly claim that they're not biased and want to look at both sides, when they are very obviously completely biased, which is obvious considering how their posts are all pro-innocence, no engagement with anything which suggests guilt and instead they just continue to post inflammatory comments instead degrading the victims as money grabbers, ignoring the evidence and then littering the thread with 'all about the money' blah blah blah. and labelling every victim and accuser and anyone who ever said anything bad about him that way.

You can't expect the other side to respond perfectly when that is what we are contending with.

While I certainly don't put everyone into the same category, some do deserve the labels and a fair debate can and should acknowledge that, especially when those people are the ones who continously dishonestly say that they're looking at both sides, open-minded etc.

Completely agree @Hubhubba26

Many of the posts from the defenders are extremely dishonest and inflammatory, lots of immature and childish posts themselves and then when they get a response they're like 'grow up', 'so adult' etc. pretending that they are the ones trying to have an honest and mature discussion.

@Hubhubba26
I haven't you seen you direct any criticism of that side, because you're more aligned to it, you're also laughing and clapping 😂👏at inflammatory posts yourself so you're not in a position to be trying to act like you want a fair and mature discussion unless you're willing to up the standard of your own posting.

Same to you @fundamentallyauthentic
If you 'completely agree' than why do you post in the manner in which you do? Again it seems that some people want to post what they want unhindered, but then act superior and try to tell the other side how to respond 😂

I disagree. She definitely isn't reasoned. She called me a ' really fervent pro- Michael fan' when I'm not at all. I've looked at both sides

As I already wrote, in my opinion, and I can't know for sure, none of us can, James safechuck comes across better than wade Robson does.

At what point did I directly accuse you? I certainly did not mention you by name or @ you?! Ridiculous. Anyway will not have this thread derailed.

Lol. Backtracking now. You used things that I had written, my direct quotes, eg "no skin in the game" and wade was "smirking while talking"

in your post about "really fervent pro michael fans".

Grow up and calm down

Watching poor Gavin having to answer questions about the abuse was heartbreaking. He clearly was very upset and how did he know about the suitcase full of porn if he hadn’t been made to look through it and why is MJ showing little boys pornographic material? Why is it in his bedroom where he innocently ‘just sleeps’ with the children. ‘No, no no bed is just for sleeping’ or lying naked looking at porn with 12 year olds. 🤮

Well if the cap fits…🧐

At the trial they tried to make out that Gavin and his brother were little delinquents, that they were sneakily looking through the porn themselves and stealing alcohol etc.

MJs cousin 12 year cousin testified at the trial and said that Gavin and his brother were watching porn, masturbating and that they told him he should do it too.
He said he had told Michael that they were watching porn, and that MJ didn't believe him, and he thought they were cool and that they wouldn't do that. 🙄

ETA: I haven't seen the documentary yet so don't know if they've said any of that.

Again.

Grow up. You're an adult woman. And calm down.

It’s so easy to spin these things. I keep going back to the guy who was a prosecutor in many abuse cases when he said ‘ the easiest thing to do would be to keep quiet’. I don’t believe any child would want to go through what they had to, retelling those awful experiences, being disbelieved, death threats, hate mail, not for any amount of money. It’s just not worth it. Poor kids.

I find it very odd that the obvious pro- Jackson posters on here really don’t want be singled out as that, even when what they are posting clearly states otherwise. What’s that about? Freud would have a field day. 🤣