|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 24, 2019 23:31:21 GMT
"At least I accept the possibility that Jackson might have done something to someone somewhere. I'm not saying Jackson is 100% definitely innocent"
Great, we agree then - I totally think he's not 100% innocent either and I accept that Woody "may" be guilty (f'n doubt it), and Polanski "is" guilty. On a different note, my favorite film is Chinatown. Glad we could resolve. Cool....glad you've retracted that "Leaving Neverland is the devastating, unquestionable proof we've all been waiting for to finally wipe Jackson's legacy to dust" position you were previously advocating. Woody' s probably guilty tho. His behaviours (Soon-Yi , that underage model he was boning) are as suspect as Jackson. And poor Dylan is so believable and consistent But if you have no issues supporting a probable/possible peadophile, then who am I to judge. Glad we sorted that out
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 24, 2019 23:38:39 GMT
Even with Polanksi, you admit he"s a rapist (no shit, it's a proven case), but you've always minimised his actions, by blaming the legal system for his woes. So you can keep waxing lyrical about his "art". Woody's not a molester, huh? So you were in that room with Woody and Dylan? You are omniscient now? The only people who know the truth for certain are Dylan, Woody and God. At least I accept the possibility that Jackson might have done something to someone somewhere. I'm not saying Jackson is 100% definitely innocent, because by the standards of normal society, his behaviour was odd and suspect.It"s mainly unfortunate that most of Jackson's accusers I've read up on suffer significant credibility problems and are all financially motivated, which always puts a cloud over these things. Not 3, just 1. Dylan's been brainwashed and the poor girl probably thinks it did happen, and THERE IS NO GOD, so you're wrong yet again. Only ONE PERSON knows, and it's Woody. But the circumstantial evidence, which is very thin in this case, all points to Allen being INNOCENT. Jackson molested Jordan Chandler. And Safechuck. And most likely Robson too. "Brainwashed".Lols! Is Mia Farrow Professor X now? The hoops Allen fans will jump through to discredit his daughter are....interesting! Funny how two perjerurs and proven liars who want 1.5 billion dollars to you are more believable to you than a young woman who has never changed her story, and isn't looking for money.
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Mar 24, 2019 23:56:40 GMT
"At least I accept the possibility that Jackson might have done something to someone somewhere. I'm not saying Jackson is 100% definitely innocent"
Great, we agree then - I totally think he's not 100% innocent either and I accept that Woody "may" be guilty (f'n doubt it), and Polanski "is" guilty. On a different note, my favorite film is Chinatown. Glad we could resolve. Cool....glad you've retracted that "Leaving Neverland is the devastating, unquestionable proof we've all been waiting for to finally wipe Jackson's legacy to dust" position you were previously advocating. Woody' s probably guilty tho. His behaviours (Soon-Yi , that underage model he was boning) are as suspect as Jackson. And poor Dylan is so believable and consistent But if you have no issues supporting a probable/possible peadophile, then who am I to judge. Glad we sorted that out She's only believable to gullible idiots, so...no surprise you find her believable!! And only a disingenuous moron would think banging a 17-yr old or a late teens Soon Yi is reason to suspect you'd molest a 7-yr old child. WORLDS OF DIFFERENCE, boo. Jackson always hung around with little boys and slept with them. Disturbingly suspect. Having a thing for young girls, even a 17 yr old, does NOT make someone suspect for molesting a small child. But hey, nice attempt at being a smart-ass while posting a thoroughly idiotic & illogical analogy. Try again.
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Mar 25, 2019 0:00:49 GMT
Not 3, just 1. Dylan's been brainwashed and the poor girl probably thinks it did happen, and THERE IS NO GOD, so you're wrong yet again. Only ONE PERSON knows, and it's Woody. But the circumstantial evidence, which is very thin in this case, all points to Allen being INNOCENT. Jackson molested Jordan Chandler. And Safechuck. And most likely Robson too. "Brainwashed".Lols! Is Mia Farrow Professor X now? The hoops Allen fans will jump through to discredit his daughter are....interesting! Funny how two perjerurs and proven liars who want 1.5 billion dollars to you are more believable to you than a young woman who has never changed her story, and isn't looking for money. Cuz only a superhero mutant could brainwash a child?? Riiiiight.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 25, 2019 0:06:27 GMT
Cool....glad you've retracted that "Leaving Neverland is the devastating, unquestionable proof we've all been waiting for to finally wipe Jackson's legacy to dust" position you were previously advocating. Woody' s probably guilty tho. His behaviours (Soon-Yi , that underage model he was boning) are as suspect as Jackson. And poor Dylan is so believable and consistent But if you have no issues supporting a probable/possible peadophile, then who am I to judge. Glad we sorted that out She's only believable to gullible idiots, so...no surprise you find her believable!! And only a disingenuous moron would think banging a 17-yr old or a late teens Soon Yi is reason to suspect you'd molest a 7-yr old child. WORLDS OF DIFFERENCE, boo. Jackson always hung around with little boys and slept with them. Disturbingly suspect. Having a thing for young girls, even 17 or 16 yr olds, does NOT make someone suspect for molesting a small child. But hey, nice attempt at being a smart-ass while posting a thoroughly idiotic & illogical analogy. Try again. Yes...I'd like to hear more about how Mia Farrow, with her Charles Xavier-esque mutant telepathic powers "brainwashed" her daughter for life to believe she was molested Yes, that sounds like the most logical explaination. Not that Dylan was actually, y'know, molested. Believe victims y'all. Unless it involve one of my favorite movie directors. Then we can use the elaborate lifelong brainwashing excuse to discredit victim, just like in The Manchurian Candidate. Whatever helps you sleep better at night dude. Ah....the searing stench of hypocrisy!
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 25, 2019 0:10:14 GMT
"Brainwashed".Lols! Is Mia Farrow Professor X now? The hoops Allen fans will jump through to discredit his daughter are....interesting! Funny how two perjerurs and proven liars who want 1.5 billion dollars to you are more believable to you than a young woman who has never changed her story, and isn't looking for money. Cuz only a superhero mutant could brainwash a child?? Riiiiight. Nope, but I've only ever seen this "brainwashing" defense used for a notable/ celebrity alleged molester/abuser in the case of Woody Allen. Convenient that. Refusing to give a now grown woman in Dylan agency for her truth. Like I said, whatever helps you sleep at night
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Mar 25, 2019 0:20:14 GMT
Yes...I'd like to hear more about how Mia Farrow, with her Charles Xavier-esque mutant telepathic powers "brainwashed" her daughter for life to believe she was molested Yes, that sounds like the most logical explaination. Not that Dylan was actually, y'know, molested. Believe victims y'all. While I do think that so many people will bend over backwards to defend artists they like, rather than acknowledge that even the greatest talents are still flawed individuals capable of monstrous things, it should be noted that if you're going to bring out the "believe victims" mantra, by definition you can't discount what Moses Farrow says about his mother, or the various horror stories connected with her. If Dylan Farrow's testimony has weight, so too should her brother's. The whole thing is incredibly murky, and no one can really know for sure. People will have their minds made up on it on either side of the fence, but because none of us were there, no one can speak definitively on the matter. The same goes for Jackson. For every plausible argument in favor of the accusation, there's another against it. I do think that all accusations should be taken seriously and investigated . . . but accusations are not to be taken as outright condemnations. There needs to be a process. Unfortunately, the court of public opinion doesn't work that way.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 25, 2019 0:37:36 GMT
Yes...I'd like to hear more about how Mia Farrow, with her Charles Xavier-esque mutant telepathic powers "brainwashed" her daughter for life to believe she was molested Yes, that sounds like the most logical explaination. Not that Dylan was actually, y'know, molested. Believe victims y'all. While I do think that so many people will bend over backwards to defend artists they like, rather than acknowledge that even the greatest talents are still flawed individuals capable of monstrous things, it should be noted that if you're going to bring out the "believe victims" mantra, by definition you can't discount what Moses Farrow says about his mother, or the various horror stories connected with her. If Dylan Farrow's testimony has weight, so too should her brother's. The whole thing is incredibly murky, and no one can really know for sure. People will have their minds made up on it on either side of the fence, but because none of us were there, no one can speak definitively on the matter. The same goes for Jackson. For every plausible argument in favor of the accusation, there's another against it. I do think that all accusations should be taken seriously and investigated . . . but accusations are not to be taken as outright condemnations. There needs to be a process. Unfortunately, the court of public opinion doesn't work that way. Ehh...we're muddying the issue now, with an unfortunately fractured family who have taken sides (and abuse cases often split families like this). Ronan Farrow, the Pulitzer Prize winning journalist (and Woody's son) who took down Harvey Weinstein believes his father is guilty. Does his view carry more weight and credibility than Moses? Is he more trustworthy as a major journalist of high repute, wheras Moses is possibly just someone who will say whatever is neccesary to defend his adopted father? Questions. Dylan has said this story for over 25 years, and stood by it. Moses came out in defence of his father only recently, being long estranged from his mother. Who knows the dynamics at play. Maybe some of Mia's kids thought she was a bad mother (some clearly adore her though). But Mia is not the one accused of sexual molestation, so it feels like a distraction to the main story. I still think the notion that Mia was some master hypnotist who "brainwashed" her daughter for life is fanciful, bordering on ridiculous, when much more likely and logical explainations exist. I was being slightly mocking with the "Believe victims" mantra, as that is basically the mantra of people who think this documentary is credible and should be taken at face value. Some "victims" (or should I say, accusers) are more credible than others, and evidence, cross examination and due process is always useful.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Mar 25, 2019 0:43:47 GMT
Many people will find this offensive..........so don't look if you're sensitive but it isn't laughing at the MJ victims it's laughing out our own cultural culpability - and this was back THEN. Norm Macdonald did this series of inspired and pointed comedy routines on SNL which implicated US pop culture and those who allowed or justified or deluded themselves as to what MJ got away with - it's supposed to make you uncomfortable. It should still make you uncomfortable. It still applies. Still absurd.
|
|
Zeb31
Based
Bernardo is not believing que vous êtes come to bing bing avec nous
Posts: 2,557
Likes: 3,794
|
Post by Zeb31 on Mar 25, 2019 2:22:02 GMT
"Brainwashed".Lols! Is Mia Farrow Professor X now? What you call a "Professor X 'brainwashing' defense" is an actual psychiatric concept that's been accepted and in use for decades at this point. And it's a far less uncommon occurrence than you might assume.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 25, 2019 2:41:29 GMT
"Brainwashed".Lols! Is Mia Farrow Professor X now? What you call a "Professor X 'brainwashing' defense" is an actual psychiatric concept that's been accepted and in use for decades at this point. And it's a far less uncommon occurrence than you might assume. I'm fully aware of the parental alienation concept. You see variations on it done in cults like Scientology. But Woody Allen is literally the only notable case I'm aware of where a child turned adult has steadfastly maintained an allegation of molestation for nearly 30 years. It takes the concept to extremes to try and give him a get out of jail free card. It's fairly easy to convince a child to dislike another parent or not want to have contact with them (See Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman's adopted kids). It's a damned sight more difficult to get a child to go along with an elaborate and specific child molestation event, and have that same child (and later adult) maintain that event happened for 30 years. That's why I was being facetious with the Professor X comment. You need some serious skills to pull that shit off. Like I said, I think it's kind of awful and sinister in how it takes away Dylan's agency as an adult. But as long as it allows people to watch Manhattan and other Woody classics guilt free, why not I guess
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Mar 25, 2019 3:00:15 GMT
What you call a "Professor X 'brainwashing' defense" is an actual psychiatric concept that's been accepted and in use for decades at this point. And it's a far less uncommon occurrence than you might assume. I'm fully aware of the parental alienation concept. You see variations on it done in cults like Scientology. But Woody Allen is literally the only notable case I'm aware of where a child turned adult has steadfastly maintained an allegation of molestation for nearly 30 years. It takes the concept to extremes to try and give him a get out of jail free card. It's fairly easy to convince a child to dislike another parent or not want to have contact with them (See Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman's adopted kids). It's a damned sight more difficult to get a child to go along with an elaborate and specific child molestation event, and have that same child (and later adult) maintain that event happened for 30 years. That's why I was being facetious with the Professor X comment. You need some serious skills to pull that shit off. Like I said, I think it's kind of awful and sinister in how it takes away Dylan's agency as an adult. But as long as it allows people to watch Manhattan and other Woody classics guilt free, why not I guess I don't have skin in this game, but if a child was convinced that something awful happened to them even if it didn't, they wouldn't just grow out of it. That belief would become even more entrenched with time until they see and accept evidence to the contrary (which, hypothetically, Dylan would not be exposed to given her estrangement from Allen). Both of these cases are very messy and I find it fascinatingly ironic that the dividing lines are set by who likes which artist (which also entails who has more closely read up on each case).
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 25, 2019 3:29:42 GMT
I'm fully aware of the parental alienation concept. You see variations on it done in cults like Scientology. But Woody Allen is literally the only notable case I'm aware of where a child turned adult has steadfastly maintained an allegation of molestation for nearly 30 years. It takes the concept to extremes to try and give him a get out of jail free card. It's fairly easy to convince a child to dislike another parent or not want to have contact with them (See Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman's adopted kids). It's a damned sight more difficult to get a child to go along with an elaborate and specific child molestation event, and have that same child (and later adult) maintain that event happened for 30 years. That's why I was being facetious with the Professor X comment. You need some serious skills to pull that shit off. Like I said, I think it's kind of awful and sinister in how it takes away Dylan's agency as an adult. But as long as it allows people to watch Manhattan and other Woody classics guilt free, why not I guess I don't have skin in this game, but if a child was convinced that something awful happened to them even if it didn't, they wouldn't just grow out of it. That belief would become even more entrenched with time until they see and accept evidence to the contrary (which, hypothetically, Dylan would not be exposed to given her estrangement from Allen). Both of these cases are very messy and I find it fascinatingly ironic that the dividing lines are set by who likes which artist (which also entails who has more closely read up on each case). Maybe. Anything is possible. But it still reeks of people looking for the most the most elaborate scenario possible(as opposed to the most credible scenario)to let one of their beloved celebrity directors off the hook. Again, how many notable child molestation cases succesfully engage the "brainwashed" defence? If Woody was Larry the Postman, I question how many would laugh off the brainwashed defence as desperate in the extreme and side with the alleged victim who stayed consistent for 30 years and is only asking to be believed? But yeah, both very messy cases. On that we can agree.
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Mar 25, 2019 3:53:47 GMT
I don't have skin in this game, but if a child was convinced that something awful happened to them even if it didn't, they wouldn't just grow out of it. That belief would become even more entrenched with time until they see and accept evidence to the contrary (which, hypothetically, Dylan would not be exposed to given her estrangement from Allen). Both of these cases are very messy and I find it fascinatingly ironic that the dividing lines are set by who likes which artist (which also entails who has more closely read up on each case). Maybe. Anything is possible. But it still reeks of people looking for the most the most elaborate scenario possible(as opposed to the most credible scenario)to let one of their beloved celebrity directors off the hook. Again, how many notable child molestation cases succesfully engage the "brainwashed" defence? If Woody was Larry the Postman, I question how many would laugh off the brainwashed defence as desperate in the extreme and side with the alleged victim who stayed consistent for 30 years and is only asking to be believed? But yeah, both very messy cases. On that we can agree. The McMartin case. And there are other high-profile examples too. Any other questions?? And let me laugh and GAG at the same time about you pathetically trying to claim the moral high ground after calling Jackson's likely victims "liars" in about a dozen different posts. What a joke! And you have the nerve of calling me a hypocrite in another post?? Pot meet kettle. FACT: There is way WAY more evidence that Jackson was a child molester than there is that Woody is one. Not an opinion...a FACT.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 25, 2019 4:02:42 GMT
Maybe. Anything is possible. But it still reeks of people looking for the most the most elaborate scenario possible(as opposed to the most credible scenario)to let one of their beloved celebrity directors off the hook. Again, how many notable child molestation cases succesfully engage the "brainwashed" defence? If Woody was Larry the Postman, I question how many would laugh off the brainwashed defence as desperate in the extreme and side with the alleged victim who stayed consistent for 30 years and is only asking to be believed? But yeah, both very messy cases. On that we can agree. The McMartin case. And there are other high-profile examples too. Any other questions?? And let me laugh and GAG at the same time about you pathetically trying to claim the moral high ground after calling Jackson's likely victims "liars" in about a dozen different posts. What a joke! And you have the nerve of calling me a hypocrite in another post?? Pot meet kettle. FACT: There is way WAY more evidence that Jackson was a child molester than there is that Woody is one. Not an opinion...a FACT. Well, I'm convinced now....FACT!
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Mar 28, 2019 22:18:21 GMT
So remember that part where Jimmy said he had sex with MJ in a train station???? Well on Twitter, people uncovered that the train station was not even built during that time period.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 29, 2019 2:42:33 GMT
So remember that part where Jimmy said he had sex with MJ in a train station???? Well on Twitter, people uncovered that the train station was not even built during that time period. Oh lawd! They didn't really think this through did they!
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 29, 2019 4:23:52 GMT
Oh god...I just read that Safechuck also claimed Jackson took him on a "honeymoon" to EuroDisney...four years before it was opened Seems like one of Jackson's greatest talents was also Time Travel It's like a bad satire. And Safechuck is supposed to be the "credible" one (compared to Robson anyway) because he's a handsome, softly spoken white guy who looks permanently depressed. Really can't believe so many people fell for such an obvious grift
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Mar 29, 2019 14:50:42 GMT
Oh god...I just read that Safechuck also claimed Jackson took him on a "honeymoon" to EuroDisney...four years before it was opened Seems like one of Jackson's greatest talents was also Time Travel It's like a bad satire. And Safechuck is supposed to be the "credible" one (compared to Robson anyway) because he's a handsome, softly spoken white guy who looks permanently depressed. Really can't believe so many people fell for such an obvious grift Mike smallcombe MJ's biographer just dropped another bombshell. He has transcripts from 1993 case and that part in doc where Wade talked about Grand Canyon is not true. Google it cause I can't link right now.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Mar 29, 2019 14:51:50 GMT
It you haven't seen doc better do so now cause I'm guessing hb o will get rid of it soon. Too many lies.
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Mar 30, 2019 0:25:25 GMT
Oh god...I just read that Safechuck also claimed Jackson took him on a "honeymoon" to EuroDisney...four years before it was opened Seems like one of Jackson's greatest talents was also Time Travel It's like a bad satire. And Safechuck is supposed to be the "credible" one (compared to Robson anyway) because he's a handsome, softly spoken white guy who looks permanently depressed. Really can't believe so many people fell for such an obvious grift Hey, to be fair, your dumb ass fell for Dylan Farrow's horseshit!! 😆 Not saying I'm conceding the unproven notion that MJ's victims are lying, just pointing out yet again how you have ZERO moral high ground to stand on.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Mar 30, 2019 0:54:47 GMT
Oh god...I just read that Safechuck also claimed Jackson took him on a "honeymoon" to EuroDisney...four years before it was opened Seems like one of Jackson's greatest talents was also Time Travel It's like a bad satire. And Safechuck is supposed to be the "credible" one (compared to Robson anyway) because he's a handsome, softly spoken white guy who looks permanently depressed. Really can't believe so many people fell for such an obvious grift Hey, to be fair, your dumb ass fell for Dylan Farrow's horseshit!! 😆 Not saying I'm conceding the unproven notion that MJ's victims are lying, just pointing out yet again how you have ZERO moral high ground to stand on. Probably the grossest thread on this board to me this one is - - which is really something about grossness given the moral coward(s) and trolling in that Macbeth thread ............like "on Twitter" people are saying something, HBO is gonna take the doc down, the train station didn't exist, let's bring up Woody Allen and Roman Polanski and Jimmy Savile.....Oprah's in trouble!......you know just throw out a ton of stuff - whatever sticks.......confuse/clutter/misdirect. Actually that's another sad part of that doc ........he was such a groomer that he almost saw it as an intimate love story with the boys rather than just sex, he confused idol worship with people loving him - no one could love him but everyone idolized him and it all gets mixed up. Quite a disturbing psych profile he was.......
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 30, 2019 5:47:18 GMT
Hey, to be fair, your dumb ass fell for Dylan Farrow's horseshit!! 😆 Not saying I'm conceding the unproven notion that MJ's victims are lying, just pointing out yet again how you have ZERO moral high ground to stand on. Probably the grossest thread on this board to me this one is - - which is really something about grossness given the moral coward(s) and trolling in that Macbeth thread ............like "on Twitter" people are saying something, HBO is gonna take the doc down, the train station didn't exist, let's bring up Woody Allen and Roman Polanski and Jimmy Savile.....Oprah's in trouble!......you know just throw out a ton of stuff - whatever sticks.......confuse/clutter/misdirect. Actually that's another sad part of that doc ........he was such a groomer that he almost saw it as an intimate love story with the boys rather than just sex, he confused idol worship with people loving him - no one could love him but everyone idolized him and it all gets mixed up. Quite a disturbing psych profile he was....... Why are you still talking about this "documentary'" like it's a serious thing? "Another sad part of the doc!?! It's a filmed version of a National Enquirer story. Nothing in it can be taken at face value. I'm sure there will one day be a well made, thoroughly researched and vetted Jackson docmentary that will deserve all of this pointless analysis and reflection you are putting into the psych of Jackson, but this is not it. It's a one sided tabloid hit job by broke grifters looking for a payday and cynical network execs looking for an easy ratings boost. Mercifully, it'll be consigned to the dustbin of history before long. It's over. Even the maistream media are "finally" reporting the multitude of lies and inconsistencies of Robson and Safechuck. Sometimes you just need to take the L instead of digging your heels in. This trashbag interview and it's participants have been debunked and discredited so much now, that it's pretty much worthless. Find another angle, or wait for a documentary that can't be so easily ripped apart. With MJ, there are plenty of other angles, but this movie ain't it chief.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Mar 30, 2019 5:54:35 GMT
Oh god...I just read that Safechuck also claimed Jackson took him on a "honeymoon" to EuroDisney...four years before it was opened Seems like one of Jackson's greatest talents was also Time Travel It's like a bad satire. And Safechuck is supposed to be the "credible" one (compared to Robson anyway) because he's a handsome, softly spoken white guy who looks permanently depressed. Really can't believe so many people fell for such an obvious grift Hey, to be fair, your dumb ass fell for Dylan Farrow's horseshit!! 😆 Not saying I'm conceding the unproven notion that MJ's victims are lying, just pointing out yet again how you have ZERO moral high ground to stand on. I'm not claiming any "moral high ground" genius Just exposing the massive hypocrisy of people acting like they care oh-so much about alleged "victims", but when you bring up their own favorite sexual predators, suddenly it's , "fuck them bitches. I love his movies". It was fun to see the turnaround
|
|
|
Post by RiverleavesElmius on Mar 30, 2019 5:58:36 GMT
Probably the grossest thread on this board to me this one is - - which is really something about grossness given the moral coward(s) and trolling in that Macbeth thread ............like "on Twitter" people are saying something, HBO is gonna take the doc down, the train station didn't exist, let's bring up Woody Allen and Roman Polanski and Jimmy Savile.....Oprah's in trouble!......you know just throw out a ton of stuff - whatever sticks.......confuse/clutter/misdirect. Actually that's another sad part of that doc ........he was such a groomer that he almost saw it as an intimate love story with the boys rather than just sex, he confused idol worship with people loving him - no one could love him but everyone idolized him and it all gets mixed up. Quite a disturbing psych profile he was....... Why are you still talking about this "documentary'" like it's a serious thing? "Another sad part of the doc!?! It's a filmed version of a National Enquirer story. Nothing in it can be taken at face value. I'm sure there will one day be a well made, thoroughly researched Jackson docmentary that will deserve all of this pointless analysis and reflection you are putting into the psych of Jackson, but this is not it. It's a one sided tabloid hit job by broke grifters looking for a payday and cynical network execs looking for an easy ratings boost. Mercifully, it'll be consigned to the dustbin of history before long. It's over. Even the maistream media are "finally" reporting the multitude of lies and inconsistencies of Robson and Safechuck. Sometimes you just need to take the L instead of digging your heels in. This trashbag interview and it's participants have been debunked and discredited so much now, that it's pretty much worthless. Find another angle, or wait for a documentary that can't be so easily ripped apart. With MJ, there are plenty of other angles, but this movie ain't8 it chief. Keep dreaming, boo. This documentary is NOT going away any time soon. It's all a bunch of sorry-ass MJ apologists on Twitter pretending it's been debunked by anyone that actually matters. ZERO mainstream coverage about "Leaving Neverland" being in any way debunked. It's still out there, it's still being listened to. It will be remembered as the BEGINNING OF THE END for MJ's legacy. Stick to being Denzel's fluffer, you make a poor truth denier.
|
|