Michael Jackson Dies

Keyhole

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
This article lists counter-claims (against the families' claims in the Leaving Neverland documentary). Do they hold up?

Why is U.S. Media Silent on the Implosion of Leaving Neverland, While the U.K. Press is Pouncing?

JOHN ZIEGLER APR 4, 2019 10:40 AM
Interesting article, and it does seem like there are many holes in the narrative, but I for one am not going to 'throw the baby out with the bathwater' here.

1. Michael Jackson being a pedophile, and 2. The narrative of the documentary being factually incorrect in places - are not mutually exclusive.

Whether the story was partially fabricated or not, I am not convinced that it is enough to get MJ off the hook, because the whole bunch of other evidence is quite damning. The child porn, frequent "sleep-overs", jumping from one boy to the next, and MJ's overall demeanor coupled with the way that he handled to media coverage, suggest to me that he was clearly a patho with predatory sexual predilections.

Honestly - any fully grown man who sleeps with random kids in his bed AND has been shown to have child porn, is almost certainly a pedophile in my books. This may seem like a bit of a knee-jerk reaction, and perhaps it is... but I don't feel it is even necessary to have much more evidence than that.
 

aragorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I'm not familiar with this Sloan Bella from before, and 'celebrity psychic' sounds suspicious enough, but from the bits I viewed she did have some interesting things to say. I think it's a plausible theory, that many (black) stars like Jackson, Cosby, Murphy etc., who might already be pretty weird from the start (pedophiles, transvestites, psychopaths) but talented enough to make lots of money, are set up in some fashion so that those in charge can blackmail and totally steer them, and 'milk' all their money in the end. And, as a bonus, these celebrities will lure more youngsters into the sick arrangement they have, and then the process repeats.
 

nature

Jedi Council Member
This article lists counter-claims (against the families' claims in the Leaving Neverland documentary). Do they hold up?

Why is U.S. Media Silent on the Implosion of Leaving Neverland, While the U.K. Press is Pouncing?

JOHN ZIEGLER APR 4, 2019 10:40 AM
So this type of article is typical of the arguments put forward by anti-victim guys to discredit victims' testimony, particularly in pedophile circles.
Mr. Pilger's arguments remind me of those of the guys who loosely dragged the poor children in the Outreau affair through the mud. In this French case, the perpetrators' lawyers acted indignantly to clear pedophiles, in contempt of vulnerable children. They discredited them on the basis of arguments based on details (what was the colour of the carpet in the room where you say you were raped)? A child traumatized by a disgusting act of violence on his intimate parts will pay attention to the colour of the carpet, of course! These unworthy lawyers do not care about relevant elements but go looking for silly details. They also discredited the children with stories of date and place. However, tapes of their filmed sexual violence were available. The media did not take an interest in it and preferred to let off steam on ridiculous details. At the time, 99% of the French population fell for it and considered these children liars! Imagine the suffering, the additional trauma that this has caused to these really victime children; these children, adults today, have psychiatric disorders since. :-(

It centers on Safechcuk’s detailed claim in the movie that he was forced to have sex with Jackson, near the start of his abuse, in the second floor of the train station at Jackson’s Neverland Ranch.
... In the film and in his lawsuit deposition, Safechuck says that his abuse by Jackson ended in 1992, when he was about 14 years old.
... However, there is now a huge problem with Safechuck’s allegation. Construction on the train station building, which was not commenced until late 1993
Scientific research on brain have demonstrated that memories change over time. Even without science, anyone knows that, based on its own experiences. This is even more obvious with children who are victims of abuse as a result of a PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder)

If this guy had a minimum knowledge of psychology, he would know that memory is not infallible. When you are an adult, even in normal times (without any context of abuse), you have difficulty remembering the date of certain events in childhood, or even their sequence.

This suggests that Safechuck, based on his own testimony, and the film’s most prominent premise, made up the story about being abused in the train house.
So the author of this bad paper admits that Safechuck had been abused, but not in the train house. :whistle:

The other accuser, Wade Robson, asserts in the film that he was first abused by Jackson when left alone with him as his family went on a trip to the Grand Canyon. However, his mother, Joy Robson testified under oath twice, indicating that Wade was actually on that trip with his family
This does not discredit the veracity of the abuse statements, because again it is a question of the bad tricks that memory plays on us when we think about the events of our childhood. Mr. Pilger has never been himself a child? Just look at our own flaws. For example: when my daughter was 6 yo, I left her alone for a whole weekend to go to a conference. I told her where and why. When she was 10, I no longer know what we were talking about, and she reminds me of this episode by saying that I abandoned her when I went to visit houses to buy. Four years later, her memory therefore confused the episode "going to a conference" with another episode that took place a year earlier when I left her and went visiting houses in another region.

So in the case of Wade Robson, it is very likely that he did go to the Grand Canyon with his parents, but that the weekend he stayed with Michael Jackson was another time his parents were away. Or the parents had stayed at home but Wade felt it as an absence of the parents from their home. It's a feeling you can easily have as a child when you're left at family or friends' home for several days.

(it should also be noted that a radio interview Joy did in 2011, which casts further doubt on other aspects of Wade’s timeline, was just recently mysteriously removed from YouTube).
What is the reason for this disappearance? Maybe Wade had said some very compromising things about the popstar.

It was revealed that Joy not only remained part of a Michael Jackson fan group on Facebook, well after her son went on the Today Show in 2013 to announce that he was abused, but that she had “liked” several pro-Jackson posts way after that event. Then, within hours of someone tweeting about this discovery, those “likes” suddenly disappeared.
The mother's attitude or mentality must not distract us from what the child has suffered!
The best way is to ask Joy why she deleted her likes, rather than raise doubts about the sincerity of the child victim. Isn't it, Mr. Pilger?

Robson testified in his lawsuit that he realized he was abused while in therapy in May of 2012. However, there is an interview with Robson which was posted to YouTube in July of 2012 where he is still speaking of Jackson with very high praise.
Mr. Pilger definitely lacks basic knowledge of psychology. In the case of incest at a young age (toddler, infant), or with someone appreciated by others and even more so with a national or international star, most of sexually abused children do not realize the harm of having sex, especially when it is done without physical aggression, with sweet words, with an attitude of superficial caring. The child, being vulnerable by nature, is easily manipulable, wants to please the adult, wants adults to be happy with him, wants affection. Sexual predators know this very well and abuse this vulnerability. These children realize this later, after adolescence, or when they are adults.

And then there are also children who are ashamed to admit to themselves that they have been manipulated and abused, and therefore remain silent and suffer in silence untill they become aware of it.
Mr Pilger ignores the cases of adults who were abused in their childhood but who complain at the age of 20-30-40 ?

Thirdly, the impact of the #MeToo movement having radically altered the rules for how we evaluate such stories is much more pronounced here.
This movement had been constructed purposely, in the heat of the postliberal madness, for spreadind false accusations, thus confusion and discredit on real victims.

Finally, we must be very critic when someone wants to present children as liars of sexual abuse, particularly by distracting us with date and place stories. One must not forget the other elements, much more relevant.
One musn't forgeit neither that it isn't easy for a child (even for an adult abused in childhood) to speak about that, to let the world know their name, know their abuse, know their intimate story, to take the risk of being moked, the risk of being being ostracised.
 

aragorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I think we also need to add to the equation how children quite easily fall into a disassociate state as they encounter something as horrible and utterly unnatural as sexual abuse and worse. The more brutal the abuse is, the deeper the suppression of memories becomes, or so I've understood. A couple of years ago I wanted to educate myself on the subject and I read this book:


It's a tough read to stomach, but by reading it you'll learn e.g. how disassociation is a very common, perhaps the only, survival mechanism these abused kids have, and how many of them have no memory at all of what they've been through. Just speculating here, but these victims of Jackson might just be the tip of the ice berg; they are the ones who do have some kind of memory of what has been done to them, while the victims of even more horrific abuse might not remember anything (although I'm sure they suffer from 'idiopathic mental illnesses').
 

genero81

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I watched the whole thing yesterday. They are obviously not making it up. The pain and emotion of it is too visceral. They would have to be some of the best actors and actresses ever. Besides the fact that coming out about sexual abuse publicly is difficult in any case, more so against a pop icon on the level of Elvis Presley. The whole thing brought home for me the price paid for subjective wishful thinking. Wanting reality to be something it's not. You have this larger than life person that is offering the ultimate fantasy on a silver platter. Almost impossible to turn down. Complete with plausible deniability. "He's different. He didn't have a childhood." Still, cognitive dissonance on the part of the parents to believe the lie and abdicate responsibility to their own child. Children must be protected as they're in no position to understand what is appropriate love and what isn't. Then to add salt to the festering wounds, they blame themselves for being willing participants. Was Jackson pure predator with no conscience? Samenow's work comes to mind; there seems to be a need in most humans to think of themselves as a good person even when they engage in criminal behavior. I think Michael thought of himself in this way but that in no way absolves him.

As far as the victims getting some events mixed up in the timeline, I would be more surprised or find it more suspicious if they didn't.

Sometimes I think that we've taken the hard road by looking this reality square in the face. It can feel like a terrible burden at times, but cases like this make it clear that choosing to live in a subjective, wishful thinking, reality bubble can have disastrous consequences. Far better in the long run to see things for what they are.
 

gdpetti

Jedi Council Member
Reminds me of two things... how people respond to their priests being charged with this .... they immediately deny it.... knowing nothing... then the usual game of finding some specs of fact discrepancy as proof that it never happened....

And it reminds me of how Laura in the sessions with the C's asked about these types of discrepancies in the Roswell story... which ends up being not one, but three events that were merged thru the usual propaganda techniques to 'divide and conquer'.... confuse them, distract them... double back again and again... push this piece of data, then the next, separately or at once to distract, confuse and destroy... and for most people, their interest drifts away.... back to sleep.

MJ being creepy seems commonplace in so many of these 'kids' that grow up in the Hollywood hothouse.... read/watch that doc on Angelina Jolie.... her mother was her enabler.... sometimes, it's part of the culture... in a cleaner sense, ELvis and Priscilla? She looked older, but why did her parents, her father military.. allow him to bring her home etc etc.??? I wonder what her explanation is today.

Why do parishoners still go to Church, give them money etc? Isn't it a question of free will? Isn't this why only a small percent need to be targeted here in 'Purgatory' by the STSers? Isn't this why Marx said only a small percent rule things? How many can they pervert, encourage to join, get distracted etc to allow this minority to seize and maintain power? Th MJ issue seems reflective of all the rest... more of the same...
 

gdpetti

Jedi Council Member
PS... just saw these posts over on vigiliant citizen.... I don't do social media, so I never hear about this stuff... but it fits in with the whole MJ issue as well... like it or not, the kids especially, get involved in this clubhouse.

THen from the 'art' world, which fits in with that 'art' at the Denver Airport:

And that report of Michelle Obama and friends dining on ship while Notre Dame burned? Seems true enough by the reflections in their wine glasses... reminds me of those celebrations on 9-11.
 

Mariama

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
It's a tough read to stomach, but by reading it you'll learn e.g. how disassociation is a very common, perhaps the only, survival mechanism these abused kids have, and how many of them have no memory at all of what they've been through. Just speculating here, but these victims of Jackson might just be the tip of the ice berg; they are the ones who do have some kind of memory of what has been done to them, while the victims of even more horrific abuse might not remember anything (although I'm sure they suffer from 'idiopathic mental illnesses').
I watched a few more videos about MJ these past few days which left me feeling very disturbed. I think it was mentioned earlier in the thread but just like Jimmy Savile he had unlimited access to (very vulnerable) children, visiting children in hospital, and going to Africa. I suspect he may have even wreaked more havoc over there, without it ever coming to light. It is likely that he knew it would even be easier to get away with crimes in a place far from the US and with a very different culture (and even less awareness of sexual abuse?). He was made king in some place, which was another perfect opportunity for grooming unsuspecting kids and their communities.

Was Jackson pure predator with no conscience? Samenow's work comes to mind; there seems to be a need in most humans to think of themselves as a good person even when they engage in criminal behavior. I think Michael thought of himself in this way but that in no way absolves him.
And he used that in a televised address to his fans to claim his innocence, but I think he protested too much. He also perfected the art of pity ploys, being able to put a lot of emotion in his voice to the point of crying (or so it seems). We know that he used his tears (if they were produced at all) to sway the people around him.

I thought it was interesting that he had a serious accident while doing a commercial for Pepsi back in the 80s which left him with second and third degree burns and caused him a lot of pain. A billboard sent by the Universe? Apparently, he didn't even notice his hair was on fire (too focused on the job or feeling invincible?) and another man had to put the fire out. At one point he also broke some bones, so he did receive some warnings that he was on the wrong path, methinks.

This does not discredit the veracity of the abuse statements, because again it is a question of the bad tricks that memory plays on us when we think about the events of our childhood.
My thoughts exactly.
 

Dakota

Jedi Council Member
I'm still stuck on this case, not because I was a fan of MJ (I was little bit, if fan means that you listen someone songs and try to dance like him), but because lie always makes me angry (so, thank you Mariama for bringing up The Myth of the 'Out of Character' Crime by Samenow - the book is amazing).

This is not the first case and probably it's not the last case where is in front of the viewer tough choice to try to discover truth (or at least part of it). And I really like what Turgon said:

Well, the forum isn't a court of law and Michael Jackson isn't on trial here. We're posting what we've found so far and sharing our thoughts on the documentary and additional videos and articles posted about it in order to get a better understanding of what was really going on. At this point, there is no physical proof, like you said, other than the accounts of the people that were there, but discounting that as 'bla bla bla' doesn't really help.
And for me, this has nothing to do with accusing MJ of pedophilia or accusing Wade&James about lying. It's about understanding what was really going on like Turgon point out.

In the next short video Jackson's brother Jackie, Marlon, Tito and MJ's nephew Taj speaking out about sexual abuse allegations. Even feeling or gut feeling, or even microexpression doesn't give proof they look to me like a gang and they look terrified. But that just my opinion, what struck me the most fact that they didn't watch Leaving Neverland and nor did they intend to do so but still they are convince in MJ innocence. And I don't trust people when they firm about something and didn't hear the other side and try to be objective.
They also said something that many mention couple of times, that MJ is not alive to defend himself. Pardon moi, but it's not like he defended himself when he was alive.
They accusing Wade&James that they after money and it's all about the money, but for whom, they or Wade&James?
On the end of the video Gayle King conclude that MJ was all alone in the trials and that MJ had very complicated relationship with his family. Where were they then?

 
Last edited:

gdpetti

Jedi Council Member
MJ got the rest of the siblings to get nose jobs to 'match'... and MJ's plastic surgery addiction seems to indict 'issues' ... like is said, deal with it in the mind or deal with it in the body later.... MJ was talented... all of these people affected are... as that twerker exDIsney girl said when 'supposedly' asked outside the theater (Voice taping I think it was)... on how to succeed.. and she credited Satan... you gotta go that route she said.... she has talent... the problem is all the crap that comes with it... the mental breakdowns, and the physical toll later... as MJ seems to demonstrate... programs are hard to work through... especially for the PreAdamics.
 

Ant22

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
You can't prove someone's innocence, you can only prove someone's guilt, that's why it's also "innocent untill proven quilty"
Like I said, people's bla bla bla is not evidence, for someones innocence either.
And you can't have physical evidence that proves someone's innocence.
Physical proof is always proof that someone is guilty.
And there is no physical proof whatsoever.

Unless Michael Jackson was into kinky video tapes there will never be any physical proof.

This thread provides logical analysis of data - and that data clearly points towards Jackson being a pedophile. That's strong enough evidence IMO.


Like Oxajil mentioned, the Jim Clemente videos are very revealing. But I'm curious, did you watch the Leaving Neverland documentary or any of the subsequent videos and articles that other members shared before you started posting on this thread?
Agreed, a 35 year-old man sleeping with little boys is weird enough, videos of professional analysis of his behaviour posted earlier are convincing enough IMO.
I haven't seen any reply to Turgon's post and I too would be interested to know whether you watched Leaving Neverland?

Regarding "seeing no evil and hearing no evil": (from Lobaczewski):


“Human nature demands that vile matters be haloed by an over-compensatory mystique in order to silence one’s conscience and to deceive consciousness and critical faculties, whether one’s own or those of others.

If such an ponerogenic union could be stripped of its ideology, {or a pathological person is exposed as predatory, if not pathological} nothing would remain except psychological and moral pathology, naked and unattractive. Such stripping would of course provoke “moral outrage”, and not only among the members of the union; even normal people, who condemn this kind of union along with its ideologies, would feel hurt, deprived of something constituting part of their own romanticism, their way of perceiving reality. Perhaps even some of the readers of this book will resent the author’s stripping evil so unceremoniously of all its literary motifs. The job of effecting such a “strip-tease” may thus turn out to be much more difficult and dangerous than expected.”

Coincidentally, I bumped into the above quote in another thread where the issue of "guilty until proven otherwise" was brought up too. One of the posts describes a case of another sexual predator who got away with multiple cases of rape - and the public even protected him! It seems to be happening in MJ's case too and I get the impression his fans almost take it personally. As if accepting the evidence of his guilt said something about them. And they would never ever support a pedopile!

Yes, both victims claimed there had been no abuse before. But they are victims. Ever heard an alcoholic who claims they don't have a drinking problem? Or even more fitting, an abused wife who claims the husband who beats her black and blue truly does love her - because he says so? It often takes years before she realises that this isn't love. That she is a victim.

People aren't exactly good at understanding or seeing through their own or other people's intentions. And it is his intentions that Jackson lied about. Similarly to abusive husbands who tell their victims they do it because they love them, Jackson told his victims that the abuse was how they showed their love for each other (paraphrased from Leaving Neverland). And like a battered wife, Safechuck and Robson finally admitted they are victims. They can now start healing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Gawan

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Singer Sheryl Crow also adds some points to the story:

Sheryl Crow has admitted she saw some “really strange” things while working as a backing singer for alleged paedophile Michael Jackson.

The country star, 57, who performed on Jackson's globetrotting Bad tour in the 1980s, said she had a lot of questions about his behaviour.



Crow added: "I think that there were a lot of exceptions made because of the damage that [Jackson] … I mean, he didn’t intentionally project it, but it was part of his aura – this almost being untouchable and almost alien-like [figure].



"I feel like there was just a huge network of people that allowed all that to go on. It’s just tragic."

It brings up also the Epstein case in this regard that highly influential people get protected. It is also said, that Jackson was also listed in Epsteins address book.
 
Top Bottom