Jump to content
MadonnaNation.com Forums

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Jazzy Jan

    Maroon 5: most boring superbowl in history

    Read the Brexit thread and you will see some of his comments. He also was carrying on about Madonna's backside in such an over the top weird way a few months back. Also completely supported Kevin Spacey and thought he was a victim instead of being a predator pervert.
  3. I noticed before that Gaga's powerful PR machine stopped the second these rich families hired a PR company. I'm not kidding. I think it's the same company
  4. karbatal

    Maroon 5: most boring superbowl in history

    Neither do I. I only know him from the Brexit thread. Had no idea he said he was French before. Internet is a weird place.
  5. As Jazzy Jan stated before, when a little child (we're speaking about kids being SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS OLD!) go though this situation, it's typical that they feel guilty and even defend the abuser. Most people here forget, though, that the trial from 2005 started because of Jackson's own words regarding his behaviour towards children. That and the proof submitted by the people from the Sundance documentary should be enough to not having this conversation here. He's guilty as fuck and I'm sincerely appalled at people still defending him.
  6. Shocking. $250 million he wants. Just as shocking is his lawyer is hash tagging Trump. They hate the Washington Post and are out to destroy them. This smug kid will probably win as well. Like we all say, every detail has to be 100 per cent correct when reporting. Clever lawyers know how to make anyone a victim through highlighting any inaccuracy, despite the intent and arrogance of those boys. I also see that Trump supporters are talking of how noble this kid is because he is anti abortion. It is nauseating indeed.
  7. The very nerve. So nowadays with money you can hire a PR firm to handle social media crisis and make you the victim. Nauseating.
  8. ctg12

    Maroon 5: most boring superbowl in history

    My god, I need to start participating in more threads. I had no idea about any of this.
  9. Actually the consesus is that he was a fucked up, drug addicted freak, who slept with children.
  10. Michael Jackson is a fucking peadophile. I can't believe with so many evidence around and yet some people still think that he's innocent.
  11. Some priests end up getting away with it for decades, most abusers do; so really the system generally works in the abusers favor as it is anyway. But now that there is more awareness of how pedophiles operate, there should be less opportunity for these things to happen. MJ's dead and gone and there's worse things going on in the world but what upsets me about this case is how people want to dismiss this behavior. And "oh it's all wrong but that doesn't mean he did it" is enabling.
  12. Clearly, the popular consensus in this thread is that a conviction for child molestation is acceptable based on accusations (questioning those accusations only means you condone child abuse) and the personality profile of the accused. That sort of eliminates the need for a trial for any case like this. The accused will always have the "profile" and (in most cases...not all though...) the accuser will always stick to their story. If that's all that's needed why even go through all the time and trouble of proving ANYTHING one way or another? With exception of a few, everyone here would've locked him up in '05. My question though is, should we apply that style of "law and order" to other crimes as well?
  13. MJ propaganda website You can defame the site all you want, doesn't change the fact this is a page that provides a myriad of sources to their claims, with a footnote after almost every sentence linking to official reports, court transcripts, interviews etc. These people verify every argument they put forward with factual info, something this thread is desperately lacking. But omg, it's MJ fans hosting this website (because *shock* some fans are not just mindless sheep, but people who actually bother to do research), so let's throw all of this away! Let's disqualify all of their arguments because hey, they are MJ fans, what do they know! You claimed to be informed in this topic, so shouldn't you know this yourself? 🙃 Especially since you continue talking about dozens of people "who gut hush money", when in fact, there is only one single case that was settled with money, the Chandler case. Jumping to conclusions AGAIN. How do you know he only ever touched the books "with the half naked boys"? I think I should give up asking for sources at this point. Given we are talking about an alleged paedophile who in fact did not own any piece of child pornography, not even on his computer, but instead masses of adult pornography, including in intimate locations, I suppose it's a point worth considering. But of course, when everything can be explained away by tactics, then I guess what does it count. This guy surely must have been a criminal mastermind with the amount of tactics he employed. If you ask me, a bit contradicting for a man that, two lines earlier, "could barely scrape a sentence together".
  14. a lot of people in these cases have messed it all up for themselves & public. some have been caught lying or changing stories. even those books that were later found to be doctored by one article - turned out the author of that article had ties to a person/lawyer in a suit against Micheal. a court of law need facts & evidence - but i guess the courts and police in the states are that bad. a lot of Ad hominem going on in here too. sad. the issue is horrific and i assume personal for some of you.
  15. The future husband is in for a treat.
  16. Digging? I read it at the time and I'm only now commenting on it. Seeing as you were commenting on what you found "funny". I decided to do likewise. It's hardly surprising that one or two people have been taken in by you cutting and pasting from a MJ propaganda website. I'm not slamming the name, I'm laughing at the fact you're linking to a fansite created by Michael Jackson fans as a repository for refuting the allegations of sexual abuse against him. It's like a Trump supporter linking someone to Breitbart in order to prove something they read on Twitter. Completely ridiculous. What victims? The ones in the documentary? the ones in the 90s? The ones that went to court or the ones that didn't? The ones we know about or the ones we don't? The ones who got hush money or the ones who didn't? Man accused of multiple incidences of sexual abuse has porno collection. Are we supposed to be shocked? Just in case anyone took your "he had 10,000 books" nonsense to heart thinking he had a wonderful pristine library, it's helpful to realise that these books were piled up in squalid filthy rooms and no doubt never touched (except the ones with the half naked boys of course) The very idea that this illiterate who could barely scrape a sentence together was well read is hilarious. I choose to believe the victims and you don't. In my opinion you are a paedo apologist and if you don't like it - sue me.
  17. Oh, you mean a post I made three weeks ago and that would take quite some dedicated digging to find? Well dear, I changed my mind. And given that I have received private messages from 2 different forum members the last couple of days/weeks, thanking me for providing factual info in this thread, I have a good incentive to go on. And slamming the website for its name is exactly what I was expecting and goes to show you did not take a look at this site at all. This site verifies every argument they put forward with multiple sources, examines every claim meticulously, but of course, let's throw it in the bin and defame it because of its *shock* website name. I am very well aware grooming is a common method of paedophiles. It's just a slight bit counterintuitive when the alleged victims themselves stated that no grooming ever took place, which is exactly the reason why this grooming claim, which the prosecution tried to pursue as well, stood no chance in court. Whoops. I will not respond to your other question as I fail to see how chaotic, unorderly rooms are an indication for anything else expect for a chaotic and unorderly person. Or was that a side effect of his pedophilia too? Fine if you don't care to go through all this again and you have it all in the back of your head anyway. But then maybe deal with other people having different opinions and not throw personal insults at them? Because yes, alleging that I, or anyone else in this thread, are actually okay with any proven case of child abuse and any convicted predator, is highly defaming.
  18. Yesterday
  19. Considering your initial post was that you were leaving the thread and not re-entering, yet here you are posting links to, wait for it.... the michael jackson allegations dot com (gee I wonder what slant that website takes?) I'd say that it must be you who's kidding at this point, no? I'm sure you're aware that paedos often show pornography to young boys while grooming them. I'd be surprised if that wasn't covered in this documentary. And the fact that the upper floors of Neverland were mostly filthy squalid holes shouldn't be particularly funny either, or was that just another side effect of his mental health and drug addiction issues? And seeing as I have it in the back of my head that all this was covered in previous threads, possibly on Dotmusic, it's not really achieving anything going over it all again, other than reminding people that behind the music was an abomination.
  20. At this point I'm believing you must be kidding. Since you talked so confidently about his profile matching a pedophile, you surely are aware it is not so typical for a raging pedophile to own these masses of adult heterosexual porn and in turns, no child pornography at all. But that doesn't matter to the theory, does it? Of course, all of this must have been for grooming purposes now. Don't agree? Well then you're a paedo apologist! (Seriously, this is getting boring) Again, who is speculating without any basis and who is sticking to the facts?
  21. I made the mistake of clicking on that link and seeing the pics of filthy rooms that look like some roach infested motel. I'm sure it says something about him that he and his 10,000 books were surrounded by squalor. So the sexual deviant liked making up binders full of clippings from porn magazines? This is meant to prove that he wasn't a paedophile is it? Because he had clipping from Big Jugs monthly? Or are those the binders and magazines and DVDs he used while grooming these young male kids? Yet another casebook example of grooming. Ugh, he was repellent.
  22. Where are the "mountains" of those "dubious barely legal" photo books of young men? Where do you take these claims from? And how are these his 'predilections' when his book collection contained over 10,000 titles? (Source: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/no-child-porn-found-at-neverland-thenor-now-the_us_577fdfbce4b0f06648f4a3f8?guccounter=1) And of course, there we go again. It just can't be he owned adult heterosexual porn because it would actually *shock* indicate he had healthy sexual interests, no it must have been a tactic again. Suggesting anything else is, of course, paedo apologism. (Isn't this getting tired at this point? Think of sth more creative) Anyway, let me introduce the "few copies" of his apparent tactic: So all of this was only a tactic I see. Makes sense.
  23. Oh good grief. Are these paedo apologists now saying that the fact Jacko wasn't dumb enough to have a stash of actual child pornography at his place, and that the mountains of dubious barely legal photo books of young men and boys that yes, you can indeed buy in bookshops under the guise of "art" doesn't give hints to his predilections? And no, the laughable tactic of stashing a few copies of Hustler in his nightstand to prove he's a normal heterosexual male is even more hilarious. God, he was a freak. I just randomly put one of those titles into Amazon and the pics are weird as fuck. Young boys dressed as angels frolicking in a pool - with a bunch of dirty old men in the reviews saying how wonderfully "artistic" they are. Bleurgh!
  1. Load more activity
×