What are the FACTS?


For those who plan to view this "Mocumentary" tonight please consider the following:
A DOCUMENTARY, by the nature of its name, is an account of something documented by some sort of evidence and fact.
Does this piece pass the test?
What seems to be the case here is that this piece relies entirely on milking peoples sympathy for real child abuse cases as well as the pain, and shame that the victims feel, sometimes for a lifetime. Its hard not to feel their pain.
However does THIS piece pass the test of credibility of the charges?
If not, then THIS is an abuse in of itself.
Many will use an old adage; If it walks like a duck, Quacks like a Duck and swims like a duck, it must be a duck. That is how they view Jackson.

People are FAR more complex than ducks. Jackson to say the least was a very complex individual. WW cant deny his talent and stamina. He was an eccentric person.
Those who look past their own bias will see a man who was generous to a fault. He loved kids, and YES it was too much so. He became possessive and and "smothering" and FAR too gullible and trusting of certain situations that left him wide open for scrutiny.
But the question remains, was he an abuser of kids.
I have spoken in defense of kids many times. I hate abuse in any form. But I also believe that the "Walks like a duck analogy is too vague and simplistic to apply to analyzing the complexity of a (hu)man.

One thing that should be considered is peoples lust for money and greed.
These things are to be considered as well.

My heart goes out to to Michaels Kids as well as the rest of the family. His kids are old enough to see what an ugly world this is turning into and that they will be facing. The rest will face this yet again.

WHAT is to be gained here? Jackson has been dead for 10 years. He leaves behind people who's lives have been enriched in one way or another (including monetarily)
He also leaves behind some who feel very differently or perhaps are waiting for a further monetary reward. Who Know? But the question remains; AT WHAT COST? WHO SUFFERS NOW?
Jackson is beyond suffering.

I intended to post my own list of things to look for and consider. I found something FAR BETTER. Something that will probably be left out of this so called Documentary.
Lets start with some truth and some facts or at least some viable counterpoints.

Check THIS out
https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.forbes.com/sites/joevogel/2019/01/29/what-you-should-know-about-the-new-michael-jackson-documentary/amp/?usqp=mq331AQCCAE%3D&_js_v=0.1#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.forbes.com%2Fsites%2Fjoevogel%2F2019%2F01%2F29%2Fwhat-you-should-know-about-the-new-michael-jackson-documentary%2F

While I can not say that EVERYTHING here is 100% credible, I know that much of it is and that will be more than is offered in this show.

Dont be sheep lead around by your emotions and attempts to manipulate them.
THAT is clearly how the world is operating today. This is just another example
Money and ratings regardless of the consequences!



reply

As a child and young man he certainly had talent, but as soon as he started grabbing his crotch, it was obvious he was a creep.

reply

Textbook example of the type of people not interested in meaningful facts getting in the way of their own personal bias, conjecture & innuendo which enables things like this shamefully unethical & downright degenerate tabloid mockumentary lynching to be produced.

reply

The fact is he enjoyed grabbing his crotch in public. That's what I'm judging. The only people who know what happened behind closed doors are those people.

reply

Your unnecessarily lurid inference to an ultimately irrelevant & relativity tame on stage artistic expression in an era over the top provocative on stage antics really says more about you than anything else.

reply

Crotch-grabbing is "artistic"? Can the weirdo on the street use that excuse, too? If it's gross, it's gross. Yes, it does say something about me. That I'm consistent and I don't think certain behavior is "cool" simply because the guy doing it can sing and dance.

reply

Like i said many people like yourself poorly hide your bias by deflecting with your lurid inferences given the lack of tangible facts to support any of this slanderous nonsense.

reply

If I am to pass judgement of this specific act(ion), classed as a "dance move" I take a dim view of it. It should have been removed from his performances. Its not the first or only time that "dance moves" have fallen under scrutiny. Wardrobe and lack of it, are also things that fall under serious scrutiny of too many performers. Even more so for song lyrics.

The issues HERE are what was allegedly happening with the crotch of certain young boys. Does his "dance move" translate to the abuses that allegedly took place?
The complete and total lack of consistency of some of the stories takes this out of the realm of logic. The FACTS are that these accusers have repeatedly changed their stories to fit their needs and occasions. They have done so willingly and without duress. THOSE FACTS CAN be documented but those are details that will likely be left out of their "story".

I cant and dont defend everything that Jackson has ever done. I also dont see any need at this time to peddle smut to further discredit his life in general or to add to the pain that is caused to his children and family.

reply

as soon as he started grabbing his crotch, it was obvious he was a creep


Context means everything; it was a (seemingly spontaneous) dance move. Secondly, you no doubt grab your crotch many times a day for one reason or another. Let's keep it real.

reply

Facts were settled in court. That's why we have courts and a legal system. Michael is innocent. I'm done caring about the matter. I think this documentary is a spiteful attack on MJ's legacy and certainly engineered to play on the sympathies of child abuse in general. I wouldn't say this film will damage the credibility of documentaries in general cause they've been circling the drain a long time.

reply

Because innocent men always pay large settlements ($23 million) to children that they didn't abuse.

reply

The 1993 settlement did NOT prevent the family from proceeding with a criminal case so ideally, they could have walked away with money plus justice. They dropped the criminal case because they got EXACTLY what they wanted - MONEY! That was always their objective. Subsequent allegations are a product of this mentality.

Also, the FBI investigated Jackson for over a decade (ripped through his home, searched his computers, and followed him around the world), and they found nothing to indicate guilt. Are the FBI liars? Read the links I provided below. He was also found not guilty at the 2005 trial for a reason after it was proven that the accuser's family had a shady history of extortion attempts. As well, if your son was really molested, why ask for a settlement rather than fight to see the perv locked in jail? That's what any genuine parent would do. #extortion

1. https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/266333/michael-jacksons-fbi-files-released

2. https://vault.fbi.gov/Michael%20Jackson

reply

The guy (?) was a creep, a freak, and purveyor of junk music for little boys, some of whose stupid parents turned them over to him to molest.

reply

What evidence can YOU supply to support the molestation charges?
The rest is just your opinion.

reply