Michael Jackson 'kept photos of naked children and pornography stash' at Neverland Ranch,

Sounds like you're saying that making jokes about Jackson is worse than what Jackson did.

ok, that's it.

Yes, you caught me out. I have a shrine to Jackson in a little closet I keep locked.

Re picture of animal torture, what types of pictures of naked children; show me the actual pictures of these animals, or the source where they came from so I may view. Are they sadistic phycho sexual pictures for arousal, or are they pictures of animals in labs, and the images are protesting it?

Are the naked child pictures provocative, or more like these 2 Mary Cassett paintings?

Naked children, underwear.

The burden of proof is on anyone trying to prove there was any pornographic depictions of children, or wanton torture of animals for pleasure.

Have you seen the torture pictures and the source izzy, or are you just taking someone's word for it that it must have been some source of pleasure for anyone?

The fact you would use words like belittle or ameliorate when presented with neutrality to me shows what shaky ground you're on, when you must resort to emotional charged accusations.

I've not got the patience to even to pretend to discuss with someone who themselves have made up their minds, regardless of thoughts presented as to the veracity of evidence presents, and in fact seems downright fearful of other viewpoints. Viewpoints that must be met with insinuations that anyone questioning and seeking answers must themselves be pro-child porn, pro child sexual abuse.

I'll leave you to it.

Sounds like you're asking me to break the law. Why would you want to see such stuff anyway? I definitely don't want to.

izzy, I'm not going to address Jackson any more. I've over that.

However, I just realized what you sound like.

A Fundamentalist Christian.

It's true because this says it's true and if you question it you're saying it's not true but it true and the reason is because this is true. It says it's true right here and that proves it. That is proof and sunsets are beautiful and that proves it. You hate sunsets and that is true.

Not making light of child abuse; making light of Michael Jackson. Nothing could ever "make light" of child abuse. One joke about Jimmy Savile that I saw in the satirical Viz magazine was "Say what you like about Jimmy Savile, he taught me to milk a cow while blindfolded". Maybe we like our humour a bit ripe in Britain.

Apparantly so.

I just looked up viz "magazine" and I would hardly call it that. It's a comic book.

And btw, that Jimmy Savile joke is totally disgusting.

Making jokes about pedophiles is just about as low as you can go, as they are inexorably tied to their victims.

Please don't print any more.

Here is a video that I think at least presents some balanced information.



I looked up Pere Formiguera. Some of his stuff is at best questionable. Not all though.

I am interested in the polices statement could be used in grooming. I do see where that is a possibility. Like the guy on the video said "Let's keep it real" I'm all for that, I just need the actual information so I can make up my mind. Not just that someone said it was so.


The woman said "Here's the information, it's up to you what to do with it."

They gave the information so an individual can investigate.

Room to Play by Simen Johan? I had no issues with it.

Off topic.

I absolutley LOVE this picture from "Room to Grow"



Kitty got mad.

I sound like a fundamentalist Christian? You're the one dismissing evidence.

Here (finally) is some evidence.

The actual police report link is below.

Reading through it, there are a lot of things that can be seen as grooming activity, although none of the pictures of children was deemed to be actual pornography.

Looking though it myself, reading through the 88 pages, I do tend to agree. I do think some of the pictures including children are inappropriate.

This is evidence, a police report.
This is what evidence looks like.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160621193645/http://radaronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/mj-docs.pdf

From what I can understand, the "sex addiction drug" that was being referred to was percocet, as it's the only drug I could find doing an internet search that is related to sex addiciton.
Obviously though that's not the primary purpose of the drug.

But it's more tittilating in a news story.

Well, I just provided the first actual evidence on this thread, and as you can see I'm not dismissing it.

Really? Jackson's behaviour towards children was just 'inappropriate,' like saying a swear word when you hurt yourself. It wasn't just inappropriate, it was wrong.

izzy, what is it you' want from me?
please, just spit it out.

I've been asking for evidence from you, and you supplied nothing. A newpaper article is not evidence, personal feelings are not evidence.

I researched myself and found evidence, and provided it for whoever cares to read.

I have said there is much evidence of grooming behavior in the report. Based on what I've found, I can't say any more.

It somehow offends you that I'm not emotionally charged about this here, on this thread regardless of what my personal feels about what I've found may be. You're so distracted by my lack of being appalled on this thread, that you can't think straight yourself, which is what I'm trying to avoid.

Don't mistake lack of expressing shock, dismay, expressions of anger or the like with lack of empathy.

I am very skeptical about what popular media presents, and prefer facts from the source, which is what a police report is.

Against my better judgement, I've responded to you on this thread, and that's about as emotional as I'm going to get.

No more.

Do you have children of your own?

Is that what you want from me? To know if I have children?

That's an odd question.

Does this have anything to do with the evidence you couldn't present, and the evidence of a police report that I posted?

Oh damn, I get it now.

You've totally been having me on all this time, haven't you?

That's the only possible reason you could be not answering requests, direct questions, and asking stuff that's irrelevant to the thread.

Ya had me going there for awhile buddy. Well played.

Unfortunately, I don't have time to play anymore.

Good bye.

I posted the news article. You're the only one protesting Jackson's innocence, and no, I'm not running round finding stuff for you when I've got a lot on right now.

And if you don't have kids I can see why you're quite relaxed about the whole thing.

She's not actually.

If Michael Jackson was a molestor therefore they would have found all of this stuff back in 2003, no way would he not have gone to jaol. No one will let a child molestor off, full stop no matter how much money they have.

Elizabeth Taylor was aware of the maturity of Michael Jackson, I don't think he ever grew up, a big kid that wasn't all together there. Let's face it, Netherlands.

He had Monkeys.

Not one of his children "do not defend him".

One of the boys he supposidly molested came clean and said his Father was behind it all for Money.

I have no doubt that he was very child like and may even have looked at photos of kids, he was a kid, very weird man/kid.

His best friends were "kids" or people that nurtured him like a kid, like Elizabeth Taylor she definately would not be a person who would support a man that kept pictures of naked children, she would support people that are "different".

20 years later and you wish for us to believe that "now" this is true? But not back then.. We honestly Izzy will never know Michael Jackson. He sure was a true mis fit, his music was to die for "back then", loved it.

My opinion, if this was true he would have been in jaol in 2003.

My opinion, he hung with kids as he was mentally still one, couldn't get past it, hated his youth, his Father was a jerk. He felt safer around them.

And in that, he got the " money card, let's make money out of him".

That's my opinion.

Rolf Harris didn't get away, did he.

Sez you. From the original article.





Rolf Harris was tried in a British court.

I didn't think chai2 was defending Jackson, I thought she was criticizing the article about him.