Cinema is not a valid reference source, even “documentaries” aren’t required to be 100% true.
FFS, even penguins were propagandized for generations before the public was allowed to learn that they’re ridiculously homocidal rapists, etc. 🤷🏼♂️ The latter came from the field journals penned during the first excursion through their territories, way back when. The cover up that swiftly followed said expedition’s report was bankrolled by the running class & its academic policy makers.
Neither is Wikipedia. It’s even less trustworthy outside of America because of the strong bias toward the US narrative. But fuck all of you that defend the child molester Michael Jackson. May you never know what if felt like for all his victims. No, sleeping in the same bed with minors and having them be in underwear is not appropriate and is paedophilia. So fuck you .
Not accounting for the international conspiracy to cover up penguin behavior characteristics, the film interviews two men who were boys at the time as well as their family, friends, and archival materials.
Eyewitness testimony is legally valid, and it’s hard to imagine two different people had the same story, but the other - 50? 100? kids didn’t.
The film says it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and demands the bloody underwear be retrieved out of the trash before the cops find it like a duck.
He was phenomenally talented, there’s no doubt. But very troubled as well, and part of that was sexualizing young boys.
Again, you seem to be founding a lot on outdated and/or debunked views/methods like eyewitness testimony, and I’m hoping you take your experience from this thread to make some changes, fellow pleb. 🙇🏼♂️
Cinema is not a valid reference source, even “documentaries” aren’t required to be 100% true.
FFS, even penguins were propagandized for generations before the public was allowed to learn that they’re ridiculously homocidal rapists, etc. 🤷🏼♂️ The latter came from the field journals penned during the first excursion through their territories, way back when. The cover up that swiftly followed said expedition’s report was bankrolled by the running class & its academic policy makers.
Neither is Wikipedia. It’s even less trustworthy outside of America because of the strong bias toward the US narrative. But fuck all of you that defend the child molester Michael Jackson. May you never know what if felt like for all his victims. No, sleeping in the same bed with minors and having them be in underwear is not appropriate and is paedophilia. So fuck you .
Not accounting for the international conspiracy to cover up penguin behavior characteristics, the film interviews two men who were boys at the time as well as their family, friends, and archival materials.
Eyewitness testimony is legally valid, and it’s hard to imagine two different people had the same story, but the other - 50? 100? kids didn’t.
The film says it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and demands the bloody underwear be retrieved out of the trash before the cops find it like a duck.
He was phenomenally talented, there’s no doubt. But very troubled as well, and part of that was sexualizing young boys.
“Legal” ≠ “factually correct”, though. ☝🏼
Again, you seem to be founding a lot on outdated and/or debunked views/methods like eyewitness testimony, and I’m hoping you take your experience from this thread to make some changes, fellow pleb. 🙇🏼♂️
Seriously you people are way up in that tree with no interest at all in getting down, so. Ok. Have fun thinking MJ didn’t rape boys.
OJ wasn’t guilty either right
Point of order: it’s you that seems to get really excited about exactly that. Par for the course, though. 🤣
I just like the truth. And it’s the truth.