Jump to content

The Axl Rose doesn't like Michael Jackson story


Recommended Posts

Ok, I believed the guys in Leaving Neverland but everyone is entitled to their opinion. A few things are possible:

1. Someone may not have the best timeline of events on things that happened as children.

2. Someone may lie under oath and it doesn’t mean they’re lying later.

3. Someone may be trying to get money out of a situation and they were abused. Those things are not mutually exclusive.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The relationship between Slash and Michael Jackson wasn't just professional but developed into a personal friendship: Slash: "[Michael Jackson] was great, you know? I mean, I know a lot of people

From what I remember, Axl made at least 2 negative comments about Michael Jackson: - the comment at the VMAs ("This has nothing to do with Michael Jackson" or something like that) - and a fe

Unless you have been there, shut the fuck up, quit talking out of your ass and stop pretending to know things you don't know shit about.

MJ, I just cannot say. I am not posting about him, but I can understand  why to Axl's thoughts way back  then on this one situation. MJ , main problem was having Yes People around and living in a Bubble. This paling , best buds with little boys should  have been a no for all obvious , common sense reasons from the beginning. Axl 's life is very similar  to MJs and Elvis with Yes People and living in a Bubble. No, of course, Axl never was buddies with kids  or lived in the Bubble to the extreme of MJ and Elvis. Thank goodness for NITL Tour because it broke his bubble in a sense even though all of his Yes People ( Dizzy, Del, TB) were there, but he is part of The Big3.  We know Duff,Slash could say yes or no to things and did not have to clock in to Axl as MJs staff had to and The Memphis Mafia revolved around whatever Elvis wanted.  MJ and Elvis were "It. "The Center. The Nucleus.  Someone mentioned Beta mothering him. I never got how in the hel1 one can mother someone of the same age group. To me, that sounded like Beta was like 20 years older,  old enough to be his mother. She is like  ,about 5 yrs or less older. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

@PatrickS77 my reference to Little White boys is that if they were little Black boys, aint no body would have said anything. Ex  R.Kelly and I will explain that later.. I am not referring to anyone here as racially biased , but to the industry. None of us knew, worked for MJ, or was in the industry. People on the inside saw and knew he is always around these kids. Odd.  Plus MJs  Yes People protecting him in his Bubble knew this was odd.  Oh, everybody on the inside knew about R.Kelly way back to having  teenaged girls around going back to mid 1990s. He and Aaliyah got married with  falsified papers upping her age  and a magazine then put it all out. No body said nothing.  Another example, Epstein situation  was a long known on the inside open secret. MJ, did he or didn't he...debatable.  R.Kelly, Epstein, no debate. I would like to see that show , another angle, on Amazon Prime, but I dont have Amazon Prime.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, PatrickS77 said:

And yes, it is very different. One is a falsely accused and the other is a criminal. A difference of night and day.

I meant what difference does it make literally, as in where is the difference to his life?  There ain’t none, he might as well have been guilty cuz he got treated like a pedo for the rest of his life.  This is precisely the point I’m trying to make, it could be argued that innocent and guilty only really matter in regards to you personally and how you sleep at night, after that its the courts (both the law courts and the court of public opinion) that makes a man guilty.  There’s many-a man I wager thats done his time having not done any crime and gone to his grave being considered a criminal when he was innocent as fuck.  
 

Ergo, try not to stitch yourself up cuz Michael really didn’t help himself with that interview.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2020 at 1:10 PM, SoulMonster said:

WELL THAT PROVES IT! I don't know what exactly it proves but definitely one of the following: Axl was convinced MJ was innocent/he just really admired MJ's singing/he wasn't aware that the little black kid in Jackson 5 was the same individual that years later would morph into the alien, malfigured, chalky creature with a fondness for sleeping with little boys that became MJ/he just liked that particular song.

Yeah I wasn't exactly saying this was definitive proof of anything, more an interesting tidbit. My personal take on it would be that it would show that Axl respects MJ as a musician. I would interpret this nod to MJ also meaning that, even if he did not respect the man, he would be able to separate music from the artist and still respect what he had accomplished in their shared profession. Surely if he considered MJ an abhorrence he wouldn't cover his song in a live environment?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, CAFC Nick said:

Yeah I wasn't exactly saying this was definitive proof of anything, more an interesting tidbit. My personal take on it would be that it would show that Axl respects MJ as a musician. I would interpret this nod to MJ also meaning that, even if he did not respect the man, he would be able to separate music from the artist and still respect what he had accomplished in their shared profession. Surely if he considered MJ an abhorrence he wouldn't cover his song in a live environment?

I was just taking the piss :)

And I agree with your analysis.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, LunsJail said:

Someone may lie under oath and it doesn’t mean they’re lying later.

The problem is that Mr. Robson in particular won't stop lying under oath and perjuring himself. He allegedly lied during MJ's trial back in 2005. Then just a few years back he sued MJ's estate and said a lot of things that he would later contradict in Leaving Neverland.

One of his depositions from 2016 has been making the rounds online since last year and that single video alone contains at least 4 contradictions to things he says in the documentary that began filming shortly after. 

Is he telling the truth in court? Is he telling the truth to HBO? Is he telling the truth at all??? TV is well known for dramatizing things but when you are recounting details of your alleged childhood molestation, you need to stick to the facts and not embellish the story.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, History2010 said:

Sadly. A lot of people aren't aware that the civil trial was approaching quickly while the criminal trial was lagging behind. He was going to have to give up his defense strategy just to save some money so he settled and waited for the criminal trial which ultimately never happened due to no evidence being found and Chandler's incorrect description. That situation inspired a change of law in California that dictates that a civil trial can no longer come before a criminal trial.

The Chandler's also stopped cooperating with the police after receiving the settlement. I guess they didn't want MJ to go to prison because he never actually did anything. They got the payday and rode off into the sunset 

Wow. I did not know those facts about his case. That is crazy a civil trial would come before a criminal trial.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23.6.2020 at 8:44 PM, Sweersa said:

Slash has a child named Cash? 

Wow, I expected better. Sounds like the name of trailer park baby, or the last name of a great country artist. Haha

Iirc it was Ronnie Wood who told Slash something like"you have to give your son the coolest name on earth... Cash", or something like this. So they named him Cash Anthony. Wood is also the Godfather for one of Slash's kids. London Emilio I think. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/25/2020 at 12:10 AM, The Holographic Universe said:

Wow. I did not know those facts about his case. That is crazy a civil trial would come before a criminal trial.

The Chandlers all also became completely estranged from one another afterwards. Evan actually hung himself shortly after MJ died and Jordan, in addition to refusing to testify against MJ in the 2005 trial, is pretty much confirmed to have told friends when he was at Uni that he was still a huge MJ fan. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a big MJ fan and an advocate to his innocence, based on the reasearch I did, that includes looking at old footage with mj and kids, analyzing it, reading transcripts, looking at the background of all the families that have spent time at Neverland and literally everything that happened, it is a FACT that Mj was innocent. 

The people that speak about Axl hating MJ for the allegations are complete idiots. 
MJ was accused in 1993.

Axl made that speech in 1992 at the VMA's.

Axl, as any other human being that has worked in showbiz, especially knowing the tabloids that were around him and Guns as well, wouldn't buy those stories. 

If you have more questions about MJ I can answer them, long story short, he never had a sexual attraction to kids.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21/06/2020 at 10:45 PM, DurhamGirl said:

He was proven innoccent by a court of law and he is not here to defend himself.

So were multiple people in the past who it turns out were disgusting human beings that go away with horrible things. 

I like Michael Jackson as a musician, I don't like that stuff normally but he was a master, Off the Wall is amazing. The circumstances of his upbringing were awful, child abuse, fame etc. He seemed to live a very sad life. 

But the evidence is pretty overwhelming at this stage. I'm not saying he is 100% guilty but on the balance it doesn't look good.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Use Your Delusion 1 said:

But the evidence is pretty overwhelming at this stage. I'm not saying he is 100% guilty but on the balance it doesn't look good.

No, it's not. What evidence are you talking about? There is none. Just lots of bullshit. And every accuser is problematic, shady and raises a red flag. None of them is trustworthy.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6.07.2020 at 9:02 PM, TheGeneral said:

While those dolls are actually creeping me out, I'd say let's see what weird stuff we all would have in our houses if we'd have Michael Jackson money.

An investigator told Radar Online: “He had disgusting and downright shocking images of child torture, adult and child nudity...”

Okaaaaay...

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Drexl said:

An investigator told Radar Online: “He had disgusting and downright shocking images of child torture, adult and child nudity...”

Okaaaaay...

What a crock of absolute fucking shit.

Radar Online are the lowest of the low and are about as reliable and trustworthy as Richard Fortus promising a new GNR album every year.

The so called child nudity was nothing more than an art book with photography including some images of kids with their tops off. Hardly child porn. There was tonnes of abstract, avant garde images in the book. Another page had a little girl blindfolded and tied up. These were taken by arthouse photographers, in a book which you can buy from Amazon and was one of thousands of books found during the 2003 raid on Neverland.

MJ was never found in possession of illegal pornography, he had eight computers and laptops seized and analysed and they found nothing but straight and lesbian porn.

If they had found anything sinister in terms of illegal illicit material, he would've been arrested on charges for it, which he never was.

Edited by Towelie
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Drexl said:

In 1994 he paid 23 million dollars to settle out of court. What a generous man.

His lawyers told him to do that and I think he went to rehab and focus on REAL problems instead.

As far as I know he regretted not going to court the first time around.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, TheGeneral said:

His lawyers told him to do that and I think he went to rehab and focus on REAL problems instead.

As far as I know he regretted not going to court the first time around.

But you'll admit that those Shirley Temple and Macaulay Culkin photos, the graphic showing Michael reading for a cluster
of kids, and all those dummies, are a little disturbing?

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Drexl said:

But you'll admit that those Shirley Temple and Macaulay Culkin photos, the graphic showing Michael reading for a cluster
of kids, and all those dummies, are a little disturbing?

Yeah, they creep me out. But Michael Jackson doesn't. As I said, we'd all have weird stuff at our houses with that kind of money. Even the hidden rooms he had, dude I'd have ten of those but still no intention of harming anyone. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TheGeneral said:

Yeah, they creep me out. But Michael Jackson doesn't. As I said, we'd all have weird stuff at our houses with that kind of money. Even the hidden rooms he had, dude I'd have ten of those but still no intention of harming anyone. 

I want to believe you. And I'll try.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Drexl said:

In 1994 he paid 23 million dollars to settle out of court. What a generous man.

You should watch a documentary called Square One 2.0. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Drexl said:

But you'll admit that those Shirley Temple and Macaulay Culkin photos, the graphic showing Michael reading for a cluster
of kids, and all those dummies, are a little disturbing?

Are you insinuating that he was sexually interested in Shirley Temple as well? Previously people were arguing that there was something suspicious or sinister about the fact that he supposedly only liked boys.

Not that I have much insight into the thinking of pedophiles, but I think it would be unusual for a practicing pedophile to have paintings like the fairytale one where he's reading a bedtime story to a bunch of children or the other one where the children are depicted with angel wings. Wouldn't it make it harder for you to molest children if that's how you see them? I think you'd be a lot more likely to find child pornography than pictures that emphasise the innocence of children if he really was a pedophile.

As for the dummies, not sure if it's any more disturbing than, say, a wax museum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

Are you insinuating that he was sexually interested in Shirley Temple as well? Previously people were arguing that there was something suspicious or sinister about the fact that he supposedly only liked boys.

Not that I have much insight into the thinking of pedophiles, but I think it would be unusual for a practicing pedophile to have paintings like the fairytale one where he's reading a bedtime story to a bunch of children or the other one where the children are depicted with angel wings. Wouldn't it make it harder for you to molest children if that's how you see them? I think you'd be a lot more likely to find child pornography than pictures that emphasise the innocence of children if he really was a pedophile.

As for the dummies, not sure if it's any more disturbing than, say, a wax museum.

I admire your optimism. Good for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...