Barbra Streisand FINALLY issues a full apology for defending friend Michael Jackson

[snoop1130]

Barbra Streisand FINALLY issues a full apology for defending friend Michael Jackson

By LAUREN FRUEN and STEPHANIE HANEY

 

Barbra Streisand, 76, told British newspaper The Times that the two main subjects of documentary 'Leaving Neverland,' adults Wade Robson and James Safechuck, 'were thrilled to be there' as children and whatever happened to them 'didn't kill them'

 

Barbra Streisand has finally issued a full apology for defending friend Michael Jackson after claiming his two accusers 'wanted to be there'.

 

The legendary singer and actress, 76,  sparked an angry backlash Saturday after saying Jackson's 'sexual needs were his sexual needs' in a bizarre interview.

 

Following the outrage she then issued a statement which appeared to continue to blame the boys' parents.  

 

But the Oscar winner later posted a separate statement on Twitter which went far beyond her earlier words in which she elaborated on her published remarks saying she was 'profoundly sorry'.

 

Full Story: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6844941/Barbra-Streisand-FINALLY-issues-apology-defending-friend-Michael-Jackson.html

[ShortTimed]

What were the boys’ parents thinking when they would leave them unattended like that overnight?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Pilotman]

7 minutes ago, ShortTimed said:

What were the boys’ parents thinking when they would leave them unattended like that overnight?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Money 

[Curt1591]

Boy; I'm glad she finally cleared that up!

I think all these washed up, aged celebs should simply enjoy their senility in peace. 

Edited March 25, 2019 by Curt1591

[ShortTimed]

I haven’t read there is any evidence to support the allegations and one of the alleged victims gave sworn testimony that he had not suffered abuse.

 

Now MJ is long dead and cannot offer a defense.

 

And the alleged victims stand to make considerable damages, which is a motive to lie.

 

We live today in a culture that says the alleged victim is always right. Actually they don’t even say alleged, there is a default assumption any accusation is true.

 

Ofcourse, we all think MJ is a strange duck and so its easy for us to believe this but has there ever been any other corroborating evidence? Any other alleged victims stepping forward? Any diary from either boy? They never told anyone? That would sure help if they had anything at all to support their allegations. Something more than some TV program looking for ratings.

 

And there really is the question of why the boys own parents never once were concerned of foul play?

 

 

 

 

 

[BobBKK]

He's dead, they got paid, they need more money so they give it a second kicking. No sympathy for them, sue them for 100m and case closed.

[ShortTimed]

He's dead, they got paid, they need more money so they give it a second kicking. No sympathy for them, sue them for 100m and case closed.

 

Thats what it seems like to me.

 

So here is Barbara Streisand who was his long time close friend sticking up for him in the absence of any evidence to the contrary and the social media mob is trying to tear her limb from limb.

 

America just seems to be fully ruled by emotion anymore with no thought of consequence or fairness.

 

Did any of you read that story about the @TimesUp CEO who stepped down because her son was accused of sexual misconduct? Its a great story.

[direction BANGKOK]

If MJ was 100% innocent of ever touching a child, I still say he has been labeled correctly as a pedophile. You do not get to act like that and no be "guilty" in the public eye.

 

Bottom line, he was a pedophile, just like anybody would be if they admitted to sleeping with children. Best case scenario for MJ is he had horrendously poor judgement and for some reason he could not control his actions and behaviors around children. If you can't control yourself around children, and somehow manage to even admit to sleeping with them on national tv, then that is it... you are done. It is over at that point. Courts are different, but he was a pedophile.

 

Of course the new documentary presents the worst case scenario, and if you ask me the stories are quite compelling. You have the parents essentially ruining their lives in the documentary. If you have not seen it, watch it before you make up your mind. 

[ShortTimed]

If MJ was 100% innocent of ever touching a child, I still say he has been labeled correctly as a pedophile. You do not get to act like that and no be "guilty" in the public eye.
 
Bottom line, he was a pedophile, just like anybody would be if they admitted to sleeping with children. Best case scenario for MJ is he had horrendously poor judgement and for some reason he could not control his actions and behaviors around children. If you can't control yourself around children, and somehow manage to even admit to sleeping with them on national tv, then that is it... you are done. It is over at that point. Courts are different, but he was a pedophile.
 
Of course the new documentary presents the worst case scenario, and if you ask me the stories are quite compelling. You have the parents essentially ruining their lives in the documentary. If you have not seen it, watch it before you make up your mind. 

I agree its easy to believe he was child molester and I sure don’t say that is OK, but I just think its a dangerous environment when completely unsubstantiated allegations can be made that actually are the opposite of sworn testimony and nobody is saying thats not how American Justice works.
Nobody is skeptical or critical in this, its just hop on social media and say things that will get “likes”.

[spidermike007]

There seem to be alot of MJ apologists out there. Granted, the parents were a bit much to let their sons spend so much time with him. But, does a normal, healthy, non devious man sleep with young boys? And why did anyone think this behavior was "normal" or acceptable?

[ShortTimed]

There seem to be alot of MJ apologists out there. Granted, the parents were a bit much to let their sons spend so much time with him. But, does a normal, healthy, non devious man sleep with young boys? And why did anyone think this behavior was "normal" or acceptable?

I could care a less about MJ as an individual but I liked the Jackson Five. The expression apologist is either a way for those who use the expression to simplify things to a level they can understand or a way to marginalize and belittle.

I just wonder why no one wver stops for a moment and says, hey if they can tear this person down with no evidence and only accusation then that means they are setting up an environment where they can do the same to me or my sons or any male in my family.

Shouldn’t there be some concern that the new claims made by one of these guys is exactly the opposite of his sworn testimony? Does that not deserve even a small amount of hesitation?

Why were the parents so convinced that no assault was taking place that they had no concern allowing the Neverland sleepovers to occur?

Why is there not even one other alleged victim coming forward and saying this happened to me too? Or the usual types of actual evidence used in criminal investigations to support a claim such as friends/family saying the boys mentioned this to me at the time or they journaled it at the time?

I am not apologizing or making excuses for MJ. I am saying that when accusations are made and accepted by all members of a society without one shred of evidence that no member of society is safe from it happening to them.

I mentioned a victim advocacy group in an earlier message that highlights the dangers of always believe the victim and do not give the accused the chance to even replay.

A woman contracted with a man to provide her with a “spiritual massage” that included rubbing coconut oil over her fully naked body. When it was over she sent him a text thankyou saying how much she enjoyed it.

In the days following, she decided that he touched her in ways that made her uncomfortable and accused him of sexual assault.

Can you see the danger of accepting her story? Can you see maybe a few shortcomings with her accusation? Like why didn’t she speak up at the time and say this makes me uncomfortable? Or maybe she could put on some clothing? Lol.

So my concern is with a society that now accepts alleged victim statements without any burden of proof and when they contradict earlier statements that spoke approvingly and never gave even a hint of wrong-doing.

That is what my position is. If you can offer counterpoint to that then great but if you are going to insist on framing this as a MJ apologist then that is just a strawman construct.

[ShortTimed]

I guess part of what bothered me about this is that Barbara Streisand got attacked for defending her dead friend who was being attacked. Thats a character attribute where I come from.

 

It used to be that society would take context into account when someone said something disagreeable and if it was someone defending a friend then that loyalty had some merit even if there was disagreement. Especially when they are as old as Barbara. What harm was she doing?

 

I suppose she would have been better off when asked to comment to say MJ was her dear friend for many years and she had no further comment.

 

Although even that would probably be unacceptable to a social media victim society that insists everyone jump on their platform or else.

 

But as I look closer into this MJ history, I see there were more than just these two accusers over the years and that is some evidence that lends credibility to these more recent allegations.

 

One thing is certain...MJ was one strange dude.

Being cast into stardom as a little kid can sure do some damage. I am sure glad I was just an average kid.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

 

 

[smotherb]

19 hours ago, ShortTimed said:

What were the boys’ parents thinking when they would leave them unattended like that overnight?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Oh, maybe they were thinking what a wonderful experience for our son--in that wonderful place associating with that mega star. 

 

If they were wondering how much money they could get from Jackson for selling their sons for sex; I think they waited too long. 

[ShortTimed]

Oh, maybe they were thinking what a wonderful experience for our son--in that wonderful place associating with that mega star. 

 

If they were wondering how much money they could get from Jackson for selling their sons for sex; I think they waited too long. 

 

Maybe they were thinking what a wonderful experience for our son—in that wonderful place sleeping in the same bed with and snuggling up with that mega-star.

 

Yeah...sure.

[smotherb]

4 hours ago, ShortTimed said:

 

Maybe they were thinking what a wonderful experience for our son—in that wonderful place sleeping in the same bed with and snuggling up with that mega-star.

 

Yeah...sure.

So, you're convinced the parents were letting Jackson have sex with their children. Hmmm. So, Jackson had parental consent?

 

[direction BANGKOK]

8 minutes ago, smotherb said:

So, you're convinced the parents were letting Jackson have sex with their children. Hmmm. So, Jackson had parental consent?

 

I advise watching the documentary. It addresses this question rather well in my opinion. 

[Timbob]

6 hours ago, ShortTimed said:

I guess part of what bothered me about this is that Barbara Streisand got attacked for defending her dead friend who was being attacked. Thats a character attribute where I come from.

Friend or not, what she said was outrageous and deserved criticism.

 

You seem to have a lot to say on this subject, yet know very little. I recommend you watch 'Leaving Netherland' as it may help answer many of your questions. 

 

I was a MJ fan, but it's clear as day he was more than just a "strange dude". He was a massive nonce.

[smotherb]

43 minutes ago, direction BANGKOK said:

I advise watching the documentary. It addresses this question rather well in my opinion. 

Yeah, I guess I could, but documentaries can be fraught with inaccuracies and afterthoughts. After all, the intent of the developer is to cause interest in the documentary.

 

However, I have read several reviews and it appears to be the age-old case of star-struck children, over zealous stage mothers, and "shh, don't tell anyone, this is all about our love and nobody else would understand"  If I didn't know better I'd think Jackson was a priest. Perhaps it is simply chapter three in the pedophile's handbook.

[direction BANGKOK]

22 minutes ago, smotherb said:

Yeah, I guess I could, but documentaries can be fraught with inaccuracies and afterthoughts. After all, the intent of the developer is to cause interest in the documentary.

 

However, I have read several reviews and it appears to be the age-old case of star-struck children, over zealous stage mothers, and "shh, don't tell anyone, this is all about our love and nobody else would understand"  If I didn't know better I'd think Jackson was a priest. Perhaps it is simply chapter three in the pedophile's handbook.

I know what you mean. I was taking that kind of thing into consideration though. 

 

It is just too far fetched for me. Anything is possible, but you have mothers completely ruining their lives and credibility in the documentary. It is hard to believe a performance like all that would even be possible if it was all made up. 

 

Put it this way, any reasonable person would have some serious questions about this as a casual onlooker. In the documentary the questions do seem to get answered in very convincing ways however. 

[ShortTimed]

So, you're convinced the parents were letting Jackson have sex with their children. Hmmm. So, Jackson had parental consent?
 

I am not convinced of anything but I saw interviews where MJ admitted it at the time so the parents had full knowledge...they gave their consent for pajama parties with a 40-year old man.

Why? Your guess is as good as mine but $$$is usually on the short list.

[ShortTimed]

Friend or not, what she said was outrageous and deserved criticism.   You seem to have a lot to say on this subject, yet know very little. I recommend you watch 'Leaving Netherland' as it may help answer many of your questions. 

 

I was a MJ fan, but it's clear as day he was more than just a "strange dude". He was a massive nonce.

 

 

 She was asked her opinion and she has every right to it and there is some truth to what she said.

 

Defending friends isn’t on your list of loyalty I take it. MJ was cleared of wrongdoing in a court of law. Good for her for not throwing him under the bus.

 

The only two people with a right to question it were the alleged victims themselves. All these social media snowflakes should be focusing on their own shortcomings instead of being nosey nellies in other peoples lives.

 

 So watching a slanted TV show makes you an expert... Lol. He was tried in an actual court of law.

 

 

[Number 6]

I always detested her and every smarmy word utteted from that yap of hers. She's an absolutely shitty actress as well.

 

It would be one thing if the boys were fifteen, they were like five.

 

Michael Jackson became such a frightening figure. Even by late 90s he was well known for creppying on little boys. I find homosexual paedophiles five times more revolting personally. It's just the entirely next level of wrong. In Thailand these sorts of creepers outnumber the other ten to one.

[ShortTimed]

I always detested her and every smarmy word utteted from that yap of hers. She's an absolutely shitty actress as well.
 
It would be one thing if the boys were fifteen, they were like five.
 
Michael Jackson became such a frightening figure. Even by late 90s he was well known for creppying on little boys. I find homosexual paedophiles five times more revolting personally. It's just the entirely next level of wrong. In Thailand these sorts of creepers outnumber the other ten to one.

Yeah, I never cared for her either but I like those Jewish women who speak their mind.

[marcusarelus]

Barbra Streisand said the experience 'didn't kill' Michael Jackson accusers.  Shows what kind of person she is. 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2019/03/22/barbra-streisand-believes-jackson-accusers-but-it-didnt-kill-them/3251897002/

[ShortTimed]

Barbra Streisand said the experience 'didn't kill' Michael Jackson accusers.  Shows what kind of person she is. 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2019/03/22/barbra-streisand-believes-jackson-accusers-but-it-didnt-kill-them/3251897002/

 

She was right...(the alleged) it didn’t kill them.

 

America has a habit of encouraging a lifetime victim handicap in the heads of abuse survivors.

 

Maybe its better to encourage a survivor to accept what happened, encourage them to process it and to try to find some good to focus on...such as the fact they are alive to see another day.

 

Looking at this from her position, she was born a Jew in 1942. The holocaust continued until 1945. Her entire childhood through middle age immersed in a culture that was reeling from mass genocide. From violent sexual abuse and suffering. From entire families being wiped out and children being left orphaned. She watched Jewish victims pick up the remaining pieces of their shattered lives and move forward.

 

So maybe she has a point. Maybe these two “ alleged” victims should be happy they are still alive.

 

 

 

 

[spidermike007]

11 hours ago, ShortTimed said:

 

I could care a less about MJ as an individual but I liked the Jackson Five. The expression apologist is either a way for those who use the expression to simplify things to a level they can understand or a way to marginalize and belittle.

I just wonder why no one wver stops for a moment and says, hey if they can tear this person down with no evidence and only accusation then that means they are setting up an environment where they can do the same to me or my sons or any male in my family.

Shouldn’t there be some concern that the new claims made by one of these guys is exactly the opposite of his sworn testimony? Does that not deserve even a small amount of hesitation?

Why were the parents so convinced that no assault was taking place that they had no concern allowing the Neverland sleepovers to occur?

Why is there not even one other alleged victim coming forward and saying this happened to me too? Or the usual types of actual evidence used in criminal investigations to support a claim such as friends/family saying the boys mentioned this to me at the time or they journaled it at the time?

I am not apologizing or making excuses for MJ. I am saying that when accusations are made and accepted by all members of a society without one shred of evidence that no member of society is safe from it happening to them.

I mentioned a victim advocacy group in an earlier message that highlights the dangers of always believe the victim and do not give the accused the chance to even replay.

A woman contracted with a man to provide her with a “spiritual massage” that included rubbing coconut oil over her fully naked body. When it was over she sent him a text thankyou saying how much she enjoyed it.

In the days following, she decided that he touched her in ways that made her uncomfortable and accused him of sexual assault.

Can you see the danger of accepting her story? Can you see maybe a few shortcomings with her accusation? Like why didn’t she speak up at the time and say this makes me uncomfortable? Or maybe she could put on some clothing? Lol.

So my concern is with a society that now accepts alleged victim statements without any burden of proof and when they contradict earlier statements that spoke approvingly and never gave even a hint of wrong-doing.

That is what my position is. If you can offer counterpoint to that then great but if you are going to insist on framing this as a MJ apologist then that is just a strawman construct.

 

You make some good points. Hard to argue with such common sense and reason. 

[Timbob]

1 hour ago, ShortTimed said:

....He was tried in an actual court of law.

 

 

Not guilty does not equal innocence. 

[Timbob]

14 minutes ago, ShortTimed said:

 

She was right...(the alleged) it didn’t kill them.

 

America has a habit of encouraging a lifetime victim handicap in the heads of abuse survivors.

 

Maybe its better to encourage a survivor to accept what happened, encourage them to process it and to try to find some good to focus on...such as the fact they are alive to see another day.

Wow! Next you'll be saying they probably enjoyed it! 

[ShortTimed]

Not guilty does not equal innocence. 

Well it can equal innocence and it often equals innocence, but I will choose the findings of a court of law over a made for profit TV program any day. The former has an obligation to the truth.

In MJ case, the more I read, the harder it is to believe complete innocence...and we have seen an expensive defense team win a victory where none was deserved...so maybe you are right.

[ShortTimed]

Wow! Next you'll be saying they probably enjoyed it! 

Don’t be absurd.