The list of people, you want to avoid.

Toxic34

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2022
Messages
43
Points
18
Location
West Palm Beach, FL
Though there now is a growing wave of resentment at Diane Sawyer and calling her an unprofessional figure in her interviews of Michael, Janet, Lisa, Whitney Houston, Britney Spears, Ellen and the like, that she was more prosecutor than journalist, the strange thing is that when the she did the interview of Michael and Lisa together in '95, people thought she went too easy on them. That it was a PR-managed puff piece.

In fact, Howard Stern even went so far as to say, in his second book Miss America, that "if he really wanted to do a hard-hitting piece that was no holds barred and really prove his innocence, he would've let me interview him instead."

Can you imagine how that interview would've gone, between his continuous hectoring, speaking in the louchest terms possible, him and Robin Quivers continually sniggering at whatever Michael said? He would've been absolutely humiliated, and probably never given another interview in his life!

It's all well and good that Howard has mellowed out and is not so exhibitionist or seeking only shock value anymore, but he can't wash away his past.
 

staywild23

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2022
Messages
3,495
Points
113
Country
United-States
Though there now is a growing wave of resentment at Diane Sawyer and calling her an unprofessional figure in her interviews of Michael, Janet, Lisa, Whitney Houston, Britney Spears, Ellen and the like, that she was more prosecutor than journalist, the strange thing is that when the she did the interview of Michael and Lisa together in '95, people thought she went too easy on them. That it was a PR-managed puff piece.

In fact, Howard Stern even went so far as to say, in his second book Miss America, that "if he really wanted to do a hard-hitting piece that was no holds barred and really prove his innocence, he would've let me interview him instead."

Can you imagine how that interview would've gone, between his continuous hectoring, speaking in the louchest terms possible, him and Robin Quivers continually sniggering at whatever Michael said? He would've been absolutely humiliated, and probably never given another interview in his life!

It's all well and good that Howard has mellowed out and is not so exhibitionist or seeking only shock value anymore, but he can't wash away his past.

So interesting seeing this today, because I just yesterday had a big conversation with someone about how much an asshole Howard Stern is lol.

On a side note, a couple days ago I somehow ended up watching a David Letterman interview with Lindsay Lohan in 2013 in which it seems like he is actively trying to make her cry. Definitely hurt her in some way, humiliating her about her addiction. It was so messed up, but the whole audience is laughing. It made me think about how incredibly cruel the media is. It's always been terrible, but I think the cruelty inhumane treatment was out of control in the 90s and 2000s and Michael was at the center of so much of it. I understand why he didn't do more interviews. It is absolutely horrifying to imagine someone as kind and gentle and lovely as Michael even interacting with Howard Stern. Ugh.
 

Toxic34

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2022
Messages
43
Points
18
Location
West Palm Beach, FL
So interesting seeing this today, because I just yesterday had a big conversation with someone about how much an asshole Howard Stern is lol.

On a side note, a couple days ago I somehow ended up watching a David Letterman interview with Lindsay Lohan in 2013 in which it seems like he is actively trying to make her cry. Definitely hurt her in some way, humiliating her about her addiction. It was so messed up, but the whole audience is laughing. It made me think about how incredibly cruel the media is. It's always been terrible, but I think the cruelty inhumane treatment was out of control in the 90s and 2000s and Michael was at the center of so much of it. I understand why he didn't do more interviews. It is absolutely horrifying to imagine someone as kind and gentle and lovely as Michael even interacting with Howard Stern. Ugh.
Admittedly, even good people have done very out of character, shocking things. Letterman is a real nice, humble, and funny guy, but clearly he didn't think about what he was doing with Lindsay Lohan, especially because "Well, everyone's dissing her, I gotta keep up." Does that make him automatically bad? No, but it's likely something he probably regrets now.

I certainly don't believe in essentialism or absolutism, which some Michael defenders use, saying that anyone who even says anything mild against Michael is automatically evil. Helena of the Vindicating Michael blog called Ellen evil for believing Robson and Safechuck after LN, but that doesn't automatically make her so. (This was a year before, Ellen's disgrace, but of course she's nothing like what is being alleged, especially because it flies in the face of everything she's done and said since she came out 25 years ago, ever since she shed tears at the vigil of Matthew Shepard in 1998. You can't fake that.) Or saying that because Paul McCartney swallowed Robson and Safechuck's lies, that automatically makes him a bad person. It does nothing of the sort! It's certainly baffling that Paul would go into a "Who do you believe? Me or your lying eyes?" syndrome about someone he knew very intimately and worked with, even with the shock and surprise over the Beatles catalog, but it doesn't make him a bad person.
 

wendijane

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Messages
8,837
Points
113
New order? f that nasty man . ...ugh i am truly disappointed to read that i ...kind of ...not surprised though. i'm rolling my eyes at *age of consent*
Peter Hook-What a tool !!.
 

zinniabooklover

Proud Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2022
Messages
8,686
Points
113
New order? f that nasty man . ...ugh i am truly disappointed to read that i ...kind of ...not surprised though. i'm rolling my eyes at *age of consent*
Peter Hook-What a tool !!.
He's such a ****

As I said upthread, I never liked him as a musician so I wasn't disappointed but, yeah, it was grim reading that. But I know what you mean about not being surprised. It's that NME 'oh, we're so kewl' thing. Pathetic.
 
Last edited:

DangerousGal91

You know I'm bad 😎
Joined
Aug 13, 2022
Messages
747
Points
93
Location
The Neverlands 😉
Country
Netherlands
Admittedly, even good people have done very out of character, shocking things. Letterman is a real nice, humble, and funny guy, but clearly he didn't think about what he was doing with Lindsay Lohan, especially because "Well, everyone's dissing her, I gotta keep up." Does that make him automatically bad? No, but it's likely something he probably regrets now.

I certainly don't believe in essentialism or absolutism, which some Michael defenders use, saying that anyone who even says anything mild against Michael is automatically evil. Helena of the Vindicating Michael blog called Ellen evil for believing Robson and Safechuck after LN, but that doesn't automatically make her so. (This was a year before, Ellen's disgrace, but of course she's nothing like what is being alleged, especially because it flies in the face of everything she's done and said since she came out 25 years ago, ever since she shed tears at the vigil of Matthew Shepard in 1998. You can't fake that.) Or saying that because Paul McCartney swallowed Robson and Safechuck's lies, that automatically makes him a bad person. It does nothing of the sort! It's certainly baffling that Paul would go into a "Who do you believe? Me or your lying eyes?" syndrome about someone he knew very intimately and worked with, even with the shock and surprise over the Beatles catalog, but it doesn't make him a bad person.
I admittedly get very fiery sometimes (yeah, I'm aware of it...) but what I'm mostly angry about isn't necessarily the individuals who believe the allegations (though sometimes I am, depending on the case) but rather the whole situation surrounding it all. Just... the fact that this mockumentary was made and has manipulated the public at large to this extent. I guess I'm also just frustrated that so many people have a tendency to take accusations at face value; they always rebuke with "believe all victims" and technically speaking, I agree with that statement - but they usually completely forget that not every accuser is an actual victim. Sometimes they're liars, opportunists, scammers... You name it. I see no reason to disbelieve actual victims, but I rarely form a final opinion in cases like this until anything is proven, and/or if the allegations are credible (which in the case of Michael, with the knowledge I have now, they really aren't, plus no evidence was found at the time anyway).

Though thankfully Michael still has a lot of supporters (including basically this entire board), and if I ever encounter a fence-sitter (like I myself used to be), I'll convince them of his innocence with the things I had found along the way. Because if a former doubter such as myself can be convinced, so can others, I feel. (It's of course different with those who hate on Michael just for the sake of it, because they're vicious, awful people; I've seen them, they don't care about justice, they're just nasty individuals who use faux-justice as a smokescreen to make themselves look good. I avoid them like the plague instead, and block them whenever I can.)
 

wendijane

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Messages
8,837
Points
113
It's that NME 'oh, we're so kewl' thing. Pathetic.
Exactly , and their being was nothing more than tabloid tripe. If i remember correctly these ones were always using the wj word .
Always using "in movement " pictures , totally obsessed with attacking his beauty.
and f'ing oct 2 1993 - ill never forgive them for their beyond tacky journalism.
 

Toxic34

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2022
Messages
43
Points
18
Location
West Palm Beach, FL
I admittedly get very fiery sometimes (yeah, I'm aware of it...) but what I'm mostly angry about isn't necessarily the individuals who believe the allegations (though sometimes I am, depending on the case) but rather the whole situation surrounding it all. Just... the fact that this mockumentary was made and has manipulated the public at large to this extent. I guess I'm also just frustrated that so many people have a tendency to take accusations at face value; they always rebuke with "believe all victims" and technically speaking, I agree with that statement - but they usually completely forget that not every accuser is an actual victim. Sometimes they're liars, opportunists, scammers... You name it. I see no reason to disbelieve actual victims, but I rarely form a final opinion in cases like this until anything is proven, and/or if the allegations are credible (which in the case of Michael, with the knowledge I have now, they really aren't, plus no evidence was found at the time anyway).
I'm sure you can certainly agree that the way Me Too is danger of being hijacked by bad faith actors and extremist firebrands all too willing to believe them is quite a problem. True, only 5-10 percent of allegations overall are false, but that small minority is becoming all the more visible right now, especially in the cases of figures like Johnny Depp and Marilyn Manson. After all, Michael got a lot of visceral hatred and smears, but of course he's not unique. Johnny and Manson are arguably on the receiving end of what Michael endured in his lifetime, especially in the 2000s.

This is why we all have to come to a reckoning and figure out standards for the movement to survive and actually help all victims.
 

fraroc04

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2016
Messages
163
Points
28
I'm sure you can certainly agree that the way Me Too is danger of being hijacked by bad faith actors and extremist firebrands all too willing to believe them is quite a problem. True, only 5-10 percent of allegations overall are false, but that small minority is becoming all the more visible right now, especially in the cases of figures like Johnny Depp and Marilyn Manson. After all, Michael got a lot of visceral hatred and smears, but of course he's not unique. Johnny and Manson are arguably on the receiving end of what Michael endured in his lifetime, especially in the 2000s.

This is why we all have to come to a reckoning and figure out standards for the movement to survive and actually help all victims.
Johnny Depp is interesting because in a sense, he became the new Michael Jackson. Someone who was the victim of false abuse allegations which the vast majority of the media and Hollywood believed the accuser, Amber Heard without question leading to Johnny losing movie deals and being removed from the Pirates of the Carribbean franchise in future installments. Only differences being is that Johnny Depp is white (there absolutley was a racial element to why MJ was so reviled) and that he's alive to defend himself against these bullshit accusations. That's why I keep telling people that Michael Jackson was basically the Johnny Depp of yesteryear.
 

Toxic34

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2022
Messages
43
Points
18
Location
West Palm Beach, FL
Johnny Depp is interesting because in a sense, he became the new Michael Jackson. Someone who was the victim of false abuse allegations which the vast majority of the media and Hollywood believed the accuser, Amber Heard without question leading to Johnny losing movie deals and being removed from the Pirates of the Carribbean franchise in future installments. Only differences being is that Johnny Depp is white (there absolutley was a racial element to why MJ was so reviled) and that he's alive to defend himself against these bullshit accusations. That's why I keep telling people that Michael Jackson was basically the Johnny Depp of yesteryear.
All certainly true enough.

In any event, I'm trying, and so far not succeeding, to get interest, on this forum, over the following: https://www.mjjcommunity.com/thread...featuring-mj-im-working-on-interested.201041/
 

Toxic34

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2022
Messages
43
Points
18
Location
West Palm Beach, FL
Another place you might want to avoid is VH Links.


The forum, which is set up as a forum for fans of Van Halen, is dominated by an alt-right bias, and they do nothing but attack Michael viciously, as well as fill it, in their "Political Underground" thread, a massive build up of alt-right conspiracy and anti-Democrat slander.

They even go so far as to claim that Pete Townshend of The Who is a predator who "got caught," despite the fact that the Metropolitan Police confirmed his account. According to them, no one ever "does research" about these things. So in other words, any police officer that goes undercover on these sites to break them up are just actually perverts in disguise.
 

fraroc04

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2016
Messages
163
Points
28
Another place you might want to avoid is VH Links.


The forum, which is set up as a forum for fans of Van Halen, is dominated by an alt-right bias, and they do nothing but attack Michael viciously, as well as fill it, in their "Political Underground" thread, a massive build up of alt-right conspiracy and anti-Democrat slander.

They even go so far as to claim that Pete Townshend of The Who is a predator who "got caught," despite the fact that the Metropolitan Police confirmed his account. According to them, no one ever "does research" about these things. So in other words, any police officer that goes undercover on these sites to break them up are just actually perverts in disguise.
Van Halen is my favorite band of all time and I've known for ages that place is an absolute cesspit
 

Toxic34

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2022
Messages
43
Points
18
Location
West Palm Beach, FL
Van Halen is my favorite band of all time and I've known for ages that place is an absolute cesspit
You have your own experiences there?

By the way, it's not just the continuous hatred of Michael and the continual slamming of anyone that's not libertarian or Republican there that makes it toxic. Even when they stick solely to Van Halen-related topics, it gets nasty, especially the whole "Do you like David Lee Roth or Sammy Hagar more?" or especially a lot of attacks on Eddie Van Halen himself, because of the whole tabloid war of words between him and his two frustrating errant lead singers. Basically it's all "Everything Ed ever said about those two is a lie, especially in 1996," and I've been slammed continuously, as a Democrat, as a defender of Michael, and even as a defender of Eddie in saying "I believe him and his version of events, because it makes the most sense." What, just because he had a roller coaster life regarding booze and he literally smoked himself to death even after losing part of his tongue, that means everything he ever said is invalid?
 

DangerousGal91

You know I'm bad 😎
Joined
Aug 13, 2022
Messages
747
Points
93
Location
The Neverlands 😉
Country
Netherlands
Meanwhile Eddie worked with Michael on one of his most groundbreaking songs to boot. He even refused to be paid for his work. But apparently showing respect to one of the most important artists he ever worked with is simply too much for his "fans".

I guess some people are just bitter edgelords who hate for the sake of hating. I really can't imagine how that makes a person happy in any way.
 

Toxic34

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2022
Messages
43
Points
18
Location
West Palm Beach, FL
Meanwhile Eddie worked with Michael on one of his most groundbreaking songs to boot. He even refused to be paid for his work. But apparently showing respect to one of the most important artists he ever worked with is simply too much for his "fans".

I guess some people are just bitter edgelords who hate for the sake of hating. I really can't imagine how that makes a person happy in any way.
To be fair, even his own band were gobsmacked at the fact that A) Eddie didn't tell them he did the song before it came out, and B) he didn't want to be paid. David Lee Roth specifically said, "You're an idiot, Ed! YOU made that song what it is, not Michael. You're the one who should get the credit, you should've been paid, you should have the royalties!" Apparently many never got, and still never have gotten, the fact that Eddie simply just loved music for its own sake, and that that very fact, along with the fact he may very well have been on the autistic spectrum (I see a lot of myself in him), may be why he could never truly get along or be friends with either Dave or Sammy, why those collaborations crumbled over time.
 

fraroc04

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2016
Messages
163
Points
28
You have your own experiences there?

By the way, it's not just the continuous hatred of Michael and the continual slamming of anyone that's not libertarian or Republican there that makes it toxic. Even when they stick solely to Van Halen-related topics, it gets nasty, especially the whole "Do you like David Lee Roth or Sammy Hagar more?" or especially a lot of attacks on Eddie Van Halen himself, because of the whole tabloid war of words between him and his two frustrating errant lead singers. Basically it's all "Everything Ed ever said about those two is a lie, especially in 1996," and I've been slammed continuously, as a Democrat, as a defender of Michael, and even as a defender of Eddie in saying "I believe him and his version of events, because it makes the most sense." What, just because he had a roller coaster life regarding booze and he literally smoked himself to death even after losing part of his tongue, that means everything he ever said is invalid?
I swear Van Halens biggest haters are sometimes their own damn fans.
 

Agonum

Moving Violation
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
443
Points
63
Country
Sweden
Thanks

Oprah Winfrey
Eminem
Rupert Everett
Jarvis Cocker
Daniel Radcliffe
James Cordon
Gene Simmons
Katt Williams
Robin Williams
Joan Rivers
George Michael
Cher
Jimmy Kimmel
Diane Diamond
Peter King
Ricky Gervais
Russell Brand
Ultimate Warrior
Frankie Boyle

Peter King is truly disgusting!!!!
Haven’t heard Ricky say anything bad.
 

Agonum

Moving Violation
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
443
Points
63
Country
Sweden
Oprah Winfrey
Eminem
Rupert Everett
Jarvis Cocker
Daniel Radcliffe
James Cordon
Gene Simmons
Katt Williams
Robin Williams
Joan Rivers
Cher
Jimmy Kimmel
Diane Diamond
Peter King
Ricky Gervais
Russell Brand
Ultimate Warrior
Frankie Boyle
Rosie O'Donnell
Nancy Grace
Gloria Allred
Lisa Bloom
Family Guy
Howard Stern
Chris Evans (UK Radio DJ)
Jamie Foxx
Patsie Kensit
Bob Geldof
Priscilla Presley
Chris Rock
Sheryl Crow
Wade Robson
Jimmy Safechuck
Mayte Garcia
Lil Wayne
Richard Marx
It seems to me you go by hearsay more than not. No one is gonna take that list seriously if the people on it aren’t well sourced for being on there.
 

Agonum

Moving Violation
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
443
Points
63
Country
Sweden
Yuuuup a spinless :censored: no doubt, I would also add some more names to the list, since I have the memory of an elephant, when it comes to remembering the celebs who trashed MJ when he was alive, and afterwards when he died.

Quincy Jones
Mick Hucknell from Simply Red (he claimed that Evan Chandlier was his dentist and believed that MJ was guilty)
Charlamagne tha God
Barbra Walters
Michael Che from SNL
Samantha Mumba
Harvey Winestein
Jack Black
Jonathan Ross
Grahame Norton
Rabbi Shmuley
Rose McGowan
Marilyn Manson
Uri Geller
Diane Sawyer
Bill O'Reilly
50 Cent
Drew Barrymore when she was one Watch What Happens Live with Andy Cohen dissing Neverland https://www.lipstickalley.com/threa...e-neverland-ranch-on-wwhl-last-night.1511511/
Lionel Ritchie
George Lopez
Sam Smith
Gayle King
Timberland
Deepak Chopra
Arnie Klien and Jason Pffeifer
Martin Bashir
Jake Tapper
Matt Fiddes
Mark Lester
Michael McIntyre
Rebel Wilson
Dave Chappelle
Sharon Osborne
Chelsea Handler
Bill Cosby
Roseanne Barr
David Spade
Kathy Griffin
Jay Leno
Elton John "I'd be dead by now (if I had not gotten sober) or a fruitcake like Michael Jackson or Prince" (Rush & Malloy in the New York Daily News, August 22, 2001)
Jane Fonda
Ricky Martin
Scott Thorson (Liberace's Ex)
Joseph Fiennes
La Reid
Kurt Loder
Alec Baldwin
Ta-Nehisi Coates
Conrad Murray
Guns N’ Roses’ Ex-Manager Doug Goldstein
John Legend and his wife
Quincy Jones, Lionel Richie and Elton John?! So what, you are going to avoid these people based on what?

George is getting upset!
 

Agonum

Moving Violation
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
443
Points
63
Country
Sweden
I forgot to add Motley Crue and in particular Nikki Sixx http://neon-lights.info/news/nikki-sikss-o-maykle-dzheksone-on-sdoh-i-teper-deti-v-bezopasnosti

Nikki Sixx has went off on his Twitter account posting several comments about Michael Jackson. Sixx posted the following tweets in the last few hours.

Nikki Sixx:
We're gonna attempt something thats never been done on radio on @sixxsense and try a seance to reach MJ.I hope hes not too busy at heavens children s hospital...

Nikki Sixx:
10 YEARS SOBER,FATHER OF 4,MULTIPLE BUSINESSES,SUCCESSFUL IN ALL MY VENTURES ( MOTLEY,SIXX AM,SIXX SENSE,PHOTOGRAPHER & ROYAL UNDERGROUND.) HOW DARE YOU INSULT ME BY SAYING I AM ON DRUGS OR DRINKING FOR HAVING AN OPINION ABOUT A CREEP **** WHO IN MY OPINION RAPED CHILDREN.LAST I CHECKED WERE IN AMERICA, AND I AM NKKI SIXX OF MOTLEY CRUE AND DONT TAKE ORDERS FROM KNOW BODY.READ MY BOOKS,LISTEN TO THE LYRICS.

NikkiSixx Nikki Sixx
WHAT A GREAT NIGHT...TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE WHO DONT DESERVE TO BE ALIVE FOR THE CRUELTY THEY INFLICTED ON CHILDREN...THE LIST IS LONGGGGGGG
10 hours ago

Nikki Sixx:
****ING MARKTING_RT@NikkiSixx Funny how MJ was seen as a child molester when he was alive and when he passed he was an "inspiration" all of a sudden

NikkiSixx Nikki Sixx
HES DEAD AND KIDS ARE SAFE FROM HIMRT @NikkiSixx What's up with all the MJ tonight?
7 hours ago


Since that tirade in 2011, Paris responded to Nikki and they invited her to some of their shows etc, and then a couple of years later he went right back to bashing MJ on his radio show and on twitter again!

original.png



What, no groupies? Nikki Sixx talks about the new Crue on the road http://legacy.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/features/20050522-2109-summertour-motleycrue.html

AP: What do you read when you're on tour?

Sixx: Well, I am CNN junkie, Court TV junkie, I am also a newspaper junkie. I actually ask the audience different headline things. Recently, it's been, Michael Jackson, innocent or guilty?

AP: And what is the consensus of Motley Crue fans on Michael Jackson's guilt or innocence?

Sixx: It's amazing hearing 20,000 people all say "Guilty" in unison.
This list entry is totally valid, I’ll give you that.
 

Agonum

Moving Violation
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
443
Points
63
Country
Sweden
I loved Mike's response to that which was ''I've been an artist most of my life, and I've never attacked another fellow artist. Great artists don't do that. You don't have to do that''
I also loved Stevie Wonder’s respone. Steve’s a real friend!
 

Agonum

Moving Violation
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
443
Points
63
Country
Sweden
"Elton John "I'd be dead by now (if I had not gotten sober) or a fruitcake like Michael Jackson or Prince" (Rush & Malloy in the New York Daily News, August 22, 2001)"

I honestly don't know why people like this guy so much. So overrated. Didn't write most of his songs. And is bitter against Madonna for no apparent reason. Both MJ and Prince were super talented geniuses. Elton plays the piano. No comparison.
»Didn't write most of his songs« – are you kidding? The guy’s an absolute star. You’re making a mountain out of a molehill with that Elton quote. Michael and Elton understood and respected each other very much (see the Blood on the Dance Floor dedication).
 

Toxic34

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2022
Messages
43
Points
18
Location
West Palm Beach, FL
I swear Van Halens biggest haters are sometimes their own damn fans.

It's ruefully funny these people (and to be fair, a number of "standard" VH fans) look at Eddie as a conniving, Machiavellian figure. If anything, his real sin was blunt honesty and being tactless about it. I certainly consider that more consistent and believable than whatever Dave and Sammy have said, given how often they (but especially Sammy) contradict themselves:


This is how I will always remember Eddie, like this:
 
Top