barnett and michael Jackson - the comparison
My Opinion.
The life-blood of any thread is new posts, but in some cases, it’s blatantly obvious that people will feed the fire of any thread with provocative opinions designed purely to elicit reaction as well supporting whichever slime-ball they so choose.
If there’s gonna be an epitaph for this thread then I’m gonna write it for a few reasons not least of which is, barnett deserves nothing less than an appropriate send-off.
I will close this thread after I have posted this.
A year ago, barnett was a suspected attempted fraudster, we haven’t got a video of him putting all the pieces in their correct positions as a prelude to committing the final financial sleight of hand but circumstantially, the evidence suggested he had a case to answer, and still has.
There was only one reason and one reason only barnett had to do a soft-shoe shuffle and compile a set of accounts [checked by Walt Disney] and that was because p8ntballer.com were onto him and wouldn’t let go until he came up with some credible accounts – he was never able to do that in time.
And even when he finally produced some, those accounts bore all the hallmarks of a Mickey Mouse accountant ..they really were a joke.
And so the question arises, why on earth are some people so easily taken in by him in terms of ignoring his suspicious activities with other people’s donation money?
Good question, and I’m afraid only the people who are taken in by him can answer that one but we have seen this phenomenon before on a grander scale.
In my opinion, Michael Jackson was a paedophile, there were no videos or audio tapes of his crimes but circumstantially, handing over millions of dollars to that Jordan kid didn’t exactly back up his claims of innocence ... it stank.
But this isn’t the point I’m referring to here – even with this cloud of suspicion hanging conspicuously over jackson’s head, he still had thousands of fans turning up to cheer him on when at court - but there’s worse to come - an English woman was interviewed and she was asked what she felt about jackson’s case and she responded by saying 'it was all lies, it was made up blah blah blah' .... and then she was asked, would you allow your children to be looked after by jackson?
Her response was mind-blowing to say the least, she pronounced her undying faith in jackson by stating she would have ‘no problem’ with all of her kids being alone with him.
Now, I’ve got kids and I know for a fact that any caring parent would do everything they could to avoid any harm coming to their child especially if there was even a hint of danger, you just wouldn’t put your kids into a situation where they would encounter any risk of harm - and I maybe wrong here but the English woman who would have allowed her kids to be with jackson on their own, probably loved her children but somehow the prospect of danger was snuffed out even though the available evidence was such that it indicated his guilt.
I wonder if she would have been so willing to allow her kids to be looked after by some guy down the road she didn’t know and was facing paedophile charges .. we all know what would happen there ..
And so, why the fuhk are some idiots putting their trust in barnett? ... what is it that makes them draw a veil over his suspected involvement in that charity money appeal?
I think the sort of people who are taken in by someone like jackson are weak-minded and gullible and will believe everything that comes out of the mouths of individuals they look up to .. famous people, now, I’m not suggesting barnett is famous, he will eventually be infamous but that time isn’t upon us ...yet.
It’s a terrible indictment of modern society that in jackson’s case, his fame somehow managed to interfere with people’s decision making with respect to the welfare of their own kids. I can’t explain it or even understand it, I just know it happens.
As for barnett though, he’s only famous in his own mind but he managed to deflect people’s attention away from what he’d done, or rather not done, and turned the whole saga into a personal one by focusing on me ... I hadn’t misappropriated anyone’s money but that didn’t matter, I was an easy target in terms of representing the tourney scene and of course because barnett’s cabal of weak-minded gullibles weren’t exactly the sharpest knives in the draw ... most of them believed they could ingratiate themselves with barnett by coming onto my site and attacking me and I’m sure they achieved that aim.
And so this saga gained traction not because barnett was cleared, he wasn’t, but because I had become the focus of barnett’s gullible turds.
And what was my crime in all this?
I merely asked for the financial information that should have been available to him if he had been running a legitimate appeal fund .. that’s my crime, nothing more, nothing less !!!
