Disqus - Latest Comments for antoinetteK

Re: Soon, a documentary on Michael Jackson- Hindustan Times

antoinetteK — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 11:35:49 -0000

Dear MJ - if you can hear me from up there - don't worry about what they say - WE KNOW THE TRUTH. Long live the king. RIP MJ.

Re: Soon, a documentary on Michael Jackson- Hindustan Times

antoinetteK — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 11:32:09 -0000

Hey Skylar - why don't you look it up if you have the time. A LOT OF TIME. Michael did a lot for thousands of people and paid for it from his OWN POCKET. He visited a hospital and saw a sick child that needed a liver transplant - he was dying. Michael vowed that he would not let him die and he sent people all over the world to search for a liver which they found and the boy had the transplant and is alive today thanks to Michael. All at his own expense - which was millions of dollars by the way. Some people have money but they spread it around - Elvis was the same - a kind hearted generous man. These men deserve respect. Michael did so much more than that but do you really care? Or are you just interested in hearing negative things about Michael?

Re: Soon, a documentary on Michael Jackson- Hindustan Times

antoinetteK — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 11:26:33 -0000

I don't know why Michael's family don't sue this guy. I would sue him for millions and then watch him grovel. Dirt - synonomous with halperin.

Re: Soon, a documentary on Michael Jackson- Hindustan Times

antoinetteK — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 11:21:59 -0000

Hi V.Drumbakis - nothing Ian Halperin has to say about Michael is true. He is a liar and a thief like all the others who tried to strip Michael of his dignity and the truth has nothing to do with anything Ian claims about Michael. It is funny how only those who have a book to sell or a documentary or have a lot of money to make come out and say these false things about Michael yet those who knew him well and others who met him say the exact opposite. Michael was not gay and he was most definitely not a child molester. Only subscribe to what reliable people have to say and don't wait for dumbasses like Halperin for anything.

Re: Soon, a documentary on Michael Jackson- Hindustan Times

antoinetteK — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 11:14:15 -0000

OH NO, here we go again. Halperin - another money grabbing 'hanger onner' that thinks he knows everything about Michael Jackson. Please spare us, THE FANS, and Michael Jackson's family - particularly the kids - this pretentious piece of rubbish. We don't need your documentary we already know the truth about Michael Jackson. Of course you don't care as there will no doubt be a lot of money involved here Ian. The family 'know about it' but no mention of whether or not they support it. I for one and my family of 5 will not be watching. When Geraldin Hughes or Aphrodite Jones decide to make a documentary - then I might be interested but until then - goodbye. Rest In Peace Michael.

Re: Michael Jackson

antoinetteK — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 06:56:00 -0000

Michael had such hope in Lisa-Marie. He really believed she was going to bare his children from the sounds of that last statement. I wish she hadn't deceived him about that and I wish they had had children together. At least then he would not have had to find surrogate mothers and get accused of not fathering his own children. What he had to endure was unfair and cruel. He was a good person - maybe he had issues with his looks, hence the plastic surgery, but he was an incredible human being. Too good for Lisa-Marie and the rest of us. RIP MJ. God bless your children for your sake.

Re: Miracle in Egypt - Buried Children Saved By Jesus

antoinetteK — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:34:17 -0000

Don't blame you for being angry but hey - Muslims have done their fair share of lying. Anway, real Christians don't fall for this crap.

Re: Miracle in Egypt - Buried Children Saved By Jesus

antoinetteK — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:30:14 -0000

Totally agree with you. This is not a parable and it does not have the ring of 'truth' to it. Many times well meaning individuals resort to this kind of story telling thinking that they will promote faith but instead they do the opposite. God and Jesus do not need this, their work and their miracles speak for themselves. They are evident in every day life. Those who need miracles to believe are not faithful, neither would they believe even if they saw.

Re: Perez Hilton’s Despicable Michael Jackson Coverage Creates Backlash

antoinetteK — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 01:18:44 -0000

Sorry, my comment earlier in the 3rd sentence I meant to say "just because someone accuses you of something it does not make you guilty - yes? Just because a court lets you off - that does not mean you're innocent either so neither argument can be used to prove MJ's innocence but the FACTS CAN!
I just feel so frustrated I forget to check the grammar before posting.

Re: Perez Hilton’s Despicable Michael Jackson Coverage Creates Backlash

antoinetteK — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 01:12:03 -0000

Oh my Goodness I can't take this cr**p no more. When will you people look at the evidence - it is not hard! Just because someone accuses you of something does not make you innocent - yes? Just because a court lets you off - that does not mean you're innocent either so neither argument can be used to prove MJ's innocence but the FACTS CAN! The media frenzy surrounding the first allegation made MJ's legal team and Insurance company think it was impossible for any Jury to return a fair verdict at the time which is why they forced Michael Jackson to settle out of court. He did not want to at first, he wanted to fight the allegations but even the court was against him by allowing a 'civil' suit to go ahead before the criminal one. As all of us 'educated' people know, the burden of proof in a 'criminal' case lies on the prosecution but that is not the case in a civil suit. The burden of proof required in a civil suit requires that the plaintiff (the accuser) prove their version of the facts is “more than likely” to be true. This burden of proof varies greatly from the one required in a criminal case. If the civil suit was allowed to go ahead, then only a majority of the jury need believe the allegations and Michael would have lost. Given the biased reporting of the media, it would have been extremely difficult to find a jury that was not affected by it. In hindsight it would have been better for Michael to go to court, he would have won, but given the situation at the time and the apparent willingness of the court to go against Michael, he was forced to accept the recommendations. It was already affecting his health (as it would anyone). That is the only reason the Insurance company decided to settle - it was not Michael's decision as people tend to think. The second time around Michael was not going to give up so easily. He took it to court, presented his defence and it was easy to see his innocence - the liers were so transparent it was not hard to see their true motives. The court saw it, the jury saw it and while the verdict was being announced "INNOCENT" which is the perfect word to describe Michael, at that moment, the media had already decided that he was definitely going to get a guilty verdict. I remember watching an American news channel at the time and a female journalist was making a bet that Michael would be "GUILTY". I am sure she was sacked that day. It is not the MJ fans that should irritate, it is the ignorance that always seems to be a characteristic of the anti-Michael comments. I have yet to see one that is legitimately backed by facts. If you are interested in learning about the truth, read Redemption by Geraldine Hughes and The Michael Jackson Conspiracy by Aphrodite Jones. At least read them as well as the garbage you are reading now and judge for yourself. By the way, that documentary, Michael Jackson "What Really Happened" if full of crap that is easily disproved.

Re: Perez Hilton’s Despicable Michael Jackson Coverage Creates Backlash

antoinetteK — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 00:37:46 -0000

Hi "Freddy". I find it difficult to understand people like you who have the hide to criticize fans of Michael Jackson and making claims as if they were fact. Your ignorance must be blissful to you but it is shocking to us. Everyone knows that NO CHILD PORNOGRAPHY WAS FOUND IN ANY OF MICHAEL JACKSON'S PROPERTIES, even though they were seached while he was away. What they found was deemed by a Jury and the court as "completely innocent". Do some of your own research instead of relying on TABLOID FAECES for your source of news. The only reason Michael Jackson was not charged was that they could not find one shred of evidence to support those claims that were made by two money grubbing families who took Michael's generosity and repaid him with a dagger in the back. I was not a huge Michael Jackson fan but I was intelligent enough to have recognised the rubbish that was reported by a very biased media for the sake of RATINGS. Am I being slow enough for you or do you need a dictionary? If you are intelligent enough you can read some real facts, like the court transcripts that reveal how the so called 'victims' dug their own holes by lying and they were so easily discredited that many who went to convict Michael actually came out supporting him because of the blatant lies that they heard and saw. It is too much to write about here, it would take someone who cares about the truth to actually see it. You are just a waste of time.

Re: Perez Hilton’s Despicable Michael Jackson Coverage Creates Backlash

antoinetteK — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 00:19:39 -0000

You are both a bit too full of your own importance.

Re: Perez Hilton’s Despicable Michael Jackson Coverage Creates Backlash

antoinetteK — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 00:15:15 -0000

I'm sorry but speak for yourself. I for one never laughed at the jokes and I always thought they were disgusting. I never believed the lies and have always stuck by him. I am sure there are many others like me so if you think what you said is so important - then think again. When someone dies as he did it is heartbreaking and it does make people reflect. It is human nature and I am sure you have done it too.

Re: Michael Jackson and web traffic.

antoinetteK — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 19:48:39 -0000

Michael Jackson was not a paedophile and anyone who followed his case closely, fan or no fan, even the experts came to that conclusion. You may think his behaviour was bizaar or weird but that does not make him a child molestor. The first child refused to testify against Michael and didn't even make the claims himself at first it was his 'wannabe' producer father. If it was your son who was molested you would not accept any amount of money but would want the accuser to go to jail. There were many circumstances surrounding the decision to pay the money, Michael wanted to fight it but he was ill advised by his then wife, lawyers and insurance company. He learned that lesson and was not about to let that happen to him again the second time when he did decide to fight it in court. There was not one shred of evidence found by a very determined police prosecutor and had they found any evidence, they would not have required permission from anyone to charge Michael. That is an offence that would have to be punished regardless. So get your facts right before you pass judgement. This is exactly why Michael was pushed to the edge in the first place.

Re: Michael Jackson and web traffic.

antoinetteK — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 19:36:42 -0000

Many of us fans do point the finger at ourselves but I for one am sorry that I did abandone Michael Jackson during those years he needed to be believed. I was not fanatical and did not follow the story of his life until now. The reason I am so fascinated by him is because I had not realised that he was actually innocent of those child molestation charges until now. I had not really looked into it or read anything or even watched anything. I only heard about it on the news or in passing the newspaper stands etc. I didn't even believe it at first but I began to wonder why these things were happening to him, not realising the actual facts of the events. When he did it effected me in a way that really surprised me. I did not know that I cared so much. That is when I began to dig up articles and read the transcripts of the court cases and watch the interviews and that is when I realised he was innocent and was a victim of tabloid vilification. I felt deeply sad for him. The only tragic thing about his life was that that was all the media wanted us to see. There was a lot of good things in his life too and I believe he was a strong willed individual who naievely trusted too many people he should have not trusted. He should have listened to those who really loved him but how was he to really know the difference. Look at his life - he never was given a proper chance to grow up. Anyway, all of that is too late now but the saga continues. People continue to lie and people still see dollar signs connected to the name of Michael Jackson and always will. I know he is finally at rest and hope that his children will not face the same problems he had to face. RIP Michael.

Re: Michael Jackson’s Legs covered in Sores, Needle Scars (PHOTOS)

antoinetteK — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 06:26:42 -0000

Correction - the Inquisitr. Same junk.

Re: Michael Jackson’s Legs covered in Sores, Needle Scars (PHOTOS)

antoinetteK — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 06:25:29 -0000

How in heaven's name do you expect us to believe these are actually Michael Jackson's legs?!! Inquirer it was tabloid rubbish like you that contributed to the destruction of this beautiful individual. Do us a favour and jump off a cliff.