Leaving Neverland Director Is A Shill ( pizzagate )

submitted by rickman

I am sure of it. His work has involved renegade paedophile hunters, Muslim terror attacks, 9/11, the Haiti earthquake. His IMDB ratings go as high as 8.2 and as low as 2.3. He also has a 3.7, and a 3. The rest are around the 5-7 mark. Despite this very low ratings for his work he has won 3 BAFTA Awards. To me this stinks of the TPTB propping up this director to give him a bigger platform.

His 9/11 work has focused on the Ground Zero mosque and a few people who lied about having dead relatives in the attack to win some money. To me this is an attempt to display Americans as rabid Islamaphobics and to draw attention away from the real criminals of 9/11 and shine unnecessary light on small time crooks.

His documentary about a renegade paedophile hunter is one of better rated documentaries however what shows like this do is bring out the liberal lefties who love to look down their noses at working class people who are sick of soft prison sentences or police turning a blind eye to paedophiles. I've no doubt this documentary was made to make these people look like fools.

His other work on Haiti focused on the fact that prisoners used the tsunami to escape from jail. Is this a story worth telling? Bad people doing bad things? Maybe. But his other work just makes me think he was hired to make the documentary to divert attention.

His documentaries on legal highs and the Charlie Hebdo attack received ratings of 3 and 3.7. Suggesting he's in fact a very poor documentary maker despite this being his career he supposedly won 3 BAFTA awards for.

Dan Reed

Legally High

Three Days of Terror: The Charlie Hebdo Attacks

The Ground Zero Mosque

The 9/11 Liars

Battle For Haiti

Was anyone convinced by his Michael Jackson documentary?

ASolo

While I will agree that THERE IS AN AGENDA TO TAKE MICHAEL JACKSON DOWN PERMANENTLY it does not discount the fact that he was also an abuser and worked for the CIA. I think you ENABLERS are getting these differences twisted up. You see the evil cabal trying to take down an innocent man and take the holdings of his estate, those of you that are not paid promotional shills working out of a fusion center, but the fact of the matter is there is plenty of evidence that he pain MILLIONS in hush money for the offences he did commit and his estate is still paying out millions.

We need deep thinkers that can figure out the advantage Oprah and Geffen would gain if they were to orchestrate something like this, it could all be just as simple as providing a political distraction which has already been brought up. I believe it has more to do with something we are unable to see concerning future mergers between Disney and other conglomerates.

cutelobster

No doubt that MJ was a pedo - but this was obvious for decades. Once he had to settle with Jordan Chandler for millions of dollars it was obvious (noone innocent would ever do this.) Plus his desire to make up for 'his lost childhood' seemed always to involve good-looking boys and a strange desire to sleep naked with them. So it's been known forever. Now this documentary is presented as some kind of supposed watershed moment - MJ a pedo! No way! So, yes, this documentary has been pushed. The director's back-catalogue IS suspicious - a roll-call of dodgy topics receiving dodgy treatments. The question then is why is the MJ thing being pushed and then you are off into speculation. Limited hangout? MJ had to have a lot of enablers and it's hard to believe he wasn't part of some wider network - Savile-style. Also (elements in) law-enforcement + intelligence-agencies must have known, as they must have known with Savile. The push probably also has something to do with (a) making money [never to be underestimated] and (b) moving people over to Netflix.

Podge512

Razorfist has done two videos tearing apart Reed's bullshit 'documentary' and apparently, the UK version is 45 minutes shorter than the US version because Reed, in true Orwellian fashion, decided to cut out the segments with the glaring inconsistencies and timeline discrepancies that were called out in the UK press. While it is probable Jackson was a paedophile (there is at least one CDAN blind item that alleges prospective child extras for the film Hook were abused at Neverland Ranch), I can't help but think this schlockumentary, apart from distracting from proven abuser Harvey Weinstein (a documentary on Weinstein was supposed to appear at the same film festival which Leaving Neverland was fast-tracked to), is supposed to poison the well; take two bullshit artists who are looking for a payday from the Jackson estate, put them centre stage and when their stories are discredited, the true stories of victims of the rampant child sexual abuse in Paedowood can and will be painted with that brush.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yTTEwBLfUQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYx0vLfpRYY&t=73s

Otto-

Yeah, that's a fair point. Like I've always said, I'm not surprised either way if Jackson's guilty, it doesn't really matter to me, but I never liked the production of the doco and don't like this Reed the more I hear of him.

Just to be clear, I do care what the truth is, but I don't care for MJ's career, I don't care for his music or what people think of him, because he's dead now. It's too late. If anything else, even if Jackson's perfectly innocent, this at least opens people up to the ever-increasing belief that their heroes in the past were sick and crooked, which is a sentiment I can't endorse enough. If they get used to the idea, Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks will be easier to accept. And they're still alive. And this time it involves deaths.

kazza64

it doesnt matter he still presented information that sheds light on michael jacksons activities with young boys

think-

I'm not sure whether IMDB ratings say anything about whether a film is well or poorly done.

rickman

The evidence is what I presented. That he specialises in events which are surrounded by conspiracies and decides to focus on minor aspects as if to divert attention away from the bigger picture. And I disagree about your opinion on IMDB ratings. Even average films get 5s or 6s. For someone to get ratings in the 2s and 3s suggest he is seriously inferior in his field.

pizza-party-pooper-2

I'm inclined to agree with rickman. Have to admit, I never watched the alleged doc and I don't intend to. If they want to convince me of MJ being a pedo they need to go back and photograph the privates of the McMartin perps the way they did MJ. Hmmm, interesting even after being forensically photographed for the court proceedings he still wasn't convicted. Maybe he was simply NOT GUILTY. Perhaps because it was a part of the usual MO: Character assassination before real assassination. Just a thought.

think-

What exactly in the film or regarding the way 'Leaving Neverland' was done makes you think he is a shill?

I think that would be a good starting point for trying to find out whether he is a shill or not.