I wonder why she said that? (if she did)
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6841461...-thrilled-there.html

the great thing about being 76 is that you can tell the world exactly what you think and if they don't like it the can get f*cked.

It does seem a rather bizarre and stupid thing to have said. But seen from a different angle, I think she makes a valid point. If their parents allowed them to spend time with MJ and they liked being with him as kids/teenagers and went on to lead normal adult lives, marrying and having children, perhaps this suggests that the alleged abuse never happened rather than that they were abused for years and it didn't affect them. I think it's just an absurd idea that not just one but both of them could reach adulthood without realising they'd been abused and the penny supposedly didn't drop for either of them until they had baby boys.

Oh no. Will this mean there will be no more TV showings of The Prince of Tides and Meet the Fockers?

md wrote:
Oh no. Will this mean there will be no more TV showings of The Prince of Tides and Meet the Fockers?

truly awful films but I love Streisand.

Many years ago (Brush With Fame #44)I was in a jeans shop in LA and she came out of the changing booth and asked me if she looked good in the jeans she had tried on. Well she asked everyone in the shop actually in a fairly frenetic manner.

Now Diana Ross is sticking up for Jackson.

The thing here is : whatever the truth about Michael Jackson the fact so many "credible" journalists and Talking Heads are demanding people believe a documentary which can be skewered any way the director wants and there must be no alternative thought (but which also publishes proven falsehoods) is scary.

# I doubt any true Barbara Streisand fan would give a stuff how the tabloids present her words.