Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators

Hoax Theories => References & Similarities => Topic started by: ~Souza~ on April 02, 2011, 10:03:36 PM

Title: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part 1
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 02, 2011, 10:03:36 PM

Most people on this website and forum believe Michael Jackson is still alive, but there are also people visiting here that say he is dead. Some do so in a polite way, some in a less polite way, but they all have the same arguments as to why Michael Jackson could never have hoaxed his death. Because it is going in circles mostly on the forum about this, I decided to resuscitate the blog and post my view on these arguments. This is only part one, more will follow whenever I have time.

One of the opinions that is most expressed by non-believers, is that Michael would never do this to his kids. I strongly disagree with that statement, and I will try to explain in this piece why I disagree. People are welcome to challenge my view, if they can and they are also welcome to reply to this blog and share other arguments that make you believe Michael is really dead. This is my attempt to show the non-believers why we think what we think and that we are in no way disrespecting Michael. We heard your side of the story, some of us even were on your side, now try to see this from our point of view, before accusing us of being disrespectful to Michael.

Read more: http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/blog.php (http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/blog.php)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: jacilovesmichael on April 02, 2011, 10:58:23 PM
I applaud you! Thank you for writing that. I look forward to reading more. Also couldn't agree more.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MJonmind on April 02, 2011, 11:38:54 PM
Great Souza!
An argument I get at work is, with all those people in on the hoax, somebody by now would have spilled the beans even for money; they would not have kept their mouths shut. I think that was mentioned yesterday by one of the guests as well.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 03, 2011, 04:46:19 AM
Quote from: "MJonmind"
Great Souza!
An argument I get at work is, with all those people in on the hoax, somebody by now would have spilled the beans even for money; they would not have kept their mouths shut. I think that was mentioned yesterday by one of the guests as well.

Yes, I saw that one too. I think I will move this one to the guest forum, so that they can reply if they want.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Le Papillon Bleu on April 03, 2011, 04:55:19 AM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "MJonmind"
Great Souza!
An argument I get at work is, with all those people in on the hoax, somebody by now would have spilled the beans even for money; they would not have kept their mouths shut. I think that was mentioned yesterday by one of the guests as well.

Yes, I saw that one too. I think I will move this one to the guest forum, so that they can reply if they want.
Wow .that would be great.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 08:44:52 AM
A little suggestion if i'm allowed. Since this debate between believers and non-believers has started off topic in "Do you think MJ uses this forum", i think we could insert a link at the end of that locked thread so they should know this debate is here now. And i salute Souza for this thread, hope we can all shake hands and have a nice talk where everyone explains their arguments in the most respectful and mature way.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MissG on April 03, 2011, 09:47:25 AM
*RTRL*
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: fordtocarr on April 03, 2011, 09:52:36 AM
Great idea Souza. Now us who don't want to read that Michael is dead can just avoid that topic :) And will you reopen the original thread about Michael visiting?  That was a good one.
 Thanks.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MissG on April 03, 2011, 09:54:12 AM
Quote from: "fordtocarr"
Great idea Souza. Now us who don't want to read that Michael is dead can just avoid that topic :) And will you reopen the original thread about Michael visiting?  That was a good one.
 Thanks.
Michael visiting? who? us?  :D
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: maninthemoon on April 03, 2011, 09:54:57 AM
Quote from: "fordtocarr"
Great idea Souza. Now us who don't want to read that Michael is dead can just avoid that topic :) And will you reopen the original thread about Michael visiting?  That was a good one.
 Thanks.
Indeed it was. Now that we've an official topic for arguing.

Why not open the other topic so we don't have to make a new one? (:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 12:13:56 PM
Me too,coz I took ages to find this thread.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 12:43:32 PM
The ambulance photo was fake because no one managed to get an up to date photo
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 12:49:52 PM
Quote from: Troll
The ambulance photo was fake because no one managed to get an up to date photo

The s at the end of pain was simply a mistake-after all it was probably done in a rush,as there would have been so many other things to do.

The numerology stuff is nonsense-no-one had THIS amount of time on their hands.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 01:04:56 PM
OK,I guess you don't like my name! I thought that's what all of us non believers were called.Troll.I want to be challenged,which is what thiss thread is all about.I'm not here to be nasty.Just to state my beliefs.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: eternalflame on April 03, 2011, 01:07:16 PM
Hi 1guest, and everyone, it´s nice to have you here !

I think the "visiting" thread was locked for good reason, because there were lots of bad vibes there and we obviously couldn´t find a good way for discussion anymore, because some of the guests were very impolite and some of the members here got really scared.
Well, opening a new thread may not protect us from rude people, but it´s a good start, nevertheless.
I´m really looking forward to a good and polite discussion with all of you who are non - believers and want to share your reasons with us.
As I already posted, I´m on my way but not at the stage yet to say "I know he´s alive". At the moment I´m stuck and I need some fresh inputs from people with an opposite opinion.
So I´m looking forward to have some good and brain-refreshing discussion here.
Please stay polite. We are not nuts, and you are not stubborn. Every opinion is welcome.

Ok, to the subject: I can´t support the statement that Michael wouldn´t do that to his kids.
Kids are often more mature and intelligent as we might think, and Michael´s kids will be just the same. Kids can keep a secret quite well, if you explain it properly, they take it as a kind of sport
and mostly they are very proud to be involved.
And they want to protect their parents as well as the other way round, if necessary. And they weren´t at their baby stage anymore.
The kids don´t appear to me as if their little souls were seriously damaged.

Love & Peace!




-
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 01:11:22 PM
Thankyou...and what about the 3 questions I've asked please.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 01:16:52 PM
Quote from: ok
Thankyou...and what about the 3 questions I've asked please.

Also,kids bounce back so much quicker than us grown ups.Also I would imagine that they've had the best councilling money can buy.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 03, 2011, 01:24:31 PM
Quote from: "ok"
Quote from: "ok"
Thankyou...and what about the 3 questions I've asked please.

Also,kids bounce back so much quicker than us grown ups.Also I would imagine that they've had the best councilling money can buy.

Questions? You posted statements and not questions. If you would take the time and effort to exactly explian why you have that opinion, someone might take the time to actually answer you.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: maninthemoon on April 03, 2011, 01:39:02 PM
If all the numerology is nonsense, Mr. Troll. Then what's with the shirts MJ has been using, the shirts with '7' on them? Hmm? Is it his "lucky number", or could it be hinting reincarnation?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 01:44:27 PM
"The ambulance photo WAS fake Because no one managed to get an up to date photo"

This is not true. There's a picture (perhaps Souza can to publish it again) where someone is lying, but you can not distinguish any faces.
 And if you say this is true, why the family has not complained about it in public knowing that this journalist won so much money for this picture?
 And tell me who is recording the journalist? and why curiosity is the only one there that day at the doors of his home? and why he cant got nothing more? He had have 100 per sec
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: hesouttamylife on April 03, 2011, 01:56:21 PM
Thank you Souza for this thread.  I also get the hypotheses  from people saying that Michael would not do that to his children and I too beg to differ.  Here are my reasons as I posted in another forum:

Michael said that he never wanted his children to be different, that he wanted them to live with normalcy?  Can you imagine what normalcy they would have had if he had chosen to take them with him?  None.  They would have grown up afraid of everything and everybody and they would have been miserable for the rest of their lives.  That is the reason I feel in my heart that Michael left them behind, so they could live a normal life.  What ever he is going through, God bless him.

I have always believed in the saying if you love someone set them free.  If they come back to you it was meant to be.  I know that Michael’s children will grow to understand if they don’t already that what he did was courageous and done out of his love for them.  He sacrificed himself for his one true love, his children. In doing so, he purposely is making a better way for them. He didn’t leave them behind out of selfishness, but to allow them the chance to live, to grow into caring, considerate, adults with something to offer the world they live in.

I don’t know what Michael is going through, however, I know that he thinks about them every minute he is away from them.  I fear that he is sad and obviously unhappy that he had to do it, but coupled with those emotions that he is also content when he sees how well adjusted they have become and continues to be.  Loving parents will go against all odds for their children to have what they didn’t have.  Michael never had a childhood and he never had real, meaningful, fulfilling love.  His children will have all of those things not in spite of but because Michael chose them over self.  He made that possible.  Michael is a genuis and he is a helluva daddy.  I continue to pray for his peace and his well being.  I have to believe that he is safe and is watching over us and them somehow.  I have to believe that he knows that we are keeping vigil for him, we believe in his plan and that we will never let him part.  we don’t judge him for doing what he obviously had to do. Here I must add that Michael will always be my angel and even if I never ever get the chance to see him again, he will live forever in my heart.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Im_convincedmjalive on April 03, 2011, 01:59:35 PM
[youtube:3olrbeho]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3V-7DEAgdc[/youtube:3olrbeho]
Music video by Michael Jackson performing Liberian Girl. (C) 1989 MJJ Productions Inc.
[youtube:3olrbeho]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5A-h8EVzbzs[/youtube:3olrbeho]
Updated 2009 version of Liberian Girl. Directed by Michael Jackson  ;)

[youtube:3olrbeho]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ero9cMPJj38[/youtube:3olrbeho]

The Greatest Show on Earth. Thank you Michael.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 03, 2011, 02:02:06 PM
Quote from: "Gema"
Quote from: "fordtocarr"
Great idea Souza. Now us who don't want to read that Michael is dead can just avoid that topic :) And will you reopen the original thread about Michael visiting?  That was a good one.
 Thanks.
Michael visiting? who? us?  :D
oHHHHH Don't raise your expectations too high......it's just the mind-game going on :mrgreen:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 03, 2011, 02:12:16 PM
the children subject is delicate and I really wound't want the discussion to go there. We were always attacked on exactly this subject, they told us we disrespect the children.

But in my opinion the children are in, they know exactly what's going on.
We are not here to judge anybody, especially the children ,but who can honestly explain some behaviour at the memorial?

I know when my mom died I was a wreck for at least 2 months, couldn't smile or even take care of myself, I looked terrible, totally different of my usual self because losing a parent is a trauma at any age, but especially at such an young age  :?  ?

Anyway, I think we should better talk about why Marlon gave that little speech about Michael waking around in disguise - was this the most appropriate subject to talk about at a memorial  :? ?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 03, 2011, 02:20:55 PM
Quote from: "GINAFELICIA"
the children subject is delicate and I really wound't want the discussion to go there. We were always attacked on exactly this subject, they told us we disrespect the children.

But in my opinion the children are in, they know exactly what's going on.
We are not here to judge anybody, especially the children ,but who can honestly explain some behaviour at the memorial?

I know when my mom died I was a wreck for at least 2 months, couldn't smile or even take care of myself, I looked terrible, totally different of my usual self because losing a parent is a trauma at any age, but especially at such an young age  :?  ?

Anyway, I think we should better talk about why Marlon gave that little speech about Michael waking around in disguise - was this the most appropriate subject to talk about at a memorial  :? ?

I am not discussing the children, I am discussing one of the arguments that non-believers have for this not being a hoax, which is about the children. The kids can be discussed here, to a certain extent. I do not want people to be judgemental about them or dig into their private lives. Even though little smart actors, they are still kids. Hoax related stuff like this and the Oprah interview can be discussed. Totally different Gina.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 02:24:58 PM
Quote from: angranity
If all the numerology is nonsense, Mr. Troll. Then what's with the shirts MJ has been using, the shirts with '7' on them? Hmm? Is it his "lucky number", or could it be hinting reincarnation?

No,It's not mr troll,it's OK as I guessed you wouldn't like that name.
But hey,there are page full of numbers aren't there? I'm not talking about the number 7.I mean,chapters from the bible etc etc etc etc ...need I go on.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 02:27:13 PM
Quote from: Always1
"The ambulance photo WAS fake Because no one managed to get an up to date photo"

This is not true. There's a picture (perhaps Souza can to publish it again) where someone is lying, but you can not distinguish any faces.
 And if you say this is true, why the family has not complained about it in public knowing that this journalist won so much money for this picture?
 And tell me who is recording the journalist? and why curiosity is the only one there that day at the doors of his home? and why he cant got nothing more? He had have 100 per sec

Is this the photoshopped one where the supposed MJ is blanked out.Sorry I don't really understand your response
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 02:28:57 PM
Quote from: ~Souza~
Quote from: ok
Quote from: ok
Thankyou...and what about the 3 questions I've asked please.

Also,kids bounce back so much quicker than us grown ups.Also I would imagine that they've had the best councilling money can buy.

Questions? You posted statements and not questions. If you would take the time and effort to exactly explian why you have that opinion, someone might take the time to actually answer you.

Yes questions was the wong word.Statements is what I should have said...but I think you know that anyway,don't you?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 03, 2011, 02:30:36 PM
Quote from: "ok"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "ok"
Quote from: "ok"
Thankyou...and what about the 3 questions I've asked please.

Also,kids bounce back so much quicker than us grown ups.Also I would imagine that they've had the best councilling money can buy.

Questions? You posted statements and not questions. If you would take the time and effort to exactly explian why you have that opinion, someone might take the time to actually answer you.

Yes questions was the wong word.Statements is what I should have said...but I think you know that anyway,don't you?

That's not the point, you need to come up with arguments before expecting anyone to reply to you.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 02:32:33 PM
Quote from: GINAFELICIA
the children subject is delicate and I really wound't want the discussion to go there. We were always attacked on exactly this subject, they told us we disrespect the children.

But in my opinion the children are in, they know exactly what's going on.
We are not here to judge anybody, especially the children ,but who can honestly explain some behaviour at the memorial?

I know when my mom died I was a wreck for at least 2 months, couldn't smile or even take care of myself, I looked terrible, totally different of my usual self because losing a parent is a trauma at any age, but especially at such an young age  :?  ?

Anyway, I think we should better talk about why Marlon gave that little speech about Michael waking around in disguise - was this the most appropriate subject to talk about at a memorial  :? ?

Shock does funny things to people.I really don't believe Paris had a microphone,so you?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 02:36:22 PM
Quote from: ~Souza~
Quote from: ok
Quote from: ~Souza~
Quote from: ok
Quote from: ok
Thankyou...and what about the 3 questions I've asked please.

Also,kids bounce back so much quicker than us grown ups.Also I would imagine that they've had the best councilling money can buy.

Questions? You posted statements and not questions. If you would take the time and effort to exactly explian why you have that opinion, someone might take the time to actually answer you.

Yes questions was the wong word.Statements is what I should have said...but I think you know that anyway,don't you?

That's not the point, you need to come up with arguments before expecting anyone to reply to you.

These are arguments and it is the point.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 03, 2011, 02:40:36 PM
Ok, now that I see Paris again at the memorial her pain looks real to me  :?
Indeed when Marlon is giving his little speech Paris looks relaxed, taking care of her purse, but when she starts talking....and I know the tears can be hold until you start talking - the emotions take over her  :?  
I guess I am a little confused now
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: VeryLittleSusie on April 03, 2011, 02:43:08 PM
Great blog, Souza. I like it!  8-)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 03, 2011, 02:51:01 PM
I really don't know if she had an ear-phone, I saw pictures in detail where it looked like she had one but those pictures could have been faked.

I don't know.

Yet....no, I don't know what to think about her intervention.

I would ask WHY she had to be in the scenario. Why Prince said nothing. He is the oldest after all isn't he? He should have said something about his father as well, as he is the first born and his son. But no....Ms. Katherine said about Paris that she's already an actress.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: hesouttamylife on April 03, 2011, 02:53:18 PM
Why “formal” invitations to a funeral?  It’s not a party or a wedding or a gala affair.  Yes there are funerals by invitation only, but that usually requires only a phone call or a short e-mail. Who is of the mindset to address invitations at such a time? :?
[youtube:1743z71f]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZL4pCx6RJ4E[/youtube:1743z71f]
 And further, if the service was “private” why register 400 media types?  Maybe to convince the public, perhaps?  
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/32681668/ns/today-entertainment/


updated 9/4/2009 5:35:32 AM ET
Share Print Font:
GLENDALE, Calif. — Paris Jackson wept as she stepped into the mausoleum where her father, Michael, was to be entombed. Katherine Jackson, overcome by sorrow, turned back when she was faced with her son's final resting place.
On a sultry Thursday evening, amid a sea of white flowers and with a bejeweled crown placed atop his casket by his children, the King of Pop was given an intimate, private version of the lavish public memorial held shortly after his death in June.
The funeral at Glendale Memorial Park was simple but touching, according to one guest. The person, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the day, said Gladys Knight's performance of the hymn "Our Father" (The Lord's Prayer) was soared in the vast mausoleum and moved many to tears.
When it was over, many of the the 200 mourners hugged each other. Among them were Elizabeth Taylor, Jackson's ex-wife Lisa Marie Presley, Barry Bonds and Macaulay Culkin.
Tears and music
The Rev. Al Sharpton, who gave a eulogy at the public event and at Thursday's service, also extolled Knight's earlier performance of "His Eye is on the Sparrow."
"Gladys Knight sang her heart out. Now we prepare to lay him to rest," Sharpton posted on his Twitter account during the service that was held outside and then within the marble mausoleum.
The mourners followed the crowned, lushly flower-draped casket as Jackson's five brothers — each wearing a bright red tie and a single crystal-studded glove — carried it into the mausoleum. The 11-year-old Paris cried as the group entered the imposing building and was comforted by her aunt, LaToya.


Paris and brothers Prince Michael, 12, and Prince Michael II, 7, known as Blanket, began the service by placing the crown on their father's golden casket. They were composed through most of the hour-and-a-half ceremony.
As it ended, Katherine Jackson appeared extremely weary and had to be helped to her car, according to the guest. Earlier, she had a difficult time going into the mausoleum; she was overcome, turned back, and it wasn't clear if she went in at all, the guest said.
The Jackson family's tardy arrival delayed the service for nearly two hours; no explanation was given to mourners. The invitation notice indicated the service would begin promptly at 7 p.m.; it began closer to 8:30.

The 77-year-old Taylor and others were left waiting in the late summer heat, with the temperature stuck at 90 degrees just before sunset, and some mourners fanned themselves with programs for the service.

As darkness fell, police escorted the family's motorcade of 31 cars, including Rolls-Royces and Cadillacs, from their compound in Encino to Forest Lawn, about a 20-minute journey, with the hearse bearing Jackson's body at the end.

About 250 seats were arranged for mourners over artificial turf laid roadside at the mausoleum, and a vivid orange moon, a mark of the devastating wildfire about 10 miles distant, hung over the cemetery.

-  /  AFP - Getty Images
Actress Elizabeth Taylor attends Michael Jackson's funeral service at Glendale Forest Lawn Memorial Park on Thursday evening in Glendale, Calif.
There were two oversized portraits of a youthful, vibrant Jackson mounted next to the casket amid displays of white lilies and roses. At Jackson's lavish public memorial, red roses covered his casket.
A large, blimp-like inflated light, the type used in film and television production, and a boom camera hovered over the seating area placed in front of the elaborate marble mausoleum. The equipment raised the possibility that the footage would be used for the Jackson concert documentary "This Is It," or perhaps the Jackson brothers' upcoming reality show.

More than 400 media credentials were issued to reporters and film crews who remained at a distance from the service and behind barricades. The few clusters of fans who gathered around the secure perimeter that encircled the cemetery entrance struggled to see.

Maria Martinez, 25, a fan from Riverside, Calif., who was joined by a dozen other Jackson admirers at a gas station near the security perimeter, gave a handful of pink flowers she had picked at a nearby park to a man with an invitation driving into the funeral.
"Can you please put these flowers on his grave?" she told him. "They were small and ugly, but I did that with my heart. I'm not going to be able to get close, so this is as close as I could get to him.”


The man consented, adding, "God bless."
Glendale police said all went smoothly and there were no arrests.
Advertise | AdChoices



Jackson will share eternity at Forest Lawn with the likes of Clark Gable, Jean Harlow and W.C. Fields, entombed alongside them in the mausoleum that will be all but off-limits to adoring fans who might otherwise turn the pop star's grave into a shrine.
The closest the public will be able to get to Jackson's vault is a portion of the mausoleum that displays "The Last Supper Window," a life-size stained-glass re-creation of Leonardo da Vinci's masterpiece. Several 10-minute presentations about the window are held regularly 365 days a year, but most of the building is restricted.
The Jackson family had booked an Italian restaurant in Pasadena for a gathering Thursday night, and family members and guests were seen coming and going late into the night.
"I feel like I watched Michael finally given some peace and I made a commitment to make sure his legacy and what he stood for lives on," Sharpton said outside the restaurant around midnight. "So at one level we're relieved; another level we're obligated."
The ceremony ends months of speculation that the singer's body would be buried at Neverland Ranch, in part to make the property a Graceland-style attraction. An amended copy of Jackson's death certificate was filed Thursday in Los Angeles County to reflect Forest Lawn as his final resting place.

Handout  /  Getty Images
Michael Jackson's casket rests during the funeral service held at Forest Lawn Memorial Park on Thursday in Glendale, Calif.
In court on Wednesday, it was disclosed that 12 burial spaces were being purchased by Jackson's estate at Forest Lawn Glendale, about eight miles north of downtown Los Angeles, but no details were offered on how they would be used.
The King of Pop died a drug-induced death June 25 at age 50 as he was about to embark on a comeback attempt. The coroner's office has labeled the death a homicide, and Jackson's death certificate lists "injection by another" as the cause.
Dr. Conrad Murray, Jackson's personal physician, told detectives he gave the singer a series of sedatives and the powerful anesthetic propofol to help him sleep. But prosecutors are still investigating, and no charges have been filed.
© 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 03, 2011, 03:06:44 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
A little suggestion if i'm allowed. Since this debate between believers and non-believers has started off topic in "Do you think MJ uses this forum", i think we could insert a link at the end of that locked thread so they should know this debate is here now. And i salute Souza for this thread, hope we can all shake hands and have a nice talk where everyone explains their arguments in the most respectful and mature way.

Hi 1guest, are you one and the same 1guest from last evening?
You made a good sugestion about the other thread.
Ohhhh....I don't know if I can act mature but I'll do my best, just for you   :mrgreen:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MissG on April 03, 2011, 03:28:40 PM
Quote from: "GINAFELICIA"
Quote from: "Gema"
Quote from: "fordtocarr"
Great idea Souza. Now us who don't want to read that Michael is dead can just avoid that topic :) And will you reopen the original thread about Michael visiting?  That was a good one.
 Thanks.
Michael visiting? who? us?  :D
oHHHHH Don't raise your expectations too high......it's just the mind-game going on :mrgreen:

ooops....once away from the hoax one can´t follow the topics  :mrgreen:

anyway, if M pass by and i am not here, say hello from me  :D
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MissG on April 03, 2011, 03:29:57 PM
Where are we supossed to post the replies for the blog post? there at the blog or here?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 03, 2011, 03:38:17 PM
don't worry Gema, I'll say hello from you to M next time I talk to him  :lol:
You won't have to wait that long 'cause I spot him around ALL the time   :lol:  :lol:  :lol:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MissG on April 03, 2011, 03:50:23 PM
Great!!  :D  and tell him...i got his numba...
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 03, 2011, 03:58:04 PM
What is it that we can't stay on topic lately? Many threads turned into a complete different discussion then it was intended for.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 03, 2011, 04:18:23 PM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
What is it that we can't stay on topic lately?

I don't know why we can't stay on topic.

Good night everyone.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: hesouttamylife on April 03, 2011, 04:23:00 PM
This article PROVES TO ME that Michael recorded footage of the This Is It rehearsals for a movie production, not just for reviews as stated by Kenny Ortega.  

It also points out that Michael did not hire Conrad Murray as has been suggested.

EXCLUSIVE: MICHAEL JACKSON’S ‘EXTRAORDINARY STRESS’ FROM LONDON CONTRACT
Posted July 6, 2009 • 9:44 a.m.

Mohamed Hadid

Just 48 hours before his death, Michael Jackson was “in a high state of stress and emotional drama, fearing that he would never be able to complete the 50-concert run in London, and it would kill him.” That’s the inside word from one of the closest business friend’s of the late King of Pop who he turned to often when problems were at their darkest.

I am sworn to never release his identity. The night that the rehearsals were filmed and recorded at the Staples Center in L.A., Michael returned home “exhausted, highly strung, stressed and sweating profusely.”

Michael reportedly said: “We did it, but we can’t go on. I’ll never make all 50. It will kill me.”  Michael’s confidante told me that he had come up with a last-minute plan to meet everybody’s needs. He wanted AEG to stage the This Is It show as a one-night world spectacular -- the largest one-time pop music event in history. It would be produced live from London, and it would be available in movie theaters, arenas and concert halls around the world simultaneously with immediate CD and DVD release.
 
The concept was that Michael would still earn the money he desperately needed and AEG would make the same money in one night as they would from 50 shows.
Michael apparently believed it would work and everybody would be happy, but he was stressed beyond belief if AEG insisted on going with the original plan, according to his confidante. “He couldn’t sleep, he was exhausted, and he was more stressed than he’d ever been in his life,” I was told. “At the very moment he should have been able to get back on top of the world, he worried so much he wouldn’t be able to execute it, and disaster loomed. He thought this new plan was the best solution.”

But top business executives reportedly rejected what Michael proposed. His plan was nixed. He became even more stressed, and, according to my source, it was that stress and high-wired sleeplessness that drove him to seek relief in the illegally prescribed anesthesia that should have only been used in a hospital operating room.
‘Death drug’ linked to Las Vegas doctors?

Since moving from Las Vegas, Michael lived in a $40 million, 22,000-square-foot mansion built by Mohamed Hadid and Hadid Development Co. located in Carolwood in Holmby Hills in Westwood, a mile past the Beverly Hills Hotel and before the Bel Air Hotel. Neighbors include Hugh Hefner, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie.
Mohamed released this photo of the home located on 1 1/2 acres he built in 1999 and lived in for three years before selling it to a private investor who purchased it in 2004. Michael leased it from the investor but was friendly with Mohamed and his children, who played with Michael’s three kids.
 
The Holmby Hills, Calif., mansion owned by Mohamed Hadid that Michael Jackson rented for $100,000 per month.

When Michael began rehearsals for This Is It in California, he insisted that AEG production people hire doctors for him, one of whom lived at the house almost round-the-clock and was scheduled to fly to London on the This Is It payroll.

Side Note:
This Is It tribute show with Las Vegas production

Insiders have told me there is “sufficient -- more than enough.” In addition to Michael taping all of the This Is It rehearsals from start to finish for a “making-of” TV documentary, he also had all the tracks from two albums that he had been working on in the Palms recording studio for three months when he lived here almost secretly at George Maloof’s casino hotel. It’s believed that everything that was recorded as a safety precaution, and that can be used in a future show, is under tight security at AEG offices in Staples Center.
 

As investigators track down the cause of death and as the world mourns at tomorrow’s televised and streamed memorial, the mega-bucks business of pop music will continue to grind. Meantime, even free tickets for Michael’s memorial service tomorrow morning sat Staples Center have skyrocketed in price. Prices on eBay, despite the warning on the tickets that there is to be no resale, have shot up in some cases as high as $20,000 for two! One offer even has a whopping $600,000 price tag!

Michael, in death, will at some point go out with the biggest showbiz spectacular of all time and probably wind up making more money than even dreamed possible with the original 50 London show comeback.

Robin Leach has been a journalist for more than 50 years and has spent the past decade giving readers the inside scoop on Las Vegas, the world’s premier platinum playground.
Follow Robin Leach on Twitter HERE.
Follow Vegas DeLuxe on Twitter HERE.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MissG on April 03, 2011, 04:27:27 PM
Yes, recordered before.
I can´t remember where I read that this pic
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_NlNgGVV9u_8/Skk7cdKdLCI/AAAAAAAAAq0/5ABfsTp0fKk/s400/mj_rehearsal_4.jpg)
Took place in 2007!! any one remembers?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MissG on April 03, 2011, 04:31:04 PM
Here!
Michael Jackson teaming up with David Blaine?

BY: ABSOLUTE PICTURES | Tuesday, November 21, 2006


http://www.absolutepictures.com/news.php?id=1042 (http://www.absolutepictures.com/news.php?id=1042)
After Michael Jackson's dismal performance at The World Music Awards last week, the King of Pop needs all of the help he can get. Now it looks like he's found it in street magician, David Blaine. It's been reported that Jackson and Blaine are planning a music and magic spectacle for the New Year.[...]
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 03, 2011, 05:20:12 PM
Quote from: "ok"
[/b]
I know when my mom died I was a wreck for at least 2 months, couldn't smile or even take care of myself, I looked terrible, totally different of my usual self because losing a parent is a trauma at any age, but especially at such an young age  :?

I completely know what you feel cause I have experienced the same, took me longer.. But believe me, when the opposit happens and parent buries its child, it must be 10 times more painful.
Right here I have a question to you. Explain how could Katherine go Target to do shopping, looking very calm on good,on the 3rd day of her sons sudden death? And how paparazzi again was right there, just like Ben the only pap. on June 25thy happened to be at Carolwood dr. [/color][/b]

[youtube:33a43oh5]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6aU_vAtw-Q[/youtube:33a43oh5]
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 03, 2011, 05:41:18 PM
I'd love to make a couple of TS quotes to explain the numerology part better to non-believers and ask them a couple of questions.

Quote
it was 77 days from the “death” on June 25 to 9-9-09; and it was 7 days from the “burial” to 9-9-09. strongest proof of hoax, not murder; and also it very clearly shows one of the main reasons for the hoax: to turn the 666 NWO upside down, 999! It is the Biblical counting system known as “inclusive reckoning”; you must use this system to arrive at 77 days and 7 days to 9-9-09. Everyone knows that the “death” was on 6-25-09, and the “burial” was on 9-3-09. Using inclusive reckoning (shown below): it is 77 days from 6-25-09 to 9-9-09, and 7 days from 9-3-09 to 9-9-09.

September 3 = day 1
September 4 = day 2
September 5 = day 3
September 6 = day 4
September 7 = day 5
September 8 = day 6
September 9 = day 7

But MJ chose 2009 as the year, because that year would be three 9’s. Full moon came on 7-7 in 2009, the day of the memorial; it was the first time since 1952 that there was a full moon on July 7, and it won’t happen again for decades {http://fullmooncalendar.net/}.   This is another reason for the fake death being in 2009. Furthermore, full moon came also on September 4 in 2009—just one day after the burial! And if you looked at the moon with the naked eye on September 3 (night of the burial): it looked full. Do you remember seeing the full moon in Thriller? And if MJ was really dead, but for whatever reason the family wanted his burial to be on a full moon: then why didn’t they have it on Friday, September 4? There is one very clear reason for all of these things: it’s 7 days (inclusive) from 9-3-09 to 9-9-09!

MJ “1998” Autographs

1998 is an interesting number, that can be divided evenly by only these single-digit numbers: 1998 / 2 = 999; 1998 / 3 = 666; 1998 / 6 = 333; and 1998 / 9 = 222. If you add 222 (that last one) to 777 (red shirt), you have 999. The first one is 999 itself; and the other two added together equal 999 (666 + 333). Also, if you add the first digit (1) to the last three (998), you have 999 (1 + 998 = 999). And if you add all four digits, it reduces to 9 (1 + 9 + 9 + 8 = 27; 2 + 7 = 9). Even if we had nothing else to go by, just the 1998 alone should point us pretty clearly to 9-9-09; but there is far more. in this case, the arrow is down and would represent the death. But you also have the resurrection here, with the upward pointing caret (^). However, these symbols are part of the equation, as well: start with the 1998, go down (subtract) by 666 = 1332; then insert this answer (caret means insert) into the last part: 1332 / 4 = 333. Of what significance is 333? It is the exact number needed to turn the NWO 666 pyramid upside-down; 666 + 333 = 999!!! In fact, that is why the three digits on the dangerous code are vertical, not horizontal; they represent the vertical layering system of the pyramid (666), and then turned upside down (999).

Autopsy Report “9-9-09, Date Finalized”

When the report was released, everyone could see that the very last thing on the whole report said: “9-9-09, Date Finalized”. Was this a coincidence? Aside from the 9-9-09 resurrection aspect of the coroner’s report, there are numerous other fishy things.

“This Is It” Movie Poster on 9-9-09

Although the poster may have surfaced unofficially a little early: it was not posted on the official MJ website, until Wednesday 9-9-09! {http://www.michaeljackson.com/us/news/michael-jacksons-it-movie-poster}. And remember, this is the poster with about 10 different red shirt pictures—reminding us of the 777 (77 from death to 9-9-09, and 7 from burial to 9-9-09). The movie itself was originally scheduled to open on Friday, October 30; but they moved it to Wednesday, October 28. Notice that 9-9-09 was a Wednesday, and the official opening date was on Wednesday (10-28-09)—exactly 7 weeks after 9-9-09!! Also, the movie was originally scheduled to run for only 2 weeks—which would bring it up to 9 weeks from 9-9-09!!! And from the original Thriller: “… see you next Wednesday!” “The line [‘see you next Wednesday’] is also mentioned in the opening scene for Michael Jackson’s ‘Thriller’ when the police decode a message from Jackson’s werewolf character.”

Jermaine and La Toya Supported 9-9-09

Jermaine had his MJ Tribute press conference in London on 9-9-09! London??? Yes, London—exactly where “This Is It” concerts were originally scheduled; and also where the O2 press conference was held on March 5, 2009. Two days later, TMZ posted this video of La Toya Jackson Christmas shopping (although posted on the 18th, she did the actual shopping during the “99” redirect). At 0:47, the camera points to a “9.99” price tag for about 5 seconds {http://www.tmz.com/2009/12/18/la-toya-jackson-chris-brown-tiger-woods-target-christmas-holiday-shopping-video/}

The 911 Call Was at 12:21

911 phone call placed at 12:21 PM on 6-25-09. However, all the other timing was planned: death 77 days until 9-9-09; memorial on 7-7 (full moon), and 7 years from will; burial 7 days from 9-9-09 (and essentially full moon), etc. So is it possible that the timing of the 911 call was also planned?  So this whole hoax was kicked off with a 911 call, which represents the NWO (911 terrorism); and it was made at 12:21, which represents the end of the world (12-21-2012). However, whether or not you believe the end is near, you can’t change the fact that it is part of the hoax and MJ’s message—which can be seen very clearly from the call at 12:21, as well as “Jackson” and the other parallels in the 2012 movie {http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aznBAuj4Vw}.

Was the “Death” Time (2:26) Also Planned?

Could it be, then, that the exact minute of the “death” (2:26 PM) was also planned? 12:21 to 2:26 is 2 hours and 5 minutes (on June 25); and 2 + 5 = 7. Second, 1,221 + 226 = 1447; then 1 + 4 + 4 + 7 = 16; and 1 + 6 = 7. Third, add each digit separately, 1 + 2 + 2 + 1 + 2 + 2 + 6 = 16; and 1 + 6 = 7. Here again we have 777 (red shirt); and this would not work, unless both times (12:21 & 2:26) were planned to the very minute.

Another thing is the MJ will, dated 7-7-02, exactly 7 years before the memorial

{http://www.tmz.com/2009/07/01/michael-jacksons-last-will-diana-ross-mentioned/; http://www.tmz.com/2009/10/22/michael-j ... s-probate/ (http://www.tmz.com/2009/10/22/michael-jackson-will-trust-mistake-witnesses-new-york-city-los-angeles-probate/)}. Just a few weeks before, MJ had spoken out and said: “... they never thought, that this performer, myself, would outthink them. ... I promise you, the best is yet to come.” {http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx4NwrMtgw8; and see this similar video, from just one day before the 7-7-02 will: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzGCZUT9DG4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzGCZUT9DG4)}

What was he referring to? What was his plan (outthinking), and when did he implement it? What was the “best” to come after 2002? And what was the big and “innovating” film “surprises” that he mentioned to Geraldo in 2005 {http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImqsGbaNOpE}? There seems to be no answer to these questions, unless of course the answer is Thriller II (TII). In fact, since MJ did do film clips for TII (Gilda fake death, spider resurrection, etc): then whatever he was planning, we can be quite sure “This Is It”.
According to MTV, the Dome Project (film clips for TII) was completed on 6-9-09; this would be about two weeks before the “death” {http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1615003/20090630/jackson_michael.jhtml}. Amazing that the film portions were conveniently completed, just before he “died”!

Quote
Questions to be asked to non-believers
Michael:

M1. After watching MJ videos including Thriller and Ghosts: is there any reason why MJ would not have thought to do a real life Thriller?
M2. If MJ did plan a hoax death, is there any time that would fit better with a full moon (Thriller) and 777 than: 6-25-09 death (77 days to 9-9-09), 7-7-09 memorial (full moon & 7 years from will), 9-3-09 burial (7 days to 9-9-09, & almost full moon), and all the other numerology?
M3. Being a big fan of old movies, and also choosing to remake Gilda in TII: it’s not possible that MJ was unaware of Mundson/Macready faking his death in Gilda (and also sharing MJ’s birthday). So if MJ was not planning on faking his death: would he be so cruel as to include Gilda in TII, and make his fans think he was planning a hoax death when in reality he was not?
Statistics:

S1. Even if MJ was unaware of the hoax death in Gilda: what are the chances that he accidentally did a remake of a fake death by an actor sharing his own birthday?

S2. What are the odds that all the hoax numerology and timing is merely coincidence (and show your calculations, not just your answer)?
Family:

F1. From the death to the burial more than two months later, why did we never see a single tear shed from a single family member (not even Paris, in her touching speech at the memorial)? And why did the children looked bored at the memorial? And why did the adults all wear dark glasses (so that we could not see the tears, or not see the lack of tears)?

F2. Are we to believe that MJ’s own family is ignorant of his role in the Liberian Girl video? And if not, then why did they allow Liberian Girl pictures to dominate both the memorial and the burial? Would they be so cruel, as to send fans the message that he is hiding behind the camera and running The Show—if in reality MJ was actually dead???

F3. Why was the burial delayed for a world-record longest time? And why did the family schedule it for 9-3-09: unless it had to do with the 7 days to 9-9-09, and the full moon (on 9-4-09)?
EOW:

E1. If the numerology and timing is not a coincidence (see M2 & S2): then why was the 911 call placed immediately at 12:21, unless it was to show that one of the main reasons for the hoax is to warn about the end of the world (that it’s near—even if it’s not at the end of the Mayan calendar, 2012)?

E2. Why did MJ specifically mention four more years in TII, unless he was referring to 2012 (and also the Sony movie with “Jackson” in it, etc)?
NWO:

N1. Also in the Bible, a one-world government/religion is prophesied to rise near the end of the world (see Revelation 17; etc). So if MJ’s message includes warning about the end of the world, how is it possible that his message does not also include a warning about the New World Order?

N2. If MJ does not believe in conspiracies from secret societies and our own governments: then why did he say that the grassy knoll is “truth” (Tabloid Junkie), and who does “they” refer to in TDRCAU (with the pyramid and eye, etc)?

N3. Who is behind the “conspiracy” that MJ was talking about, when he mentioned that our history books have been changed?
Bam:

B1. If MJ never does bam: how is he going to succeed in getting the main messages (EOW, NWO, etc) to the billions in the world?

B2. If you accept the clues which show that MJ is alive: then why don’t you accept that the very same clues (in many cases) also show that he will be back (bam)?[/b]
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 03, 2011, 05:45:15 PM
1. The 911 call didn’t sound overly panicked and Michael Jackson was not mentioned by name. (It’s possible he didn’t mention the name because 911 might think it was a hoax and not respond.)


2. Some have stated the oldest son discovered the father, but later the Dr. claimed that the reason it took so long to call 911 is that he couldn’t find anyone to make the call. (wouldn’t the son be able to make the call, he is 12 after all.) It took 30 minutes to call 911. Hasn’t Dr. Murray ever heard of a cell phone? (this point gets addressed farther down this list.)


3. Dr. Conrad Murray, who is supposed to be a cardiologist was doing CPR on the bed. (It’s supposed to be done on a flat hard surface…floor. Murray claimed that it was done on the bed cause MJ was frail, but several people have contradicted the report of MJ being “frail.”)


4. TMZ, a tabloid media source was the FIRST to report MJ had died. They reported it before the coroner and before Jermaine Jackson made his public statement. (While we’re on the topic, isn’t that weird too? Is it normal for a family member to make a public statement instead of the doctor in charge?)


5. Though he was taken to the hospital and they tried to revive him for an hour, he was pronounced dead at UCLA. However, despite this, almost no one had any kind of comment regarding it. No official doctor’s statements, no nurses being interviewed, no second cousins of neighboring patients coming out to gawk and report what they saw or heard. The only comments reported was someone who worked there said something strange was going on with regards to MJ, and someone else claimed the fire alarm went off while MJ was there. (In the CNN transcripts they mention the fire alarms in passing.)


6. Dr. Conrad Murray refused to sign the death certificate. No physician at UCLA in charge would sign either. In fact no UCLA doctor has made any kind of statement confirming the death of Michael Jackson or even that he was on the premises.


7. Cause of death was listed as “deferred” until after the autopsy. The DC states that it is only valid if signed in purple ink. At the bottom it’s signed in BLUE ink. There are also many irregularities of the document which indicate it possibly isn’t legitimate.


8. The autopsy results have been held, pending a toxicology report, which was due but is now expected to be two more weeks. (at time of posting this). A total of 3 autopsies have been ordered. One official, one by the family who for some reason wanted their own autopsy performed, and a third reportedly requested by Joe Jackson, MJ’s father. (ETA: Later the autopsy and tox reports have been stated to be delayed “indefinitely.”)


9. There is, in existence a SINGLE photo of MJ dead (or dying.) Taken by a tabloid reporter through a DARK tinted window of the ambulance. No other photos of him got taken, no photos at the hospital, no photos anywhere. (ETA: Upon further research there appear to be three photos taken in close succession, but how was the photo so clear and not blurred? And why does MJ look so healthy, alive, and young? It looks like it could be a wax dummy from the Ghosts set.)


10. There were several security cameras at the mansion in LA where MJ collapsed, but there is missing time from them. No video footage of the events in question.


11. MJ’s personal physician Dr. Tohme claimed MJ had no heart problems, that he danced 4 hours a day and it was more likely that he (Dr. Tohme) would have a heart attack than MJ. (Dr. Tohme was mistakenly reported as MJ’s personal physician, turns out he was his business manager and this point about what he said or didn’t say and whether or not it’s accurate, cannot be confirmed.)


12. Though there have been several people who have come forward suddenly talking about MJ having a drug problem and them trying to have an intervention for him, many other credible sources have come forward to say the opposite, among them: Mark Lester, and Tom Meserau. Many people at the last rehearsal claimed he was energetic and on top of his game and in no way seemed sickly or drugged. Supposedly family members wanted to have an intervention in 2007. But in 2007 MJ was in Ireland or Bahrain, how would his family know he had a drug problem if he’s halfway across the world? (A commenter here states is was in the US, but I’m really not sure about that.) Further, Jermaine has claimed on Larry King that he was not aware of any kind of drug problem on MJ’s part. If the family was “staging an intervention” wouldn’t Jermaine have been made aware of the situation?


13. Why are we just now hearing about MJ’s drug problem now? While it is true he had an RX drug dependency in 1993 (because he admitted it in an interview), and he may have had problems with RX drugs at various points and even at the end, why… with all the freaking out about hyperbaric chambers, chimpanzees, plastic surgery etc, did no Tabloid reporter ever think to jump all over the “***** ***** on Drugs” bandwagon?


14. Why are there contradictory stories about MJ’s health? Some have said he seemed frail and weak. He was underweight. He couldn’t possibly do 50 concerts. Others said he was vibrant, energetic, healthy, on top of his game. And these were all people who had seen him recently.


15. Is it convenient that AEG just happens to do all this footage, the day before he drops dead?


16. How does a man with a supposed long-term RX drug problem pass a 4-5 hour physical a few months prior to his death in order to have his concerts insured by Lloyd’s of London? That is something that would show up on a 4-5 hour physical. Either some insurance fraud is going on, or someone isn’t reporting the whole truth regarding MJ and drugs. Or he wasn’t on drugs.


17. Why did so many of MJ’s longterm friends not show up at the memorial at all, but those who ended up speaking and performing either never met MJ or hadn’t spoken to him in years? (Queen Latifah had never met him, Brooke Shields hadn’t spoken to him in years. Liz Taylor, Mac Culkin, Diana Ross, all declined showing up to name a few.)


18. While I don’t want to disrespect Liz Taylor, why would she mourn on Twitter only? She couldn’t go to the memorial, but she could tweet about it?


19. Dr. Conrad Murray fled the scene. He’s supposedly cooperating with investigators, but then he goes back to the bat cave and even tabloid reporters can’t seem to find him.


20. And just out of curiosity… why does it seem like only one picture of this doctor exists on the planet? Every article I see about him shows the same freaking picture. Now here is a test to try. Go to Google, click the link for “News” Then type: “Dr. Conrad Murray” in parenthesis. To the left there should be an archive. Archives generally go for YEARS, up to ten years or more. But there are only archives for 2009. Did he not exist before then? Whoops! now search his name in parenthesis under images… find me ONE image that isn’t the same exact one. In his entire life he only got his picture made that one time?


21. Dr. Murray has been described by some patients as a “holistic doctor” who didn’t like to prescribe medications, especially stronger medications like painkillers. If this is true, it’s unlikely MJ would have brought him on board if he was looking for an “enabling doctor.” And it’s unlikely Murray would have enabled him.


22. Up to a year ago all kinds of crazy tabloid stories were being leaked about MJ’s failing health and all kinds of crazy diseases he supposedly had.


23. He was visiting a medical center close by several times prior to his death.


24. A tabloid reporter predicted that MJ had six months to live, and six months later he died. (this is also the same time that the next thing in this list happened.)


25. Someone called a radio station and hoaxed MJ’s death several months ago. It was reported that the pop star had died, but later this report was retracted. (You can youtube search this. There is a video about it. The hoax even mentions a drug overdose.)


26. Several long-term and diehard MJ fans have expressed doubt that the person giving the O2 announcement at the London theatre was actually Michael Jackson. Many believe that it was an impersonator based on the way he walked (totally unlike MJ), the weird mannerisms and gestures and almost bragging manner (MJ was always humble with his fans, and everybody else, ALWAYS), and his accent is just OFF. This isn’t a matter of voice tone or pitch which alternated with him depending on how shy he was feeling, or if he needed to project his voice, this was ACCENT, totally wrong. Here is the video if you want to judge for yourself. Fast forward to about 4:32 if you want to skip past the advertisement to the MJ announcement. That is totally not MJ. His smile is also wrong.
ETA: I now think it’s possible that MJ was at the O2 but that he was acting weird, talking in a funny accent, and walking like 50 cent on purpose to create controversy. (i.e. he was punking us.)


27. Dr. Murray’s excuse (delivered in an interview through his attorney, since he vanished into the bat cave), for why he didn’t call 911 sooner is that there was no landline hooked up for some security reason or another. When asked why he didn’t use his cell phone, the attorney said that the doctor didn’t have Michael’s address. Oh really? His attending physician who was at his house didn’t know the address? Well here is a wacky concept: CELL PHONES HAVE GPS. They didn’t NEED him to know the address. Further, he could have just said: “It’s Michael Jackson.” I’m sure someone would have figured it out. It wasn’t like MJ didn’t live practically down the street from UCLA.


28. How could investigators rule out foul play before they had an autopsy or a tox screen? Isn’t that a little weird and presumptuous? Then they later said they weren’t ruling out homicide. Then they came back and said probably no one will be charged with anything… all of these statements BEFORE the toxicology report came back, which is what they are supposed to be waiting on before making any judgments in these matters.


29. If Dr. Murray is a cardiologist, and MJ is too weak to move off the bed, why wouldn’t he have had with him and used a defibrillator?


30. Supposedly MJ insisted on hiring Dr. Murray, a doctor who had treated his sick daughter once in 2006 and apparently the two became friends. MJ claimed he was comfortable with him and wanted AEG to hire him on for the tour. We have no way of knowing if MJ insisted on this doctor or not, since most people hadn’t met him and the people claiming this are AEG and Dr. Murray’s attorney, people who have a vested interest in MJ having a prior friendship with Murray to keep suspicion off them.


31. Cherilynn Lee went on CNN after MJ’s death to claim that MJ wanted an IV drip of Diprivan to sleep. She was a NUTRITIONIST. Why on EARTH would MJ go to a holistic nutritionist to ask for Diprivan? Or any other drug? She was let go previously. Why would he call someone he hadn’t talked to for 3 months to ask for this drug? If MJ had all these enabling doctors, WHY would he go to this woman he hadn’t spoken to in three months? Not only that, she claims in the interview that MJ didn’t want pills, he wanted an IV. However others have said MJ was afraid of needles. Why would he be chasing needle drugs? She claimed it was important to come out and set the record straight and she didn’t want her 15 minutes of fame. Um, okay. Which is what all former Jackson employees said right before their mouths started flapping bullshit. She also said he owed her money. So why would he call her if he owed her money? She claims in interviews that it’s “not the drugs they’re saying” (Demerol), but it’s Diprivan… on her say so. Well does she need to save the truth of MJ? I mean this is why we have the tox screen going on. It will reveal whatever drugs were going on. On the PLUS side, she portrays MJ as someone absolutely convinced it was safe and that his doctor said it was safe, which isn’t the behavior of a ‘drug addict’ but someone who trusted doctors who lied. (But I find even THAT kind of hard to believe considering MJ read and researched everything.)


32. Grace Rwaramba refuted claims that she’d said she “pumped MJ’s stomach” from the drugs. She never said this, but the stories circulated everywhere with her name on it soon after MJ’s death.


33. Dr. Conrad Murray after disappearing off the face of the planet where mysteriously even tabloid reporters can’t find him to snap a candid shot (despite supposedly him surfacing to cooperate with police), hires an attorney. Police repeatedly said Dr. Murray was NOT a suspect, just a witness. Why on earth does a man who is only a witness, hire an attorney? Why does he further have that attorney give interviews in his name and on his behalf, instead of doing interviews himself?


34. Even though they weren’t giving up on MJ yet (since they worked on him for an hour at the hospital), the ambulance that left his house had no sirens or lights. An ambulance in an emergency medical situation, always has sirens and lights.


35. During the memorial Kenny Ortega said MJ had been there dancing less than a week ago. But at the memorial MJ had been dead for two weeks. Now clearly this could be him misspeaking, but no stone unturned.


36. Dr. Murray was slated to accompany MJ to London, but he’s not licensed to practice medicine there.


37. The LAFD fire chief in an interview with a BBC reporter kept referring to MJ as “the patient” from the 911 call. He refused to name him because of “HIPPA” violations. Well by this time the ENTIRE WORLD knew it was Michael Jackson. There is no harm in him stating “Michael Jackson” but he repeated “the patient” over and over and said he couldn’t even confirm his identity because of HIPPA violations. WTFever. The woman interviewing him also repeatedly said something about them picking up Jackson from the place he was practicing instead of his rented home (which is the official story) and he never corrected her. (Later he did mention Michael Jackson by name in an interview with CNN. HIPPA laws extend into death, so why exactly is he breaking HIPPA now when he was so paranoid about it before?)


38. In interviews the entire family continues to refer to MJ in present tense. One of the most striking examples is La Toya rolling down her car window and saying something about how they all appreciate the fan support, and Michael does too. Oh does he? What an odd statement to make. Even Paris’ speech at the memorial, moving as it was, is in present tense. “I just wanted to say that ever since I was born, Daddy has been the best daddy you could possibly imagine. And I just want to say that I love him so much.” That’s all present tense. Paris isn’t lying. She also is probably genuinely emotional considering how she worries about her daddy.


39. AFTER many people, including a site getting a lot of media attention called Michael Jackson Hoax death, whines and complains for weeks about how there only seems to be one photograph of Dr. Murray and no video… only40. Diprivan is not a common drug for recreational drug use. It’s a rather bizarre drug to abuse. Nor is it a drug that makes you feel at all rested (as you dont’ get REM) It is a completely pointless drug for anyone with an “addiction” or “need for sleep” to take. Further, a story has been floating around about how MJ had an anasthesiologist on tour with him years ago. This makes NO sense given what is factually true about these drugs… namely that you CANNOT get rest. he wouldn’t have been able to perform. This sounds to me like another hyperbaric chamber or elephant man bones story. Also, people who take Diprivan long term develop amnesia and motor coordination problems. MJ researched everything,which is probably why he was so into organic foods. Why would he not research something more dangerous he was putting into his body? And why would he put it into his body if it could affect his ability to dance? How could MJ have done the tours where supposedly he was on Diprivan, if he didn’t get rest PLUS was going to have motor coordination problems? Has anyone SEEN MJ dance? It’s not like Ozzy jumping around on stage.


41. The LAPD didn’t mark the house off as a crime scene and the family was in and out of the house for FOUR days before the LAPD thought “hey maybe we’ve got a crime scene here.” It is said that the family took things out, but they just as easily could have planted things. (such as drugs and such that were later found.) If the family was taking a bunch of things out… why would they leave the drugs in? If they suspected foul play why would they compromise the crime scene?


42. Dr. Murray’s office and home were only RECENTLY raided, after a MONTH from the death. Shouldn’t that have been done sooner? Won’t all evidence be gone?


43. Supposedly files were removed from Dr. Murray’s office on the day of MJ’s death 3 hours before the hospital was called, which calls into question how long Dr. Murray waited to call the paramedics… but…


44. The picture in the ambulance doesn’t look like a long-dead MJ. It doesn’t even look like a dead MJ (he’s got a popping vein in his forehead. You don’t get that on a dead body.) In fact… the MJ in the ambulance doesn’t even look like MJ circa 2009, but rather like MJ circa 1995 which is another time when he had a collapse and was rushed to the doctor. Could the photograph be photoshopped with earlier images not used by the same tabloid reporter?


45. The tabloid reporter from TMZ who got the “last photo” of Michael Jackson, just happens to be a licensed EMT and wants to quit the paps and go to medical school. That photo sure would pay the way for that.


46. After the death Joe Jackson in an interview pimped his new record label and said the kids were doing “great.” A little odd, no? How would these kids be doing great? He also claimed Omer Bhatti was MJ’s son and that he knew MJ had a secret son. Omer Bhatti has denied he is MJ’s kid. Even though admitting to such a thing would help his music career. (Omer’s)


47. TMZ seems to be the first on the scene for EVERY story. They scoop all other major news outlets. Who is feeding them?


48. There are MANY conflicting reports about MJ’s death. He died in the bedroom, he died in the doctor’s room. Prince witnessed it, not one witnessed it. MJ was already dead when the paramedics got there, MJ was revived and was in a coma, MJ was “worked on” for over an hour, MJ’s body was warm (incidentally a medical fact about cardiac arrest is his body would have been cold), MJ’s body was cold, MJ looked peaceful like he was sleeping, MJ’s face had been battered by CPR (huh?), The casket was closed at the memorial because the face had been battered by CPR… but the kids saw him in the private memorial, he’s been cremated, no he hasn’t, the body is missing, the body hasn’t been released to the family yet, the body has been released, the body is in a secret location, and on and on and on and on. There is not ONE fact about MJ’s “death” that anyone can agree on. (And yes, at this point I”m putting “death” in parenthesis until any two people on the face of the planet can get their story straight.)


49. On July 6th, 2002 MJ gave a speech that was basically about bringing Sony and especially Tommy Mottolla down, who MJ described as an evil man, the devil, and a racist. (Mottolla reportedly did some scary shit to Mariah Carey his ex-wife.) The very NEXT DAY, July 7th, 2002 is the date of the will that has been brought up as MJ’s will. Clearly the man feared for his life then. Is there any reason to suspect that fear was unfounded or died away? He also believed Sony was in some way involved with the child molestation trial. After all, how could MJ defend his 50% stake in the Sony catalog if he was in prison? (People have claimed MJ was broke, but he made hundreds of millions of dollars a year from his holdings in the Sony catalog. How can he be broke or in debt?)

50. The custody case is being settled out of court after many delays. (This may or may not have anything to do with anything. But there is a lot of suspicion surrounding the many delays in many areas of this situation.) It’s been reported that the custody to Katherine Jackson is temporary. many believe custody will eventually be transferred over to Rowe. But why would it? If MJ is alive, the custody to Katherine is temporary for obvious reasons.


51. MJ rehired attorney John Branca three weeks before his “death.” He also rehired several others like Frank Dileo and Karen Faye.


52. The 911 operator HUNG UP on the caller saying to call back if they needed anymore help. That is 100% against 911 policy. They have to stay on the line until the paramedics get there.


53. Within a few hours of the cardiac arrest, all of Jackson’s staff was fired. (Why wouldn’t they keep them on for security detail for the house instead of ransacking it and screwing up a possible crime scene?) In fact, most of the staff doesn’t seem to have seen much of anything and firing them would be a good way to keep them FROM seeing anything. They were removed from the premises immediately and then fired very soon after that.


54. La Toya has been interviewed by Tabloids (for money) where she’s said MJ was murdered and she will reveal by who if the police don’t. Joe and Katherine have also stated they believe there is foul play. Why wouldn’t La Toya just go to the police?


55. There were no drugs found in MJ’s home until the second search. (after family members have been there.)


56. Conrad Murray had been Jackson’s doctor for 11 days.


57. At the end of the memorial: “I’m here and I’m alive forever” flashed on the screen with a picture of MJ. As well as the end picture from Liberian Girl where MJ was directing a video unseen by the participants.


58. A mysterious source has released the pepsi footage of MJ’s burn accident from 1984. Pepsi is reportedly outraged by the leak. Michael Jackson had the only footage. Who released this footage and why? And oh hey… it supports the drug theory!


59. TMZ released the 911 call first. How did they get it? They also released the “place with no name” unreleased song clip.


60. In yet another “contradictory story” MJ’s chef, after a FULL MONTH comes out with her story of the day of MJ’s death. Supposedly Prince was called in to witness the CPR. Now one could say this is very suspicious and maybe Dr. Murray was trying to build a defense showing he tried to save MJ. But… if this kid really witnessed this, wouldn’t he have been traumatized? And is there any evidence he was traumatized at the memorial? And what about Joe Jackson a few days after the death saying the kids were doing “great.” Would Prince be “doing great” if he’d witnessed such a traumatizing scene? So then why is the chef lying about this? To the Associated Press of all places (If you’re going to lie, why not lie to the Tabloids and make money?) On top of all this, we have yet another witness (the chef), saying there was no evidence of MJ abusing RX drugs. hmmmm. So many conflicting stories.


61. The Michael Jackson Memorial is listed on IMDB.com and not only the singers and speakers but the family and Michael Jackson himself is listed as “Cast” A bit of an odd way to classify it.


62. When Jermaine sang “Smile” at the memorial, he mixed some lyrics up… instead of “Hide any trace of sadness” he sang “Hide any trace of gladness.” and “light up your face with sadness.” If it’s just a slip of the tongue, then how did he slip on BOTH lyrics? And completely reverse them? This can clearly be heard in the Memorial footage.


63. This Is It is listed in IMDB for release date October 30th, but the page was created on July 6th, 2009, one day before the memorial. This was before they had supposedly spoken to a judge to get permission to do it, before they’d supposedly sold the rights. The reality is, they moved on this deal IMMEDIATELY when MJ “died.” They did not wait and mourn. The wheels are already set in motion and the deal is already done at least one day before the memorial.


64. Everyone is speaking of MJ in present tense that is being interviewed. Anyone who didn’t know MJ was dead certainly wouldn’t know it after most of these interviews either.


65. In the 911 call, the caller says that they are calling from 100 North Carolwood drive, Los Angeles California, 90077. Now if you go to googlemaps and check that out… there is a business at that address called RNA construction. The number listed with it is disconnected.


66. Remember how none of the friends of MJ, the real close friends, showed up at the memorial? All making excuses about how sad they were or whatever? Quincy Jones couldn’t go because it was so sad after James Brown. Well James Brown died three years ago. I mean come on. Then Macaulay Culkin has been pretty radio silent and didn’t even attend the memorial. He hasn’t even said anything about MJ. (Neither has Oprah.) Culkin’s sister recently died so we could cut him some slack. That’s gotta be tragic… but.. John Hughes… director of Home Alone recently passed, Culkin is paying tribute to him… yet he has pretty much ignored MJ’s death. WHY? That’s a little on the strange side. They were friends for over nearly 20 years.


67. Kenny Ortega and several of the dancers from the This Is It tour have made bizarre and cryptic comments on their Twitter accounts, obliquely referencing this project after MJ’s death. They are a little too giddy. The dancers still have their contracts (2 year contracts, which indicate whatever was being planned was more than just 50 shows.) The dancers are also under special agreements where they can’t talk about certain things. One of the dancers named Timor, talked about MJ on a dutch television program after the death. He kept speaking about MJ in present tense saying things like: “He loves life” Even the host noticed all this present tense talk, got a puzzled look on his face and asked WHY he was speaking about him in present tense… he said something like MJ was in his heart or something. He also has a twitter account in which he mentions getting on a plane and going to LA and about it being a small step for him, but a big step for the world. Oh really? Don’t you have to be a meglomaniac to think anything you’re doing in LA is a big step for the world? Timor didn’t strike me as a meglomaniac.


68. During a Larry King Live interview (another one), Jermaine continues to talk about MJ in present tense, saying things like “he reads everything.” Oh really? Does he? It’s been 6 weeks, and Jermaine and everyone else talks about MJ as if he’s still alive. Anyone who didn’t know MJ had died, wouldn’t know it now either.


69. There was no insurance on MJ with AEG for death supposedly, it was only for non-performance.


70. MJ supposedly had a 3 million dollar life insurance policy. (Why for so little when Heath Ledgers was for 10 million and MJ is WAY bigger than Heath Ledger. Isn’t 3 million dollars about like a roll of quarters to MJ?) We’ve heard stories in legitimate newspapers that someone let the life insurance lapse… in which case it wouldn’t be paid out. But then we hear other reports that the life insurance has paid out… due to the apparently supernatural powers of Branca and McLain to make it happen. In a situation like this, an insurance company will do everything they can not to have to pay out. There is no way they paid out before things are all settled. Not buying it. Sorry. Not only this, but supposedly the reports where the life insurance was paid is in SEALED court documents that no one can read. IF Life insurance paid 3 million, isn’t it MORE likely the life insurance was just cashed out… the money that was paid into it? You can cash out your life insurance if you’re still alive. And NO insurance company is going to pay out with so many questions swirling around about the death. They have big time attorneys too. John Branca is brilliant, but he wouldn’t intimidate an insurance company.


71. Joe Jackson, Jermaine Jackson, and Frank Dileo have all stated on filmed interviews (where you can physically watch their mouths moving as opposed to the printed press where anyone can write anything), that they heard about MJ in the hospital from a fan. A fan? really? So do a lot of Michael Jackson fans have Joe, Jermaine, and Frank’s telephone numbers? Why on earth would you hear that sort of thing from a fan? In another interview at Neverland, Jermaine claims CNN called him and told him about MJ in the hospital. Really? Jermaine is that tight with CNN that they call him to tell him about matters in his own family?


72. Mark Lester, the godfather of the children, has come out now and said he thinks he’s Paris’ daddy. (He is on video saying this so it’s not just tabloid gossip.) Arnold Klein claims he is the father of one or more of MJ’s children. Well I personally feel that MJ is the bio dad of all three of his children. They look bi-racial to me. MJ has both white and native american roots in his family tree. If he procreated in any manner with a white woman, it’s highly likely any children produced from her would look more white. But the kids look like their daddy when he was little. Paris looks a lot like her aunt Janet. So why suddenly are people that MJ trusted, like Klein and Lester, coming out and saying they’re the daddy? Could it be possible, that they are trying to get paternity tests, and those paternity tests would prove MJ was the bio dad of ALL three of his kids? Finally shutting up one set of rumors about him?


73. Both Brian Oxman (family attorney) and Uri Gellar (like how the hell does he know), claim that MJ has been already buried and was buried right after the memorial. Well, that’s strange, since Jermaine JUST told us on Larry King the friday before this that MJ hadn’t been buried yet and they don’t know where they’re putting him and that Katherine knows all that stuff. Mmmmhmmm. To make matters weirder, why would MJ be buried without his brain? The family didn’t have the brain on July 7th and as far as I’m aware they still don’t, or else have JUST recently gotten it. (Yes, I know that’s morbid to talk about but… the story just keeps getting stranger and stranger. I really can’t believe more people aren’t standing up and crying foul here.)


74. Uri Gellar (who I severely dislike but this is a good point), stated originally that he didn’t believe MJ was dead, he thought it was a hoax at first. And he said that he wouldn’t believe it until he heard from the doctor that worked on MJ. Um, well, Uri, honey… we haven’t heard from the doctor. There has never been any statement from any doctor at UCLA, nor has there been a statement officially from Dr. Murray. Dr. Murray wouldn’t even sign the death certificate. So are we back to hoax then?


75. Karen Faye has started talking about weird stuff on her facebook. Things like having to feed MJ with a spoon he was so weak. Why would Karen Faye a long term trusted friend of MJ start facebooking about all this stuff (and many have confirmed this is her actual facebook.) She’s also made other bizarre statements like “Michael Jackson didn’t know how to use a computer.” Sure he didn’t. he knew all about cameras, loved technology, was really involved with his music and videos, and knew how to operate a soundboard (which is infinitely more difficult than your average home computer), but he can’t operate a computer. Mmmmhmmm. I guess he just had his laptop for decoration then. I’ve seen pictures from the nineties of him on a laptop. He had Mac's in his house.



76. Reports have said that Murray and Klein will both be charged in two weeks. Oh really? Will they now? Cause supposedly the autopsy and tox results can’t be released to the public for fear of hampering the investigation. Yet an “unnamed source” can tell us that these two are about to be charged, giving them ample warning so they can flee the country. Yeah, sure. Why hasn’t this unnamed source leaked info from the autopsy or tox results? If they’re so chatty all of a sudden?


77. Dr. Murray released a video on Youtube, thanking his supporters for standing by him. It’s reminiscent of MJ’s 1993 and 2004 video statements regarding the molestation charges. Except the difference is… in MJ’s videos he stressed his innocence, Murray spends about 95% of his video message giving a shout out to his “peeps.” The message is pretty vague and cryptic, and doesn’t mention michael jackson by name at all, or the possible charges against him. Those who believe this is a hoax, believe that this isn’t actually a message from Dr. Murray, but is a message from Michael to his fans who believe he’s alive. Either way though the intended audience is most definitely NOT his “supporters.” It’s either a PR move to humanize him, or it’s a message from Michael Jackson himself.


78. It was announced that MJ would be buried on August 29th. (His birthday.) This is fairly weird since much of his family is JW and they do not acknowledge birthdays at all. it’s also fairly morbid. The burial has been announced and delayed many many times now. Joe Jackson has NOW stated that MJ won’t be buried on his birthday but is likely to be buried on August 31st, or even later.


79. While several members of the Jackson family have claimed that MJ is at Forest Lawn, telephone calls to forest lawn indicated that MJ wasn’t at any of their locations, period. (A more normal statement would have been that they aren’t authorized to discuss Mr. Jackson.) Man, I bet the people at forest lawn HATE Michael Jackson fans with all of them that have called. THEN does TMZ and a couple of other places conveniently start to show new photographs and even a video (which there is no way to tell is Dr. Murray at all.) Are they responding to our suspicions? Why are they just now all of a sudden producing a few extra photos and videos? Even so, why are papparazzi not camped out at this man’s house if they know the location? Why don’t get get more photographs and video of him? Does this seem very likely?

80. Dr. Murray’s attorney stated that when Murray found Jackson, he had a “weak pulse” and was warm but had stopped breathing. That is not cardiac arrest. Murray’s attorney said Murray stated he gave CPR, but you do not give CPR with a pulse, you give artificial respiration, which is a different thing. A cardiologist would know this. A doctor would know this. Hell, anyone who has passed the eighth grade would know this


81. The Siren and Lights Pickle (figured out by Anna K. of MJHD): When the ambulance left MJ’s house there was no siren and lights. It’s illegal to use siren and lights in a non-emergency situation, but in an emergency situation it’s policy. Some say MJ was dead when they got there which is why there are no sirens and lights but… the ambulance photo shows them trying to save him, and if they were doing that, there would be sirens and lights… plus he hadn’t been pronounced dead either… so… sirens and lights. ALSO (and this part is my addition to this): the 911 call: the dispatcher said: “Call us back if you need anything else” and disconnected the call. This is 100% against policy. They have to stay on the line in an emergency situation until the paramedics arrive, even if there is a doctor on the scene. BUT… if it’s not an emergency situation… I guess they’d want to keep the line free, huh?


82. Dr. Murray’s attorney has posted a list of “friends and patients” to support Dr. Murray on their website along with telephone numbers. File this in the “bizarre Legal Defense strategy of the century” drawer.


83. Mark Lester talks some more about how he’s Paris’ daddy except this time he talks to a more legit news source and says Michael was too shy and uncomfortable having sex with women so… he asked for Mark’s sperm instead. (Raise your hand if you think Michael would really find it more comfortable to ask Mark Lester for some of his sperm than use his own in a clinical setting or sleep with a woman… yeah me either.)


84. (This one was shared to me by Mo from MJDHI): The photographer who got the “last photo of MJ” kind of failed to mention that it wasn’t really the only photo. There were THREE. I’ve seen all three, and it is clear from the movement of the paramedics in relation to MJ that they are three completely unique photographs. What is the likelihood that the one photographer who got “the last shot of MJ” got 3 PERFECT clear and non-blurry photographs in the span of a couple of seconds with the hubbub, a moving ambulance (however slowly), paramedics moving inside the ambulance, and tinted black windows with bright sunshine out? Close to zero maybe? Also… WHY is one of the members of the TMZ team standing back across the street to get a clear wide angle shot of the guy who is taking the “last photo of MJ” it’s almost like a “proof shot” Like “Hey look, the photo you saw of MJ dying is totally real, we promise.” This looks like a pretty organized effort. If MJ is really dying in this ambulance, why isn’t the papparazzi guy across the street trying to move in and get the money shot too? Is he really that magnanimous? Or does he feel he’s documenting history by getting a shot of the other guy taking the picture?


85. The LAPD chief of police has resigned, in the middle of the Michael Jackson case (a case that could make his career), 2 years before his tenure is up. His resignation is effective October 31st, which coincidentally is only a few days after the release of the This Is It movie. He is reportedly going into private security and re-locating. The LAPD chief of police is one of the few non-corrupt people in the LAPD, could he be uncomfortable enough with a situation involving MJ that he’s chosen to step down and remove himself from the area?


86. Caught by Salvatora on MJHD The chef claims on LKL that Murray came running down the stairs at 12:05 screaming for help. But the screen in the firetruck that shows the transcript of the 911 call says the 911 call came in at 12:21. Where is the missing 15 minutes? What happened for 15 minutes. It’s also been reported they arrived at the house around 12:27 or 12:30 but they didn’t leave the house until 1 pm to go to the hospital. Some reports indicated they may have been trying to revive michael at the house for up to 45 minutes. Why? the hospital is five minutes away? And that Ambulance pic is NOT someone who has been dead for 45 minutes. And if he’d been dead for 45 minutes why would Jermaine say his body at the hospital was warm? Some paramedics have supposedly stated MJ was stabilized before arriving at the hospital. If that’s so, how could he be dead? Wouldn’t the CNN and headline news reported Coma story make more sense?


87. There is something DEFINITELY weird about the murray video. When I first saw it I thought his lips looked weird and he looked kind of CGI’d. Also the video is obviously and poorly spliced at :38 seconds in the vid. Several have said maybe Murray is MJ in a costume, but I think maybe the truth is even better than that. If MJ is alive, the Murray vid is most likely a message from him. What if he delivered the message himself and then they CGI’d murray over him (ala a couple of characters in Pirates of the Carribbean) and MJ used a fake accent and they altered the voice too. Watch the murray vid and the 1993 MJ vid back to back and see what I mean. This is WAy too michael jackson like. Souza81 from MJHD suggested that MJ did the audio maybe and Murray lip sync’d. That idea didn’t make total sense to me because why would they do that? But maybe MJ did the audio AND video and then they altered the audio and CGI’d Murray over the video. Hey, it wouldn’t be weirder than anything else going on here.


88. Mark Torbiner was the man that gave Jordie Chandler the Sodium Amytal which brought about his false confession. He was also brought in to testify in the 2005 criminal trial, AND he is listed by some as possibly one of MJ’s enabling doctors. WHY WHY WHY would MJ go to Mark Torbiner of ALL people for drugs?


89. All mainstream news outlets are reporting that court documents have been unsealed and that they reveal Murray gave MJ a cocktail of drugs before giving propofol. If Murray had actually confessed this to police he would have already been arrested, because he wasn’t authorized or certified to prescribe OR administer anything more serious than cough syrup in the state of california. Propofol is a legal loophole because it’s not a controlled substance. But if he admitted to administering the other drugs he would have been arrested.
90. Michael Jackson is wrongly listed in the Social Security death index. (the SSA admits that errors occur and sometimes people are mistakenly listed who aren’t dead. So anyone using the SSDI as a proof that MJ is dead, is really grasping at straws.) Michael Jackson’s legal name is: Michael Joe Jackson (we know this because the trial against him in 2005 was: The State of California vs. Michael Joe Jackson… they have to use your real and full legal name.) But the Death Certificate says: Michael Joseph Jackson. ERROR. AND… in the social security database he’s listed as: Joseph Michael Jackson, which is TWO errors in listing.


91. A lot has been said about Sony and a possible murder conspiracy, but Tommy Motolla was fired a long time ago and power in Sony has shifted. MJ received an award a few years ago where he was greeted by the new person in charge at Sony/Epic and it was an artist like him. And he said “My how things have changed.” Could the Sony Threat be a red herring?


92. La Toya and other family members have screamed murder conspiracy, the AEG concerts don’t seem like they were ever planned to actually go forward because of a lack of rider in the contract… and yet… Kenny Ortega was invited to the burial. Why? If AEG was suspected as a part of a murder conspiracy, Ortega would not have been invited. Further, Ortega is too happy and giddy for a man who just lost a friend.


93. For that matter, Liz Taylor and Mac Culkin, also at the burial, were happy and giddy themselves. The atmosphere of all the people present was more like a wedding than a funeral. Why is that?


94. The Jackson family PURPOSEFULLY cultivated a media circus for the burial. Why would they do that if MJ was dead and they were truly grieving? We can say maybe more opportunistic members of the family did it, but we’ve been told from day one that Katherine was in charge and control of all of it. They announced to the media the date, time and location of the burial, as well as having it outdoors. If they didn’t want the media attention they would have done things very differently. If they did want the media attention, either they are soulless people who don’t truly love Michael, or Michael isn’t dead and they are taking direction from him.


95. Since MJ’s death, Frank Dileo has been on camera on two different occasions saying completely contradictory things on MJ. On an LKL interview he claimed MJ was in control of his life, no one told MJ what to do, if he wanted to see you he did, if he didn’t see you it was because he didn’t want to see you. No one was controlling or isolating MJ etc. etc. Then in a video about Tohme Tohme and his shady history… Dileo tells a completely opposite story about how Tohme Tohme was controlling and isolating MJ. So which is it? Perhaps Tohme Tohme is a red herring as well.


96. There has been no more talk about arresting Murray (well aside from arresting him over something having absolutely nothing to do with Michael Jackson). If Murray were to be arrested and tried it would be in the state of California, and therefore he would be required to have attorneys who could represent him in California. But his attorneys are only licensed in Texas. WHY doesn’t he have an attorney who could defend him in CA? The state he would be arrested and tried in?


97. Michael Jackson was rolled out of the helicopter covered in a white sheet (that didn’t really look like it had a body underneath it IMO.), They normally have a blue thicker material they cover the body with. Or sometimes a black bag, depending on location and circumstances I suppose. But never a white sheet. Generally whatever is covering the body has text on it like LA County Coroner or something of that nature. This was just a white sheet with no identifying markers on it of any kind.


98. The This-Is-It dancers were the ushers for the funeral. (Kind of weird since this is usually a job handled by funeral home employees.)


99. At the end of the This Is It film, after the very very end of the credits, there is a tiny little scene where MJ says the following: LET ME BREATH IN MY OWN TIME
AND THEN I WILL COME BACK IN
I HAVE TO BUTTON MY SHIRT MY JACKET
MOVE AROUND A LITTLE BIT
SNAP MY FINGERS
THEN BAM!
Now it could mean nothing, but it’s an odd thing to put at the end of the film considering the context.

100. Also in the film: There was NO mention of MJ having died at all, no RIP, no in memory of, no dates. Nothing. If I had been living in a cave the past few months and went in to see the movie and didn’t know beforehand that MJ had died, I wouldn’t have known after, either.

101. In complete contrast to the media stories and portrayal, MJ was not in any way frail or sickly or out of it. Nor was he a “puppet” that was being controlled. Nor did he seem in any way scared or unenthusiastic like he was being forced into things. (i.e. many people including people close to MJ and his family have LIED.) MJ was large and in charge. He was on top of every aspect of the production, directing people. He knew exactly what he wanted. He was happy, and playful, and energetic, and he still had the moves and the voice. He was incredible! And this was just rehearsals! (Remember how Karen Faye said on her facebook that she had to cut up his chicken because he was so weak? Um no!) There is NO way this man was on taking Propofol, period. Now could he have been on painkillers, possibly, I don’t know. but he sure as holy **** wasn’t on Propofol.


102. Also in the movie: MJ had created a new video for Smooth Criminal. It was an old film from 1946 called “Gilda” in which MJ was put into the film in place of one of the other characters. The character MJ replaces in the film… in the story of the original movie, that character fakes his death. MJ edited part of the storyline. In the original storyline the man who faked his death gets killed, in the new MJ storyline, he escapes by jumping out a window.


103. Some fans are reporting that there is more than one version of the TII movie. In the credits some have sworn they saw: “Michael WANTED to thank…” and others have seen “Michael WANTS to thank…” There are also a few other discrepencies which lead many fans to believe there is more than one version of this film floating around.


104. Timor, one of the TII dancers is rehearsing like crazy for a project he won’t divulge. (Timor is the dancer that was interviewed and said “Michael LOVES LIFE” after MJ had supposedly died. Present tense and that sentence is just more than just the normal “talking about a dead guy in present tense.” The show host got a weird look on his face, noticed it and commented on it, Timor seemed uncomfortable and then quickly said something like MJ was in his heart or something.) Timor is also the one who soon after Mj’s death was on his Twitter talking about going to LA and something about a big step for mankind. I mean come on, he’s not landing on the moon, what could Timor be doing that is that important and earth shattering that the entire world is going to stand up and take notice of?


105. The dancers were contracted for 2 years even though the concerts were all supposed to happen within a 1 year time frame. Also, even after MJ died, the dancers and other cast and crew from the show still maintains their silence about much of what went on.


106. Despite continued claims that the movie wasn’t planned before MJ died, in the movie we see documentary style interviews filmed in the same high def the rehearsals are filmed in. Many of these documentary interviews are clearly happening AT THE TIME, before MJ passed. These aren’t people they got together to film this after he died. Why did they have that kind of footage if there was no movie planned?


107. There were also parts of the show that weren’t even done yet. Costumes not ready, sets not created, certain things that were supposed to be created (like films) for certain songs that weren’t done. When were they intending on doing all this? In London? A few days before opening night?


108. At the memorial, at the end, not only does it say: “I’m alive and I’m here forever” on the screen, but there is an image of MJ behind the camera in the Liberian Girl video. This is a video where the plot of the video is basically that michael jackson is directing this video unknown to everyone else until we see him at the end. Also, at the burial, the image of MJ on the program is from the Liberian Girl video.


109: Oddness about the LA Coroner: Craig Harvey. He is listed in IMDB.com as having worked on some film projects in the past. He also has a rather bizarre twitter page. Now he doesn’t have a “verified” twitter account, so he could be anyone. But what is interesting is… his first tweet came through on June 20th. So 5 days before MJ died, the coroner of LA decided just for the hell of it to start a Twitter account. Then his other posts are cryptic about MJ. How would a “fake craig harvey” know to start a twitter account five days before MJ died? And what would be the point anyway if he’s STILL only got 34 followers?


110. More about the dancers: In Timor’s Tweets, he mentions things about working with Nick and Misha (currently after MJ is dead.) What are the odds that Timor, Misha, and Nick all TII dancers are all going to be involved in a big project just a few weeks after the death of Michael Jackson together in LA? Also… remember they were under 2 year contracts with AEG. Because of the nature of the project it is very likely the contracts prohibited them from taking other projects during the terms of their contract so they would be open and free should the concerts extend past one year. So did AEG quickly revise the contracts after MJ died to free them up to do other work? (seems weird and unlikely.) How exactly did in just a few weeks, these people have time to mourn/deal with the loss of MJ and the tour they were so excited about, AND secure other contracts with other companies, for “something big” no less, while somehow skirting around the legalese of the contracts they were still under?


111. Despite reports to the contrary, on TII MJ is shown as being Lucid, on top of his game, energetic, excited, happy, etc. While it’s possible MJ could have had some bad days, he’s STILL in better shape than most Americans who even on their BEST days in their twenties can’t do much of what MJ was doing at 50 and supposedly frail and sick and drugged and on death’s door. (Yes, this is similar to an earlier comment on this list, but… some have tried to say “Well they had over a hundred hours of footage. They took the best footage and the rest is him sickly and frail and drugged and stuff. And MY point is… someone who is THAT sick and frail and drugged up, CANNOT do for even five minutes the stuff MJ was doing. I wonder if some people have even met frail, sickly and drugged up people before.)


112. Though I’ve wanted to avoid mentioning the family… one thing I want to say about the family and friend’s reactions and behaviors since the death. Fans have been out weeping in the streets and the family and friends show little emotion. If MJ had died a totally natural death then MAYBE I could accept these reactions, but with it being fairly obvious that if MJ died it was senseless and could have been prevented and people involved in the TII production helped kill him (through neglect and being greedy if for no other reason), it seems a little odd the behavior that has been displayed. Not only that but… if you were MJ’s family and you knew that his involvement in these concerts put so much stress and pressure on him, it led to his death, would you have the TII dancers at the Burial as ushers? Would you invite Kenny Ortega? Would you really? No offense to Kenny but the man, and the dancers are WAY too happy. We’re talking about possible murder or death by severe neglect. We’re talking about KO possibly having a hand in it by not getting MJ help and ignoring the signs. None of these reactions make sense in light of the “official story” we’ve been given. Also… why has Murray STILL not been arrested?


113. Ben Evanstead, the guy who took the “Last photo of MJ” (ambulance photo), in an interview available on Youtube he says some strange things talking about MJ and the photo that was taken. For one thing, he talks about how Michael was always going to the hospital and that maybe he was trying to get out of the concerts, that it’s always drama with Michael. And there WERE an awful lot of “sickly” photos of MJ leading up to the concert comeback announcement, which makes the TII movie defy logic. Also Ben is a fan of MJ’s, and there are many pictures floating around the internet of him and MJ getting their picture made together. Also, at the end of the clip (around 4:13) there is a slip up (thank you to: CantgetenoughMJ for bringing this to my attention) EXACT QUOTE: “Yes Chris, and the other people that were there that day and the other da… uh and uh are part of that agreement, are going to make a lot of money, absolutely.” And he looked somewhat uncomfortable. It seems that he’s implying there was more than one day when they were taking the “last photo of MJ” which can only be possible if MJ isn’t dead. (Unless MJ died on two different days.)


114. Arnie Klein in an interview on LKL (I skimmed the list to see if I already had this one, I guess it seemed too small at the time to mention but it’s becoming more important as more and more people seem to be lying and having weird slip-ups in interviews. This just makes me think anyone can hoax their death and get away with it since people will just IGNORE shit once they’ve made up their mind about the truth of an issue), said that MJ was the world’s greatest ACTOR. Um, sorry, that’s not what MJ is known for. Then he corrects his slip-up. But if MJ has been going to the hospital and acting sick and frail and then kicking ass in the TII movie… I’d say that’s some pretty fine acting.


115. This one comes from a commenter named Monroe: ‘This Is It’ actually contains another film from the Smooth Criminal portion. Bogart’s line “What do want me to do count to three like they do in the movies?” comes from a 1946 film ‘The Big Sleep’ where a detective played by Bogart is pulled into a whirlwind of blackmail, lies, double-crossing, and murder while trying to answer the question “What happened to Sean Regan?” And despite the man’s disappearance being the kick off for the events of the film the question is never fully answered. Sound familiar? Now of course the similarities to Michael Jackson’s disappearance/death on June 25th kicking off a twlightzone like scenario of lies, ever changing reports (in coma/DOA at UCLA, drugged/not drugged, healthy weight/anorexic) and just plain bizarre behavior could be a coincidence after all that is a cool quote, but no stone unturned right?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 03, 2011, 07:03:05 PM
Hi, Mr. OK, you asked about numbers, I don't believe the preference for a number makes you a numerologist fan really. But i would like to let you know that not everyone believes this hoax is based on numerology and even they do think so i don't think they consider that this is the essential part in this hoax. Or maybe i am wrong, but as far as i'm concerned, numerology is not the reason i believe Michael is alive.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 03, 2011, 07:16:06 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
Hi, Mr. OK, you asked about numbers, I don't believe the preference for a number makes you a numerologist fan really. But i would like to let you know that not everyone believes this hoax is based on numerology and even they do think so i don't think they consider that this is the essential part in this hoax. Or maybe i am wrong, but as far as i'm concerned, numerology is not the reason i believe Michael is alive.

Numerology is not the ONLY reason why I believe Michael is alive but numerology is the most important solid proof that this is a hoax and everything was arranged by the master of illusion.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 03, 2011, 09:05:13 PM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Quote from: "ok"
[/b]
I know when my mom died I was a wreck for at least 2 months, couldn't smile or even take care of myself, I looked terrible, totally different of my usual self because losing a parent is a trauma at any age, but especially at such an young age  :?


I completely know what you felt cause I have experienced the same, took me longer.. But believe me, when the opposit happens and parent buries its child, it must be 10 times more painful.
Right here I have a question to you. Explain how could Katherine go Target to do shopping, looking very calm and good,on the 3rd day of her sons sudden death? And how paparazzi again was right there, just like Ben the only pap. on June 25thy happened to be at Carolwood dr.


[youtube:38ltzr6k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6aU_vAtw-Q[/youtube:38ltzr6k]

I CAN SEE NON- BELIEVER GUESTS ARE  SPEECHLESS. NO HEAVY ARGUMENTS ON MY QUESTION?
HERE IS ANOTHER ONE: HOW IS IT POSSIBLE FATHER DID NOT SEE HIS DEAD SON TO SAY AT  LEAST LAST GOOD BYE PROPERLY, DID NOT KNOW WHERE MJ's BODY WAS  ALL THE TIME BEFORE FUNERAL, WHY WAS SO CHEERFUL DURING  2009 BET AWARD,HOW COULD LEARN ABOUT MJ FROM FAN, ETC, ETC.......? watch the video to the end, very interesting and don't say that he deserved it. If you watch 2005 trial how Joe was next to MJ every single day. This is NOT that same careful Joe to me. Theese are a few out of many reasons we believe Michael is alive.  

[youtube:38ltzr6k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ity5V-eCsvQ[/youtube:38ltzr6k]
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Kristina4LOVE on April 03, 2011, 09:11:05 PM
Quote from: "Troll"
The s at the end of pain was simply a mistake-after all it was probably done in a rush,as there would have been so many other things to do.

Hello Guest Ok!  :)
I just wanted to answer your question/statement since nobody else did.
So you're saying that 's' at the end of word 'pain' was a mistake made by family or whoever organised the Memorial Service in a rush, because they had a lot of things to do. Here i have to disagree with you  :) The words that we hear are obviously spoken by Michael, this part should have been taken from an amazing song "Will you be there", but as long as i can remember i never herd Michael saying the word 'pains' (in "Will you be there") in any recorded versions of this song, even not on the concerts, not on the video, basically i never herd him using this word in this song. Please provide a link to the source where i can hear opposite.  ;) So this was a mistake clearly made by Michael Jackson and for that to happen he must be alive. I really doubt the possibility of MJ recording this part of song, never releasing it, and family decided to reveal it for the first time at his Memorial Service.  

It's all for L.O.V.E  :D


P.S
This is a very interesting topic, i would love to be challenged with questions/statements/arguments from non believers.  :D
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 03, 2011, 09:43:37 PM
 WHY DESCRIPTION OF MICHAEL IN CASKET SAID BY MICHAEL BUSH DIFFERS FROM ONE LA TOYA SAYS TO BARBARA, ESPECIALLY ABOUT THE WHTE GLOVE. WASN'T THAT GLOVE  SOLD IN AUCTION? HOW MANY WHITE BILLIE JEAN GLOVES HAS MICHAEL USED?

[youtube:668rpg8b]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OfT8uNHmuI&feature=related[/youtube:668rpg8b]


[youtube:668rpg8b]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rD_Lx23YQe4[/youtube:668rpg8b]
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 03, 2011, 10:26:02 PM
Thread is really useful and can be used either way: we challenge non-believer guests arguments/questions or they challenge our hoax proving arguments/questions to them. Please be clear on the question/argument point and short as much as possible.

To "OK''s argument that "S" at the end of "PAIN S" was because of family's rush is unreasonable.  Besides that Michael clearly  sings his song, never ever was used "pains" in this song before,  what it has to do with rush. On the contrary, If family was in rush, then they had to use the song "as is"= as they have recorded...without "S". Would not  that be easier?[/b]
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 03, 2011, 11:55:17 PM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"

To "OK''s argument that "S" at the end of "PAIN S" was because of family's rush is unreasonable.  Besides that Michael clearly  sings his song, never ever was used "pains" in this song before,  what it has to do with rush. On the contrary, If family was in rush, then they had to use the song "as is"= as they have recorded...without "S". Would not  that be easier?[/b]

I agree with you, it makes sense if they were in a rush they should have used the common version.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 03, 2011, 11:58:33 PM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Quote from: "ok"
[/b]
I know when my mom died I was a wreck for at least 2 months, couldn't smile or even take care of myself, I looked terrible, totally different of my usual self because losing a parent is a trauma at any age, but especially at such an young age  :?


I completely know what you felt cause I have experienced the same, took me longer.. But believe me, when the opposit happens and parent buries its child, it must be 10 times more painful.
Right here I have a question to you. Explain how could Katherine go Target to do shopping, looking very calm and good,on the 3rd day of her sons sudden death? And how paparazzi again was right there, just like Ben the only pap. on June 25thy happened to be at Carolwood dr.


[youtube:5sbv72zg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6aU_vAtw-Q[/youtube:5sbv72zg]

I CAN SEE NON- BELIEVER GUESTS ARE  SPEECHLESS. NO HEAVY ARGUMENTS ON MY QUESTION?
HERE IS ANOTHER ONE: HOW IS IT POSSIBLE FATHER DID NOT SEE HIS DEAD SON TO SAY AT  LEAST LAST GOOD BYE PROPERLY, DID NOT KNOW WHERE MJ's BODY WAS  ALL THE TIME BEFORE FUNERAL, WHY WAS SO CHEERFUL DURING  2009 BET AWARD,HOW COULD LEARN ABOUT MJ FROM FAN, ETC, ETC.......? watch the video to the end, very interesting and don't say that he deserved it. If you watch 2005 trial how Joe was next to MJ every single day. This is NOT that same careful Joe to me. Theese are a few out of many reasons we believe Michael is alive.  

[youtube:5sbv72zg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ity5V-eCsvQ[/youtube:5sbv72zg]
I was shopping the next day my mom died, but I was shopping for what it was needed for the funeral :( .
Can be about their religion, they believe only the body died and this could be their comfort? But most of the religions have this belief that the soul is immortal, so why we still suffer and grieve when our loved ones die?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: trustno1 on April 04, 2011, 02:59:34 AM
Okay I've just read the entire thread and to get back to the topic, thanks Souza for the blog repost, though from what I've read in this thread some of the doubters still don't see what we do, it's hard for people who have a strong idea in their head of how something happened to be disuaded from that.  Aside from the fact that I don't even think Michael doing "this" to his children is even a valid argument as none of us know him personally, that's an opinion not a fact, so how it's used as the main argument I don't know...and the kids are totally in on it. The questions that I would ask non-believers are about the many, many, many contradictions from various family members/team MJ, the huge delays and the constant drip-drip of zany, crazy tabloid stories, some of which could probably only have come from Team MJ.  Everything was exaggerated on a grand scale, reflecting the madness that surrounded him when he was officially alive.  Hopefully providing a nice little video montage (and at the same time holding up a mirror) when he comes back.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 04:13:53 AM
This is a great discussion, but it's true where are the non-believers? They have no arguments. All these tests should know the whole world, because too many tests that make us believe he is still alive.
 It is not true that the believers are just young people, I am 45 years old and most fans, with whom I have spoken about his fake death believe he still lives, and all between 30 to 50 years old.
 We are not naive because it is more than obvious that Michael is still alive.
 It's not because we do not want to accept his death, is because there are hundreds of tests, and everything is so obvious ... but everyone should know all the evidences, to know why we believe.
 The greatest proof that Michael is still alive is that he has always surrounded by mystery, and with his false death continues the mystery, because he still lives, because it is he who makes his own hands the mystery.
 And not because the family wants to continue the mystery to making money, is that he is behind them now.It is so obvious ..
I understand that people must be well informed about the life of Michael, knowing all that is in our hands on him, and just so everyone can see that there are things much more than testing.
 Of course, Michael was talking all day with his family, and if he had really died, they would have done things differently, very differently. That, no doubt.
 His family is protecting him. We do not know for sure why Michael and the children were being threatened, perhaps, only by his fame or power that I think he has (based on evidence of course) but is more than obvious that this is, and he asks for the protection of the state. None of those involved, and Michael himself, never go to jail for it, because they are the law, and this is a plan to protect someone's life.
 I think his protection was already planned, but I think everything was done in a hurry, because I really think they tried to assassinate him, and do not know where he may be now, but at that moment, he quickly removed from the scene, even the side of his children and his family.
I think Michael since his children were born, has been thinking about how to make children do not live constantly surrounded by paparazzi, and maybe, all this has helped so, so many people believe that may be true that he made for children, but do not think that was the ultimate reason.
 Of course, his children know that he lives. Moreover, I think Michael has been talking about it for years with them. They are mature, but they are thanks to Michael. You just have to see the face that makes Prince when Oprah asked if they know why they wore masks, and laughing about something that was spoken thousands of times with his father.
 They were prepared for all this, for perhaps not seeing Michael in a while, but they are in contact, do not know if they are right now in person I wish I knew.
All this is most obvious for people like me, have a certain age. All this is too absurd to be true, Michael is not dead. Michael lives.
We have to wait...
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 04:30:50 AM
Key Master said Michael was so nice, always asking if his employees were OK and everything.
So he couldn't have faked his death and leave them without jobs.

Well, I had an employer who was SOOOOO nice but when the time came, he left hundreds of people without jobs because he had no other choise.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Sarahli on April 04, 2011, 05:41:36 AM
Quote from: "PureLove"
Quote from: "1guest"
Hi, Mr. OK, you asked about numbers, I don't believe the preference for a number makes you a numerologist fan really. But i would like to let you know that not everyone believes this hoax is based on numerology and even they do think so i don't think they consider that this is the essential part in this hoax. Or maybe i am wrong, but as far as i'm concerned, numerology is not the reason i believe Michael is alive.

Numerology is not the ONLY reason why I believe Michael is alive but numerology is the most important solid proof that this is a hoax and everything was arranged by the master of illusion.

I agree. The numerology is maybe not the only thing that make us think it's a hoax but it is the most tangible evidence proving that nothing happened by coincidence. It's like the structure of the hoax...and nobody has managed to refute it with valid arguments. It's not easy to debunk it... it's not like the lack of tears from the family during the memorial when people can just say that some people deal with pain differently for example.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: hesouttamylife on April 04, 2011, 10:17:37 AM
1.   Michael rehearsed the night before, hard.  He was fine and foine.  In fact he was sizzling and bathing in the moonlight.  
2.   0-2 announcement waaay out of  character - presentation and delivery
3.   A movie was made of the rehearsal footage, a real movie, complete with props, pops, bangs, screens, the works. Michael was even behind the cameras. Rolling Action.
4.   He made a FORMAL closing statement at the end of the movie, oops rehearsal
5.   Conrad Murray waited before calling 911 & could not perform proper CPR (pleeze!)
6.   Ambulance backed out of driveway, could have circled around – time wasted
7.   Few if any paps on the scene, no flurry of activity, no one onsite  appeared distraught – tour bus in the vicinity – however, no fan film or pics have surfaced – possibly Star Line Tours? LOL.
8.   No one actually saw MJ in distress except 1 security guard, Murray and the paramedics
9.   No one in the home saw him being put onto the stretcher or brought downstairs to the ambulance because they were all fired on the spot before that ever happened and ordered to leave (how convenient)
10.   Janet's  confusion if in Atl or NY when she learned of brother's death
11.   Jackson boys on national tv went to the wrong cemetery.
12.   LAX made the lame excuse for shutting down airport on 6/25 as being due to visibility issues – sunny day – no clouds in the sky
13.   Lone Mexecana flight departed with even stranger flight info reporting the landing status as “unknown” – WTH did it vanish into space? Who was the passenger? Such coincidence. :shock:
14.   The “hoax video” of MJ exiting the coroner's van in the parking lot, too authentic to me – And btw, what ever became of the person who released that footage?  Did not know that tv stations did those types of experiments to gauge audience response.  Did you?  If so please apprise me because this is a first for me.
15.   The hoax picture of MJ in the ambulance is obviously a fake.  No one would have been allowed around the ambulance – perimeter would have been blocked off – much less close enough to take a picture INSIDE the ambulance (com on now!) Lucky dog
16.   Paramedics at the home and at the hospital said MJ was unrecognizable – shriveled up old man.  But if we are to believe the ambu picture, he was surely recognizable on the way to the hospital.  So did he age enroute?   Who do we BeLieve?
17.   Joe actively soliciting for business at his beloved son’s Memorial
18.   Private funeral held at night at which Michael arrived fashionably late
19.   Family balling at the club after the private Funeral
Katherine loves that blue suit -In many diverse cultures blue is significant in religious beliefs, brings peace, or is believed to keep the bad spirits away.
Blue conveys importance and confidence without being somber or sinister, hence the blue power suit of the corporate world and the blue uniforms of police officers. Long considered a corporate color, blue, especially medium and darker blues, is associated with intelligence, stability, unity, and conservatism.  
And as a final note, A PORCELAIN GIRL DOLL WEARING A DRESS WAS FOUND ON TOP OF THE COVERS OF THE BED WHERE MICHAEL SLEPT, AN OFFICIAL SAID.

LIBERIAN GIRL PERHAPS? 8-)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: maninthemoon on April 04, 2011, 10:29:07 AM
There are a few main plots that are enough proof (for me).

1. The numerology.
2. Faked ambulance pic.
3. 911 call wasn't from MJ's house it was from a hotel far away. Even though they said "MJ is on the bed". Then who did they pick from the mansion?
4. "The Weird List" (all mistakes, "to the airport", "the other day" etc..)

These are already enough to prove he is alive. No?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 11:34:40 AM
ROFL..I knew you'd all be sitting there frantically tap tap tapping away on your keyboards.Meanwhilw,I've been out for a meal,to the pub,cinema,swimming ,met some friends and generally had a damn good time while you've been waisting your day away.
 I think I WIN!
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: hesouttamylife on April 04, 2011, 11:39:19 AM
Quote from: "ok"
ROFL..I knew you'd all be sitting there frantically tap tap tapping away on your keyboards.Meanwhilw,I've been out for a meal,to the pub,cinema,swimming ,met some friends and generally had a damn good time while you've been waisting your day away.
 I think I WIN!

Proividing this took no time at all.  It's so familiar by now that I hardly missed a beat.  That's the difference when you know what you know ;)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: paula-c on April 04, 2011, 11:41:12 AM
When someone is going to refute a theory (in this case that of the numbers), it must come with other solid arguments and not say that the theory of the numbers does not serve or is not cost without arguments.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Elsa on April 04, 2011, 12:08:14 PM
I'm going to highlight some of the arguments that were given in the other thread.  

Quote
KellyIsntStupid » Tue Mar 29, 2011 12:29 pm
Michael Jackson is DEAD, he isn't using ANYthing. You are all idiots and you do not know him at all if you think he is alive. He would never do that to his kids. The LAPD, the Coroner, Forest Lawn, his attorneys, his family, etc are NOT in on it, he is DEAD. And, if you think Michael Jackson would let an innocent man be charged and possibly sent to prison then you really are idiots. Wake up fools. He is only alive in your hearts...
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Elsa on April 04, 2011, 12:09:37 PM
Quote
Lorie » Tue Mar 29, 2011 12:33 pm
I agree, Michael would never do this to his kids, but I think people just don't want to believe it even though it's true. So they make up stuff. Too many people being involved would not be able to keep a secret like that and there is no where for him to go. He is dead I agree. But I also agree he is alive in our hearts like you said. Some people just want to dream and I guess that's ok they really don't think he is really alive just in their dreams. MJ would never put up with what his dad is trying to do and his kids being put on tv and everything, he would not have let that happen...
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Elsa on April 04, 2011, 12:10:18 PM
Quote
Gate Keeper » Tue Mar 29, 2011 12:41 pm
MJ is definately dead. It's sad that people make up these kinds of tablodish crap and his kids will read it one day. Grow up children, get out of fantasyland and into realityland. No one has ever faked their death and got away with it. NO one. And especiall MJ ...
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Elsa on April 04, 2011, 12:11:14 PM
Quote
Key Master » Tue Mar 29, 2011 1:44 pm
Me too, I've used my real name, its my nickname that MJ gave to me while I stayed at Neverland ranch. He use to trust me with the keys to the place and I worked in security so that was my nickname from him, I get pics and cards from him everyday from ImaginaryLand, he calls me too, I tell him how bad his dad is trying to get his money and how they have already exploited the kids on tv and etc and he says he doesn't care because if he did he wouldn't have faked his death.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Elsa on April 04, 2011, 12:12:10 PM
Quote
SandyJackson » Tue Mar 29, 2011 1:41 pm
Just think, the taxpayers of LA are really going to be upset when they find out they had to pay for a funeral that really didn't happen, lol...
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Elsa on April 04, 2011, 12:13:50 PM
Quote
Key Master » Sat Apr 02, 2011 9:13 am
You have no facts that he is alive, there are more facts that he is dead. If you have facts that he is alive, then bring it to the news for all to know about. And Murray is the one that might be sent to prison because of his negligence that killed MJ. If you think that MJ would put his kids and family thru the emotional rollercoaster they have been thru then you do not know MJ. He would not do that to his kids. The man is dead just like Elvis and everyone else. MJ would also not allow his kids to have been put on tv and exploited as they have been by Oprah and MJ would certainly not sit by and let his dad try to get his money. The LA coroner is not going to risk his career by faking documents, the police and forest lawn are not going to go along with crap like this either. The man is dead. I don't like it, you don't like it, but that's the way it is. No one has ever gotten away with faking a death, it just doesn't happen.

I am not making fun of you, but it is what it is, he is dead. And like Elvis 34yrs later, you will see that MJ is....dead. You are all very young and I understand how you want to think he is alive and his is alive in all of our hearts.

But, if you think you have facts then go to CNN and let the world know. But, I know you can't do that because you have no "facts" of him being alive. You will never see or hear from MJ again because he is really deceased. Once again, he would NEVER DO SUCH A THING TO HIS KIDS WHOM HE LOVED WITH ALL HIS HEART. And, also, he'd be sent to prison for doing it to, and he would never want to go to prison.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 12:14:50 PM
I think every theory is valid, coming from a bliever or a non believer.
However, I do know one thing for sure....none of us were there, none (well, most of us) never personally knew him or belong(s)(ed) to his inner cercle. So, therefore, we will never know what happened, who he exactly is/was. His preferences, his gusts/disgusts, his physical status, the way his mind works
All of us are just guessing. Some find clues, some follow their heart.

The evidence/clues are for the most part a hunch, defined by the majority accepting them as evidence/clues. What's written in black or white is accepted by one side and rejected by the other b/c they fit/don't fit into their theory.

Tabloids are used and rejected at the same time as posting clues....

I find this whole going back and forth between so called "camps" disturbing b/c neither side has something substantial to show for.

Just my opinion.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Elsa on April 04, 2011, 12:16:17 PM
Quote
Gate Keeper » Sat Apr 02, 2011 9:22 am
You guys, Key Master is right. MJ is dead.  If he were ever found to have faked his death he would not only be sent to prison he'd be sued for every penny he ever had, no one would buy his music anymore and he'd be washed up for being a deceitful person (which he is not).  And Key Master is correct, no one has ever faked a death and got away with it....ever. Even if you saw a body you would never want to believe it was mj anyway so that doesn't matter. People can make up bs and conspiracy about anything.

Key Master, what you said was so right on. "What ever helps you make it through the day". That's what these people do and there is nothing wrong with that. Michael was not a deceitful person and insinuating he would do this is saying he was, and he was not.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Elsa on April 04, 2011, 12:17:30 PM
Quote
Alyssa » Sat Apr 02, 2011 9:32 am
Let these people have their fun, if they want to believe such non sense let them. Everyone has an imagination, so let them. In their hearts they know that all the people that would have to be involved could never keep a secret like that. Here are all the people that would have to keep that lie going and it would never work.
LA Coroner
LA Police Department
Forest Lawn Cemetary (all the people that run it)
MJ's whole family
EMS drivers/workers/techicians
The 911 operator that was called when MJ was found dead
MJ's security people
The UCLA Hospital (doctors, nurses, etc.)
The Lawyers for MJ estate
All MJ's close friends
Conrad Murray
Grace the nanny
Kai Chase the personal cook


You people aren't this stupid. This is WAY to many people that would have had to be involved if MJ faked his death, and it's not possible, all these people would not be able to keep a secret like that, and especially, NONE of them would risk their careers and go to prison for fraud and deception.

But, like Key Master said "whatever helps you make it through the day".

MJ is dead.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Elsa on April 04, 2011, 12:20:05 PM
Quote
Sue » Sat Apr 02, 2011 9:49 am
Wrong, all the people listed would have to be involved.

Police Boss
Coroner Boss
Hospital Boss
911 operators Boss
Kai Chase
Conrad Murray
Lawyers
MJ's whole family
Security and body guards
Ambulance EMS techicians
Forest Lawn Cemetary Boss
The Mayor of LA to allow the procession for funeral
etc, etc, ect.

Too many people. And the police aren't going to do MJ ANY favors at all they hated him. It would never be allowed and people aren't foolish, mj is dead
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Elsa on April 04, 2011, 12:20:51 PM
Quote
Rob » Sat Apr 02, 2011 1:17 pm
In my opinion Key Master was not being rude at all, there was no name calling that I saw today at all. However, Key is right on with everything he/she said. Too many people would have to be involved and it would never work. But key forgot to mention that also the Judge in the upcoming trial would have to be involved and also taxpayers money wasted, so this would never happen. MJ is dead when you look at it logically.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Elsa on April 04, 2011, 12:22:05 PM
Quote
Rob » Sat Apr 02, 2011 1:21 pm
You guys are funny though, you look at a lot of fake pics and think its MJ in the background when it is not, but you see a real pic of him in the EMS and don't want to think it's him, too funny.

No matter how you toss the salad, it's the same salad, he is dead. LA already spend millions on the funeral procession in taxpayers money and now with the trial that's more money, and that would be fraud, they don't hold trials for people that have killed someone but oh they are faking, LOL

Okay these were the main arguments that I found and probably reflect what most non-believers are thinking.  If we can't respond to these, will they just stay shut off from listening to anything we have to say?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 12:23:10 PM
...and the funny thing is...a large part of your info comes from the tabloids!! Look at the threads you've created from things that have been printed in these rags.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 12:27:57 PM
clipsy.....

Well said.  Thank you.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: hesouttamylife on April 04, 2011, 12:33:34 PM
There are higher ups who can and do make these decisions regardless of what the mayor and other locals think.  You do as you're told. You shut up when you're told.  And you go with the flow or else.  Besides all those people mentioned would not even have to know what's going on.  The paramedics admitedly didn't know who the patient was as well as hospital staffers.  Kai Chase only knows what she saw which obviously wasn't much.  Michael's friends?  Who were they?  Where were they, by the way, if he had any besides Liz.  His relatives, that's another ball game.  I believe some do and some don't.  Cannot have too many people knowing what the deal is for the exact reason you mentioned.  Can't keep their mouths shut.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 12:48:16 PM
I'm totally on the wall
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MashMike on April 04, 2011, 12:53:10 PM
Nice blog Souza, i like it very much , for me the children are the main reason why MJ has hoaxed his death, if he knew that smth was off, that his and his kids' lives were in danger,i think he had no alternative.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Its her on April 04, 2011, 12:54:28 PM
Quote from: "Troll"
Quote from: "Troll"
The ambulance photo was fake because no one managed to get an up to date photo

The s at the end of pain was simply a mistake-after all it was probably done in a rush,as there would have been so many other things to do.

The numerology stuff is nonsense-no-one had THIS amount of time on their hands.

Dear Troll,

1) Good eye! Using the old photo tipped a lot of other people off that something was phony about "ambulance/death day". The Genius meant to do that. It has led to much investigation of just that picture.
 
2) MJ doesn't do ANYthing "in a rush", and this Hoax Death plan has been in the making for decades. Read the lyrics of even early, not just later songs. ;)  ;)

3)The numerology as put forth in the TIAI Updates, woudn't have needed to take all kinds of time, if one was highly intelligent and used to doing these kinds of calculations---as I believe, was the case here. But you're right, "who has THIS amount of time on their hands ?" is a true statement of exasperation, before one realizes this is MJ and his Hoax team formulating all this. 8-) If you read it carefully, it all adds up, and is not nonsense---it is amazing :o .

Don't give up yet, on BeLIEving. Keep Watching, as he said.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 01:21:13 PM
Eternalflame and Gina, hello to both of you (i am the same 1guest, indeed).
Gina, i read some of your posts maybe this could answer some questions: i didn't want to show my feelings about it, because i see you all have a very strong attachment for TS, but i am personally not fond of this character at all, i don't trust and i don't look with good eyes the student-teacher attitude as long as i don't know where i really take lessons from, i am also suspicious that some people get banned because they don't reveal or deny an identity but this character has privileged position and we should trust him just because we are told to and last but not least i don't believe Michael's hoax is connected in any way with numerology or Elvis. I respect his/her intelligence, i read his posts just like any other post (even though my intuition says there are 2 people not 1) but that's it.
Please, don't jump on me for this post, i have nothing personal with TS or with his/&supporters, i just don't find him/her more valuable than anyone of you here and, also, please don't try to convince me about his predictions because i've already READ THEM and they didn't impress me at all.

Sorry again if one of you feels offended, nothing personally, just my thoughts.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 01:26:36 PM
Hello 1guest.

I respect your opinion about TS and no, I don't feel offended at all.

Glad to see you back :mrgreen:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 01:30:23 PM
Maybe the numbers are just coincidences, yet aren't these coincidences amazing  :o ?
For example I just don't get it how the Pepsi incident happened EXACTLY on the day at the middle of Michael's life and that was that moment which was  supposed to have changed his life by making him an addict to pain-killers  :shock: !
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 04, 2011, 01:30:51 PM
Quote from: "GINAFELICIA"
Key Master said Michael was so nice, always asking if his employees were OK and everything.
So he couldn't have faked his death and leave them without jobs.

Well, I had an employer who was SOOOOO nice but when the time came, he left hundreds of people without jobs because he had no other choise.

 :lol:  Exactly. For once in his life, Michael had to care about himself, do whatever whould have saved his life. It can be because of direct threat or using for  concerts to overwhelm him, the goal was the same, to destroy MJ.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Its her on April 04, 2011, 01:33:11 PM
Quote from: "ok"
ROFL..I knew you'd all be sitting there frantically tap tap tapping away on your keyboards.Meanwhilw,I've been out for a meal,to the pub,cinema,swimming ,met some friends and generally had a damn good time while you've been waisting your day away. I think I WIN!




Well...if that were the truth, touche'. Yet, you came back to waste time with us. :D  Actually, a labor of love is never a waste of time. MJ is helping us to SEE, and we will share everything we've gotten so far, with you.

LOVE never fails. We all win. 8-)

Now, my turn to go out to eat and play :!:  ;)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 01:37:47 PM
I think the concerts were fake for the most part. All of the talk concerning them was made up.

Souza found something over a year and a half ago where she showed that there was NO CONTRACT with AEG.  There was only a rider.  That is huge.

I think MJ and AEG hooked up for the purpose of jump starting the hoax, and that is the main reason.  

I think even the ticket situation was made up.  Did anyone ever post what a ticket looked like?

The only thing that was real was the 02 Arena deal, and some don't think it was truly held in England and could have been green screened.  Lol
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 01:38:12 PM
Gina, observe your life with numerology in mind and you will be amazed how many coincidences you find:)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 01:39:02 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
Gina, i read some of your posts
oooopss , you said Ciao, I thought you were gone for good :lol:
Quote from: "1guest"
maybe this could answer some questions: i didn't want to show my feelings about it, because i see you all have a very strong attachment for TS, but i am personally not fond of this character at all, i don't trust and i don't look with good eyes the student-teacher attitude as long as i don't know where i really take lessons from, i am also suspicious that some people get banned because they don't reveal or deny an identity but this character has privileged position and we should trust him just because we are told to

Well, actually I don't mind learning, there are ALWAYS smarter people than me out there.
I'm glad you respect his/hers inteligence, I do the same, but most important to me is the character and I hate when people try to deceive the others ....you know what I mean.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 04, 2011, 01:39:41 PM
Quote from: "ok"
...and the funny thing is...a large part of your info comes from the tabloids!! Look at the threads you've created from things that have been printed in these rags.

Nope, half of info comes from tabloids. Infos I posted here, for example, uses youtube, but we actually see and hear people talking themselves, info  that comes from their mouth and we do comparison and analysis.Ben Evanstad also has 2 different stories about June 25,09, ambulance scene. Come from his mouth through youtube . As well as memorial, funeral, message in TII (BAM scene) comes from Michael's beautiful mouth, etc...
 Those type of sources I accept as primary source and rely on them.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 01:41:02 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
Gina, observe your life with numerology in mind and you will be amazed how many coincidences you find:)

I'm starting this moment and let you know later what I found :lol:
ahhhhh....you are too many smart people for me here :geek:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 01:42:20 PM
"don't trust and i don't look with good eyes the student-teacher attitude as long as i don't know where i really take lessons from"

AS LONG AS...

No, i don't know what you mean, hope i am not again on your deceving suspects list. I have no interest and i think my mental health is stable too:)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 04, 2011, 01:47:05 PM
Quote from: "GINAFELICIA"
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Quote from: "ok"
[/b]
I know when my mom died I was a wreck for at least 2 months, couldn't smile or even take care of myself, I looked terrible, totally different of my usual self because losing a parent is a trauma at any age, but especially at such an young age  :?


I completely know what you felt cause I have experienced the same, took me longer.. But believe me, when the opposit happens and parent buries its child, it must be 10 times more painful.
Right here I have a question to you. Explain how could Katherine go Target to do shopping, looking very calm and good,on the 3rd day of her sons sudden death? And how paparazzi again was right there, just like Ben the only pap. on June 25thy happened to be at Carolwood dr.


I was shopping the next day my mom died, but I was shopping for what it was needed for the funeral :( .
Can be about their religion, they believe only the body died and this could be their comfort? But most of the religions have this belief that the soul is immortal, so why we still suffer and grieve when our loved ones die?

Your situation was normal Gina because:1. you were buying things necessary for funeral; 2. you did not have housekeeper or bodyguards,  or personal assistant to do that for you, and 3. you were not 80 years old.  Ms. Katherine Jackson  buying sleeping bags herself, is VERY ODD.  ;)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 01:48:48 PM
But, Gina, i would like to repeat it: my feelings about TS were mine, just mine. Including the student-anonymus teacher disturbing feeling. Still mine.  There are no reproaches and no attempts of changing others'  impressions about TS.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 01:50:22 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
"don't trust and i don't look with good eyes the student-teacher attitude as long as i don't know where i really take lessons from"

AS LONG AS...

No, i don't know what you mean, hope i am not again on your deceving suspects list. I have no interest and i think my mental health is stable too:)

well, if that conforts you, my list of suspects is as long as China and I myself am on it  :lol:

in the meantime you could really use a little lesson about how to use the "quote" button if you don't mind - it would make your posts look better  :mrgreen:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 01:52:44 PM
Quote from: GINAFELICIA
Quote from: 1guest
"don't trust and i don't look with good eyes the student-teacher attitude as long as i don't know where i really take lessons from"

AS LONG AS...

No, i don't know what you mean, hope i am not again on your deceving suspects list. I have no interest and i think my mental health is stable too:)

well, if that conforts you, my list of suspects is as long as China and I myself am on it  :lol:

in the meantime you could really use a little lesson about how to use the "quote" button if you don't mind - it would make your posts look better  :mrgreen:

Hope this look better?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 01:53:35 PM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
[Your situation was normal Gina because:1. you were buying things necessary for funeral; 2. you did not have housekeeper or bodyguards,  or personal assistant to do that for you, and 3. you were not 80 years old.  Ms. Katherine Jackson  buying sleeping bags herself, is VERY ODD.  ;)

That's what she was buying :shock: ? What for?! Really, I don't get this (http://smileys.on-my-web.com/repository/Confused/3d-funny-eyes.gif)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 01:53:46 PM
No, it doesn't. Not for guests. ;)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 01:55:14 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
Hope this look better?

Actually not  :lol:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 01:56:23 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
No, it doesn't. Not for guests. ;)

Well, there's only one thing you can do: become a member :mrgreen: :lol:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: hesouttamylife on April 04, 2011, 01:57:51 PM
I have a question for the non believers :D

Do you really think that the family kept Michael's body out of the ground, crypt, what ever for that length of time waiting on his "wrong word, lol" organs to be returned?  And, further, if that was the plan why do you suppose they announced the "private" service publicly if they didn't want the 'PLANET" to be there or try to be?  Private is private.  Just have a service unbeknownst to anyone not invited and let that be done.  Can you enlighten me please because that confuses the heck outta me :shock:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 04, 2011, 02:00:07 PM
Quote from: "GINAFELICIA"
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
[Your situation was normal Gina because:1. you were buying things necessary for funeral; 2. you did not have housekeeper or bodyguards,  or personal assistant to do that for you, and 3. you were not 80 years old.  Ms. Katherine Jackson  buying sleeping bags herself, is VERY ODD.  ;)

That's what she was buying :shock: ? What for?! Really, I don't get this (http://smileys.on-my-web.com/repository/Confused/3d-funny-eyes.gif)

Have you watched the video? that's what we are saying for 18 months. She was buying sleeping bags, a few.....not one, perhaps for Michael's camping with children.  :lol:  Who knows. It was NOT something necessary needed in rush those very hard days. IMO. :roll:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 04, 2011, 02:03:41 PM
Quote from: "ok"
...and the funny thing is...a large part of your info comes from the tabloids!! Look at the threads you've created from things that have been printed in these rags.

Tabloid is trash as long as you do NOT know what to buy from it. Not everything they give is a lie, and not all of them are the truth. You need to make the difference and don't buy the BS. We do not wait to be fed up by the media, we make our own investigation. For instance we have lawyer or doctor, nurse believers so they give their professional information about the case. We call the medical boards, ask doctors, firefighters, EMTs etc. We do not sit back and wait to get the info directly from the media. We confirm them with our investigations.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 02:04:46 PM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Quote from: "GINAFELICIA"
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
[Your situation was normal Gina because:1. you were buying things necessary for funeral; 2. you did not have housekeeper or bodyguards,  or personal assistant to do that for you, and 3. you were not 80 years old.  Ms. Katherine Jackson  buying sleeping bags herself, is VERY ODD.  ;)

That's what she was buying :shock: ? What for?! Really, I don't get this (http://smileys.on-my-web.com/repository/Confused/3d-funny-eyes.gif)

Have you watched the video? that's what we are saying for 18 months. She was buying sleeping bags, a few.....not one, perhaps for Michael's camping with children.  :lol:  Who knows. It was NOT something necessary needed in rush those very hard days. IMO. :roll:

you are so right !! Why would they have needed sleeping bags 3 days after Michael died?
(http://smileys.on-my-web.com/repository/Surprise/surprised-004.gif)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 02:05:08 PM
Gina, i'am always off topic because of you:) You're so funny:)) I'll pass no matter how tempting your offer is. I feel ok being a guest, too much crowd on the other side. Besides, my theories are anyway almost totally different and i hate to ruin the feng shui of already settled homes. I see you have a name for them: trolls. :)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 04, 2011, 02:07:56 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
Eternalflame and Gina, hello to both of you (i am the same 1guest, indeed).
Gina, i read some of your posts maybe this could answer some questions: i didn't want to show my feelings about it, because i see you all have a very strong attachment for TS, but i am personally not fond of this character at all, i don't trust and i don't look with good eyes the student-teacher attitude as long as i don't know where i really take lessons from, i am also suspicious that some people get banned because they don't reveal or deny an identity but this character has privileged position and we should trust him just because we are told to and last but not least i don't believe Michael's hoax is connected in any way with numerology or Elvis. I respect his/her intelligence, i read his posts just like any other post (even though my intuition says there are 2 people not 1) but that's it.
Please, don't jump on me for this post, i have nothing personal with TS or with his/&supporters, i just don't find him/her more valuable than anyone of you here and, also, please don't try to convince me about his predictions because i've already READ THEM and they didn't impress me at all.

Sorry again if one of you feels offended, nothing personally, just my thoughts.

For the record: people do NOT get banned for not revealing their identity, I even tell people they should never reveal personal info on here. People get banned when they cause trouble and claim to know stuff, only to stir things up and not backing up their claims. For your information, there have been other people on here who claimed to know things. They were polite and shared information. They didn't cause trouble at all so whether I believe them or not, they are still a member here. TS is also polite and actually spends a lot of time and effort to actually back up his claims. It's up to everyone to believe him or not. So don't start on the banning issue again, too easy and your argument is invalid.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 04, 2011, 02:10:50 PM
Quote from: "Flowergirl"
I think the concerts were fake for the most part. All of the talk concerning them was made up.

Souza found something over a year and a half ago where she showed that there was NO CONTRACT with AEG.  There was only a rider.  That is huge.

I think MJ and AEG hooked up for the purpose of jump starting the hoax, and that is the main reason.  

I think even the ticket situation was made up.  Did anyone ever post what a ticket looked like?

The only thing that was real was the 02 Arena deal, and some don't think it was truly held in England and could have been green screened.  Lol

No, there was no rider with the contract, that was the strange part. Now we learned that it isn't even a contract at all, but a letter of intent. I don't know how that holds up in court in the US, but here in Holland it is a useless piece of paper.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: paula-c on April 04, 2011, 02:16:45 PM
(http://es.globedia.com/imagenes/usuarios/noticias/22517/1265412792.jpg)


(http://es.globedia.com/imagenes/usuarios/noticias/22517/1265412845.jpg)

In these photos you can see Joe very depressed the day after the "death"of his son
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 02:16:59 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
Gina, i'am always off topic because of you:) You're so funny:)) I'll pass no matter how tempting your offer is. I feel ok being a guest, too much crowd on the other side. Besides, my theories are anyway almost totally different and i hate to ruin the feng shui of already settled homes. I see you have a name for them: trolls. :)

no no no, I'm off topic because of YOU   (http://smileys.on-my-web.com/repository/Winks/b-wink.gif)

OK, I promise not to be funny anymore   (http://smileys.on-my-web.com/repository/Unhappy/unhappy-046.gif)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 04, 2011, 02:17:21 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
But, Gina, i would like to repeat it: my feelings about TS were mine, just mine. Including the student-anonymus teacher disturbing feeling. Still mine.  There are no reproaches and no attempts of changing others'  impressions about TS.

Oh really? Were you aware of the fact that repeating is an important part of conditioning?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: AnaMarcia on April 04, 2011, 02:17:48 PM
Quote from: "hesouttamylife"
1.   Michael rehearsed the night before, hard.  He was fine and foine.  In fact he was sizzling and bathing in the moonlight.  
2.   0-2 announcement waaay out of  character - presentation and delivery
3.   A movie was made of the rehearsal footage, a real movie, complete with props, pops, bangs, screens, the works. Michael was even behind the cameras. Rolling Action.
4.   He made a FORMAL closing statement at the end of the movie, oops rehearsal
5.   Conrad Murray waited before calling 911 & could not perform proper CPR (pleeze!)
6.   Ambulance backed out of driveway, could have circled around – time wasted
7.   Few if any paps on the scene, no flurry of activity, no one onsite  appeared distraught – tour bus in the vicinity – however, no fan film or pics have surfaced – possibly Star Line Tours? LOL.
8.   No one actually saw MJ in distress except 1 security guard, Murray and the paramedics
9.   No one in the home saw him being put onto the stretcher or brought downstairs to the ambulance because they were all fired on the spot before that ever happened and ordered to leave (how convenient)
10.   Janet's  confusion if in Atl or NY when she learned of brother's death
11.   Jackson boys on national tv went to the wrong cemetery.
12.   LAX made the lame excuse for shutting down airport on 6/25 as being due to visibility issues – sunny day – no clouds in the sky
13.   Lone Mexecana flight departed with even stranger flight info reporting the landing status as “unknown” – WTH did it vanish into space? Who was the passenger? Such coincidence. :shock:
14.   The “hoax video” of MJ exiting the coroner's van in the parking lot, too authentic to me – And btw, what ever became of the person who released that footage?  Did not know that tv stations did those types of experiments to gauge audience response.  Did you?  If so please apprise me because this is a first for me.
15.   The hoax picture of MJ in the ambulance is obviously a fake.  No one would have been allowed around the ambulance – perimeter would have been blocked off – much less close enough to take a picture INSIDE the ambulance (com on now!) Lucky dog
16.   Paramedics at the home and at the hospital said MJ was unrecognizable – shriveled up old man.  But if we are to believe the ambu picture, he was surely recognizable on the way to the hospital.  So did he age enroute?   Who do we BeLieve?
17.   Joe actively soliciting for business at his beloved son’s Memorial
18.   Private funeral held at night at which Michael arrived fashionably late
19.   Family balling at the club after the private Funeral
Katherine loves that blue suit -In many diverse cultures blue is significant in religious beliefs, brings peace, or is believed to keep the bad spirits away.
Blue conveys importance and confidence without being somber or sinister, hence the blue power suit of the corporate world and the blue uniforms of police officers. Long considered a corporate color, blue, especially medium and darker blues, is associated with intelligence, stability, unity, and conservatism.  
And as a final note, A PORCELAIN GIRL DOLL WEARING A DRESS WAS FOUND ON TOP OF THE COVERS OF THE BED WHERE MICHAEL SLEPT, AN OFFICIAL SAID.

LIBERIAN GIRL PERHAPS? 8-)

Will non-believers may have a good theory for at least half of these points?
Enjoy and answer me (who is of the U.S.): a person tãoimportante for the country as Michael does not deserve any declaration by the governor of California or not receive an honor from the city of LA?
For all that Michael posed to the world, he would not be entitled to have declared at least one day of mourning for his death?
 :?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 02:20:45 PM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "1guest"
But, Gina, i would like to repeat it: my feelings about TS were mine, just mine. Including the student-anonymus teacher disturbing feeling. Still mine.  There are no reproaches and no attempts of changing others'  impressions about TS.

Oh really? Were you aware of the fact that repeating is an important part of conditioning?

Interesting, I wasn't quite aware of that :|
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 02:23:58 PM
Quote from: "paula-c"
[(http://es.globedia.com/imagenes/usuarios/noticias/22517/1265412845.jpg)

In these photos you can see Joe very depressed the day after the "death"of his son

this is indeed very very unusual and sad
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 02:26:22 PM
Souza, i am not going in a fight with you. I know where this leads and i am aware of the fact that my post about TS disturbed you and I will not change my mind about TS.
This does not work for me. Please, save your need for fight with someone else and be polite just as i was with you.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 02:30:35 PM
Strong Evidence of TS's Authenticity

And no, guests can't post there.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: AnaMarcia on April 04, 2011, 02:32:25 PM
Quote from: "GINAFELICIA"
Quote from: "paula-c"
[(http://es.globedia.com/imagenes/usuarios/noticias/22517/1265412845.jpg)

In these photos you can see Joe very depressed the day after the "death"of his son

this is indeed very very unusual and sad

If Michael had died that day, that image really scare me.
I think that even a murderer don't celebrate so joyfully the death of his victim.
I think Joe did not hates Michael, about to celebrate both his death.
So... have just one  reply for this! ;)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 04, 2011, 02:39:33 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
Eternalflame and Gina, hello to both of you (i am the same 1guest, indeed).
Gina, i read some of your posts maybe this could answer some questions: i didn't want to show my feelings about it, because i see you all have a very strong attachment for TS, but i am personally not fond of this character at all, i don't trust and i don't look with good eyes the student-teacher attitude as long as i don't know where i really take lessons from, i am also suspicious that some people get banned because they don't reveal or deny an identity but this character has privileged position and we should trust him just because we are told to and last but not least i don't believe Michael's hoax is connected in any way with numerology or Elvis. I respect his/her intelligence, i read his posts just like any other post (even though my intuition says there are 2 people not 1) but that's it.
Please, don't jump on me for this post, i have nothing personal with TS or with his/&supporters, i just don't find him/her more valuable than anyone of you here and, also, please don't try to convince me about his predictions because i've already READ THEM and they didn't impress me at all.

Sorry again if one of you feels offended, nothing personally, just my thoughts.

I'd love to write my opinion about your post if you don't mind. If I didn't get it wrong, you care more about where the info comes from instead of what the info is. I persoanlly do not care that much if TS is an insider or not. I do care for the info he has given. The numerology part of the hoax was explained by him and can NOT be debunked by ANYONE. If you can, please go ahead and debunk it. I'd love to listen. Some people who doesn't trust TS' info say that the things he wrote on the forum are only his theories. Then how come NOBODY could debunk them? The only thing they can do is trying to find out who he really is. As I wrote before, I learned a lot from him and an insider or not, I respect TS a lot. He doesn't force anyone to read his contributions on the forum, so I do not understand this "stoning TS" parade. If someone interests to read his posts, go ahead and read it but why need to try to find who he is in real. If you can debunk the info he gave, go ahead and debunk it. Noone can debunk him but they're trying so hard to show people that he is not an insider but just a believer. Speaking generally here, so please do not be offended and thank you for sharing your opinion.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 04, 2011, 02:47:30 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
Souza, i am not going in a fight with you. I know where this leads and i am aware of the fact that my post about TS disturbed you and I will not change my mind about TS.
This does not work for me. Please, save your need for fight with someone else and be polite just as i was with you.

I am not fighting at all, I am just stating a fact and asking you is you were aware of it. Please show me where I was fighting. And I am not disturbed at all, you assume things that don't even exsist. Your reply is a subtle way to put me in a bad light, just like your post about banning people, whether you are aware of it or not. Your assumptions are invalid and because I know myself best why I ban certain people, or why I do the things and say the things I do, I don't have to be disturbed at all.

@Gina: Yes, I once did an essay on conditioning in regards to advertisement, so I know when people are trying to make you think or believe things, try to print it in your mind without being obvious about it. That doesn't mean it is always done intentionally, but there are certain tricks to condition people to make them believe something, to make them do something, or to make the buy something.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 02:49:38 PM
Purelove, thank you, you are right, TS does not force anyone to read his/her posts or follow him/her. I don't think i've said this, but i wanted to re-post this idea too.
About TS, i can't contribute on that post "Strong evidence about TS", but i found the same post that guest published here:
http://xxserenityxdreamsxx.blogspot.com ... art-2.html (http://xxserenityxdreamsxx.blogspot.com/2011/03/ts-true-informer-or-part-2.html)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 04, 2011, 02:55:35 PM
My gut really seldom fails me...
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 02:57:11 PM
Souza, no, i wasn't aware of the fact that i put you in a bad light but i am sorry if that's what happened/you think happened. I saw your posts about how uncomfortable you feel when one member has more than one account. This is why something was fishy for me. You always cared about TS more than you cared about other members. And the fact that you jump everytime posts are not in his favor does not help one change this impression.
About repeating things, i don't sell anything, i have no interest in conditioning people, i don't have any profit and i am not even a member. Please, try to be more calm.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 02:59:06 PM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
@Gina: Yes, I once did an essay on conditioning in regards to advertisement, so I know when people are trying to make you think or believe things, try to print it in your mind without being obvious about it. That doesn't mean it is always done intentionally, but there are certain tricks to condition people to make them believe something, to make them do something, or to make the buy something.
[/color]

wow.....you know a lot don't you  
we all can learn from you, thank you
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 04, 2011, 02:59:26 PM
Everyone at the memorial must have been laughing to relief their pain!  :lol:

(http://i35.tinypic.com/x1m8fc.jpg)(http://i34.tinypic.com/r1anvn.jpg)(http://i33.tinypic.com/zjxhd3.jpg)(http://i56.tinypic.com/29xynw3.jpg)(http://i35.tinypic.com/2z6yy3m.jpg)(http://i38.tinypic.com/35k0owl.jpg)(http://i53.tinypic.com/2ns5841.jpg)(http://i56.tinypic.com/14w3goy.jpg)(http://i54.tinypic.com/2agw3sj.jpg)(http://i56.tinypic.com/10ds803.jpg)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 03:00:35 PM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
My gut really seldom fails me...

we all think so, yet we deceive ourselves so easy :?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 03:02:54 PM
About the link i've shared, i am sorry for doing this Souza ( it's again about TS),  but members really had no idea who posted that and i thought this could let them know who the ENEMY was.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 04, 2011, 03:03:07 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
Purelove, thank you, you are right, TS does not force anyone to read his/her posts or follow him/her. I don't think i've said this, but i wanted to re-post this idea too.
About TS, i can't contribute on that post "Strong evidence about TS", but i found the same post that guest published here:
http://xxserenityxdreamsxx.blogspot.com ... art-2.html (http://xxserenityxdreamsxx.blogspot.com/2011/03/ts-true-informer-or-part-2.html)

Thank you for the info. So that was Serenity. Not surprised at all. I wish she worked hard to debunk the info TS has given instead of trying to debunk his possible relation with the Jacksons. That would be useful maybe.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 04, 2011, 03:03:56 PM
Quote from: "PureLove"
Everyone at the memorial must have been laughing to relief their pain!  :lol:

(http://i34.tinypic.com/r1anvn.jpg)


 :shock:
Not that I've never seen this before but it's shocking to see it again, in fact it's shocking every time I see it again
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 04, 2011, 03:13:10 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
Souza, no, i wasn't aware of the fact that i put you in a bad light but i am sorry if that's what happened/you think happened. I saw your posts about how uncomfortable you feel when one member has more than one account. This is why something was fishy for me. You always cared about TS more than you cared about other members. And the fact that you jump everytime posts are not in his favor does not help one change this impression.
About repeating things, i don't sell anything, i have no interest in conditioning people, i don't have any profit and i am not even a member. Please, try to be more calm.

Again, invalid assumption. I am very calm and I don't see where I wasn't. The fact that you don't like my reply, doesn't automatically mean that I am not calm or offended.

About me caring more for TS than other members? Invalid assumption again. I care about all the genuine and honest members -even if I don't agree with them- and that is exactly why I give TS a platform here.

I am also not uncomfortable with members having more than one account. There are more members with two accounts, yet they have been honest about it, asked me and explained to me why. They just didn't want anyone else to know they have a new account because of certain reasons. TS also asked me, so nothing different here.

What I do NOT like, is members coming back under different usernames when they were clearly not welcome here anymore, causing drama or to bash and ridicule the members. That I do not like, but I can assure you that 99% of the admins of any forum do not like that.

And again you are putting me in a bad light with your assumptions. Another repeat.

Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: bec on April 04, 2011, 03:14:56 PM
Souza is just braver/calmer/more eloquent/more diplomatic then a lot of us who feel the same way.

I think TS is MJ and I think anyone who doesn't see or at least suspect that is either not paying attention, not intelligent enough to understand what's going on, or too skeptical for their own good. That's my opinion.

I'm sorry to those who see themselves in my words and are offended by them.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 04, 2011, 03:17:09 PM
Quote from: "GINAFELICIA"
Quote from: "PureLove"
Everyone at the memorial must have been laughing to relief their pain!  :lol:

(http://i34.tinypic.com/r1anvn.jpg)


 :shock:
Not that I've never seen this before but it's shocking to see it again, in fact it's shocking every time I see it again

One big happy family who achieved their goal perfectly. :D
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 03:23:19 PM
Ok, Souza.
Ok, Bec.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 04, 2011, 03:25:12 PM
1guest, why don't you become a member of the forum? Why do you prefer to post as a guest? That's ok if you don't want to answer this. Just curious.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 03:31:16 PM
Thank you for asking, no problem. I admit members here are wonderful and the conversations are refreshing but i think this guest forum is enough for me. I certainly wouldn't want to upset any of you. Anyway, i read the other part of the forum too, to get updated with news, clues, points of view etc. so i know what's going on:)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 04, 2011, 03:36:33 PM
Quote from: "1guest"
Thank you for asking, no problem. I admit members here are wonderful and the conversations are refreshing but i think this guest forum is enough for me. I certainly wouldn't want to upset any of you. Anyway, i read the other part of the forum too, to get updated with news, clues, points of view etc. so i know what's going on:)

Ohh ok. :) Thanx for answering. Enjoy the forum. :)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 03:36:41 PM
On topic: i guess non-believers are quiet when they're challenged :d
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MJonmind on April 04, 2011, 03:37:11 PM
Agree Souza, Pure Love (awesome pics!), and Bec! I know I love TS whoever he is, there's just something about him.
1guest, we've all already been through the mill about TS, so nothing you could post about him would be upsetting in the least. :)
 
Gina, you are the perfect welcome person to greet guests coming in here!  You have them all relaxed, since you're somewhat on the fence yourself. :lol:

Quote
by GINAFELICIA » Mon Apr 04, 2011 1:30 pm
Maybe the numbers are just coincidences, yet aren't these coincidences amazing ?
For example I just don't get it how the Pepsi incident happened EXACTLY on the day at the middle of Michael's life and that was that moment which was supposed to have changed his life by making him an addict to pain-killers !
Yep, yep! On another video, Karen Faye says that the addiction part is not true, but that MJ only got addicted 9 years after the accident because of scalp correction surgery pain.  :shock:

Quote
ok wrote:ROFL..I knew you'd all be sitting there frantically tap tap tapping away on your keyboards.Meanwhilw,I've been out for a meal,to the pub,cinema,swimming ,met some friends and generally had a damn good time while you've been waisting your day away. I think I WIN!
:lol: Those things pale in comparison to the rollercoaster adventure we've had here for almost 2 years. What do you think we all do in our time spent away from our computers? Although I admit that even when I'm doing these other things my mind is still often here.
Quote
scorpionchik wrote:[Your situation was normal Gina because:1. you were buying things necessary for funeral; 2. you did not have housekeeper or bodyguards, or personal assistant to do that for you, and 3. you were not 80 years old. Ms. Katherine Jackson buying sleeping bags herself, is VERY ODD.
I'm sure there's plenty of beds and bedding at the Encino mansion, but how much is there at supposedly empty Neverland? (And MJ doesn't mind sleeping on the floor he's said.) But I personally believe it's just a hoax-related detail that MJ stuck in to to add to the long list of crazy odd things that happened that make no sense, for us to bang our heads over.

Quote
AnaMarcia
If Michael had died that day, that image really scare me.
I think that even a murderer don't celebrate so joyfully the death of his victim.
I think Joe did not hates Michael, about to celebrate both his death.
So... have just one reply for this!
Remember Janet Jackson in one interview couldn’t keep from smiling while talking about her brother’s death and so claimed that she tended to smile when she was feeling sad. Yeah right! And aside from Paris's theatrical fake tears speech at the memorial (doing improv with her Dad ;) ) the kids have been looking pretty content and rather happy.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 04, 2011, 03:42:20 PM
Quote from: "MJonmind"
Gina, you are the perfect welcome person to greet guests coming in here!  You have them all relaxed, since you're somewhat on the fence yourself. :lol:

:lol: Gina is a great host to all guests on this thread. I love you girl. Love you too MJonmind, Souza, Bec and all my fellow believer family. How about a (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk/smile/love/love0028.gif) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk/smile/love/love0075.gif) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Guest on April 04, 2011, 03:49:55 PM
Purelove, how did SD or that someone who copied from her blog that "info" on TS wrote as a guest on that thread where  only registered members could post?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 04, 2011, 03:52:29 PM
Quote from: "Guest"
Purelove, how did SD or that someone who copied from her blog that "info" on TS wrote as a guest on that thread where  only registered members could post?

Quote from: "Andrea"
This thread is a global announcement which is also available in the Guest section so I imagine that's how a guest is able to post.


Souza knows it the best about this for sure.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 04, 2011, 03:56:44 PM
Quote from: "Guest"
Purelove, how did SD or that someone who copied from her blog that "info" on TS wrote as a guest on that thread where  only registered members could post?

The topic was moved.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: bec on April 04, 2011, 03:58:33 PM
Quote from: "PureLove"
Quote from: "MJonmind"
Gina, you are the perfect welcome person to greet guests coming in here!  You have them all relaxed, since you're somewhat on the fence yourself. :lol:

:lol: Gina is a great host to all guests on this thread. I love you girl. Love you too MJonmind, Souza, Bec and all my fellow believer family. How about a (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk/smile/love/love0028.gif) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk/smile/love/love0075.gif) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk)

You're so sweet. I love you too.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 04, 2011, 04:14:47 PM
Quote from: "bec"
Quote from: "PureLove"
Quote from: "MJonmind"
Gina, you are the perfect welcome person to greet guests coming in here!  You have them all relaxed, since you're somewhat on the fence yourself. :lol:

:lol: Gina is a great host to all guests on this thread. I love you girl. Love you too MJonmind, Souza, Bec and all my fellow believer family. How about a (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk/smile/love/love0028.gif) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk/smile/love/love0075.gif) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk)

You're so sweet. I love you too.

(http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk/smile/love/love0038.gif) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: maninthemoon on April 06, 2011, 11:53:34 AM
Quote from: "bec"
Souza is just braver/calmer/more eloquent/more diplomatic then a lot of us who feel the same way.

I think TS is MJ and I think anyone who doesn't see or at least suspect that is either not paying attention, not intelligent enough to understand what's going on, or too skeptical for their own good. That's my opinion.

I'm sorry to those who see themselves in my words and are offended by them.
I doubt TS is MJ, I think it's someone acting through MJ. One from his family, possibly? Anyways, what does "TS" stand for?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 06, 2011, 02:44:07 PM
So far I can see NO VALID ARGUMENTS/CHALLENGE FROM GUESTS/ NON- BELIEVERS AGAINST PRESENTED FACTS OF CLUES THAT MJ IS ALIVE.
ALL I READ IS BLAH, BLAH, HA, HA, HA, or CLEARING RELATIONS  WITH MEMBERS. THAT'S IT? THAT IS ALL YOUR GROUND TO BELIEVE THAT MICHAEL IS DEAD? or YOU DON'T GET THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD?  :roll: How boring......
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MissG on April 06, 2011, 02:57:53 PM
Quote from: "GINAFELICIA"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "1guest"
But, Gina, i would like to repeat it: my feelings about TS were mine, just mine. Including the student-anonymus teacher disturbing feeling. Still mine.  There are no reproaches and no attempts of changing others'  impressions about TS.

Oh really? Were you aware of the fact that repeating is an important part of conditioning?

Interesting, I wasn't quite aware of that :|

Don´t worry, Gina. Counter conditioning is as effective  ;)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MissG on April 06, 2011, 03:16:36 PM
Finally! long interesting thread.

My view on believers/ non believers is simple. It´s a matter of faith as happens with the concept of God.

"See to believe", but in this case, the alarm bell started going on for many fans and supporters since the O2 announcement and the tip of the iceberg was the ambo pic presented in the media.

Beside all the research and theories written in this and other forums, youtube videos and other medias, there are other situations that makes you doubt if one is sharp and observant or just skilled in the matter of question.We remember that Janet during her interviews described  where she was when MJ died. She mixed up 2 different locations i.e .

We read here as well our personal experiences when a loved one passed. We remembered when happened, what we were doing, what we were wearing. Also when MJ "passed" that question was a part of the forum and we remembered what we were doing, how we found about it, who told us, where we were etc.

I understand that "believers" are afraid to end up like Elvis fans and why non believers get upset but at the end all the reactions are, just for love.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 06, 2011, 03:39:29 PM
Quote from: "Gema"
Quote from: "GINAFELICIA"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "1guest"
But, Gina, i would like to repeat it: my feelings about TS were mine, just mine. Including the student-anonymus teacher disturbing feeling. Still mine.  There are no reproaches and no attempts of changing others'  impressions about TS.

Oh really? Were you aware of the fact that repeating is an important part of conditioning?

Interesting, I wasn't quite aware of that :|

Don´t worry, Gina. Counter conditioning is as effective  ;)

 :lol:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 06, 2011, 05:38:52 PM
Quote from: "angranity"
Quote from: "bec"
Souza is just braver/calmer/more eloquent/more diplomatic then a lot of us who feel the same way.

I think TS is MJ and I think anyone who doesn't see or at least suspect that is either not paying attention, not intelligent enough to understand what's going on, or too skeptical for their own good. That's my opinion.

I'm sorry to those who see themselves in my words and are offended by them.
I doubt TS is MJ, I think it's someone acting through MJ. One from his family, possibly? Anyways, what does "TS" stand for?

The Sign.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 06, 2011, 05:44:45 PM
Or The Sun, or The Subject, or The Sister(s), or The Son(s), or Tupac Shakur, or Tell Stories, or Teach Science, or Three Scrooges, or The Spell, or whatever you want to make of it :lol:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Le Papillon Bleu on April 06, 2011, 05:51:30 PM
The Snake  :lol:  :lol: The Seeker The Silence The Sartorialist :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: The Surgeon  :lol:  :lol:
If he is Michael why so simple? TS ?like no Dr Black no Dr Heat ?  :shock:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 06, 2011, 05:52:51 PM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Or The Sun, or The Subject, or The Sister(s), or The Son(s), or Tupac Shakur, or Tell Stories, or Teach Science, or Three Scrooges, or The Spell, or whatever you want to make of it :lol:

I do remember him ending one of his updates with 'The Sign' though. ;)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Le Papillon Bleu on April 06, 2011, 05:53:59 PM
PRINCE is that you? :lol:  :lol:  :lol:During that period he was frequently referred to in the media as "The Artist Formerly Known as Prince", often abbreviated to "TAFKAP", or simply "The Artist" NOW : The Symbol  :lol: (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/af/Prince_logo.svg/220px-Prince_logo.svg.png)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 06, 2011, 06:11:56 PM
Quote from: "Le Papillon Bleu"
PRINCE is that you? :lol:  :lol:  :lol:During that period he was frequently referred to in the media as "The Artist Formerly Known as Prince", often abbreviated to "TAFKAP", or simply "The Artist" NOW : The Symbol  :lol: (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/af/Prince_logo.svg/220px-Prince_logo.svg.png)

LOL, who knows? I bet Prince knows a lot more than people might think.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MJonmind on April 07, 2011, 12:17:13 AM
Quote from: "Gema"
Finally! long interesting thread.

My view on believers/ non believers is simple. It´s a matter of faith as happens with the concept of God.

"See to believe", but in this case, the alarm bell started going on for many fans and supporters since the O2 announcement and the tip of the iceberg was the ambo pic presented in the media.

Beside all the research and theories written in this and other forums, youtube videos and other medias, there are other situations that makes you doubt if one is sharp and observant or just skilled in the matter of question.We remember that Janet during her interviews described  where she was when MJ died. She mixed up 2 different locations i.e .

We read here as well our personal experiences when a loved one passed. We remembered when happened, what we were doing, what we were wearing. Also when MJ "passed" that question was a part of the forum and we remembered what we were doing, how we found about it, who told us, where we were etc.

I understand that "believers" are afraid to end up like Elvis fans and why non believers get upset but at the end all the reactions are, just for love.
In the two deaths most painful/shocking to me, everything is vivid in my mind except what clothes I was wearing. Why would I pay attention to that? :lol: Maybe I'm less into clothes/fashion than you? OK the first death I probably was wearing pyjamas.

On the topic of faith. We here are excercising faith in our own intellect/intuition/6th sense/ability to read between the lines. We don't see Michael alive, and openly the family, friends and media are stating he's dead, but we do see strong evidence that we should question the truthfulness of these people. On the other hand non-believers have to excercise faith in the key people's straightforward statements.  They have seen neither Michael's alive or dead body. They are putting their faith in man, that people including media are generally truthful. Both sides are armchair experts, and both sides are excercising faith.  I strongly have faith in a Creator God who I can't see, yet I would not recommend just having faith that my smoke detector has charged batteries. In every other area of life we demand/require empirical evidence before we are convinced. JMT
Quote
Hebrews 11:1-3 (King James Version)

 1Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
 2For by it the elders obtained a good report.
 3Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: son on April 07, 2011, 09:00:59 AM
I'll pretend to doubt for the sake of argument

 ;)

Quote from: "hesouttamylife"
1.   Michael rehearsed the night before, hard.  He was fine and foine.  In fact he was sizzling and bathing in the moonlight.

Just because he wasn't all that sick doesn't mean he WASN'T killed by Murray the next day.
 
Quote
2.   0-2 announcement waaay out of  character - presentation and delivery

He could have been high or nervous. Leaning more toward high myself.

Quote
3.   A movie was made of the rehearsal footage, a real movie, complete with props, pops, bangs, screens, the works. Michael was even behind the cameras. Rolling Action.

1) All done with a double to create this illusion of a non-sick MJ.
2) He wanted his rehearsal footage to look good.

Quote
4.   He made a FORMAL closing statement at the end of the movie, oops rehearsal

Added later, fake signiture. Or added earlier on.
 
Quote
5.   Conrad Murray waited before calling 911 & could not perform proper CPR (pleeze!)

He killed him on purpose. Or he was just that horrible of a doctor, his med school GPA was beneath a 2.0 (true fact)

Quote
6.   Ambulance backed out of driveway, could have circled around – time wasted

The driver may have been fired after that ordeal. He may have been nervous.
 
Quote
7.   Few if any paps on the scene, no flurry of activity, no one onsite  appeared distraught – tour bus in the vicinity – however, no fan film or pics have surfaced – possibly Star Line Tours? LOL.

The body may not have been Identified yet.

Quote
8.   No one actually saw MJ in distress except 1 security guard, Murray and the paramedics

Kai Chase said they stayed down stairs

Quote
9.   No one in the home saw him being put onto the stretcher or brought downstairs to the ambulance because they were all fired on the spot before that ever happened and ordered to leave (how convenient)

They wanted to avoid commotion

Quote
10.   Janet's  confusion if in Atl or NY when she learned of brother's death

It was a hectic time for her, she was working on a movie at the same time.

Quote
11.   Jackson boys on national tv went to the wrong cemetery.

Simple mistake
 
Quote
12.   LAX made the lame excuse for shutting down airport on 6/25 as being due to visibility issues – sunny day – no clouds in the sky

Coincidence

Quote
13.   Lone Mexecana flight departed with even stranger flight info reporting the landing status as “unknown” – WTH did it vanish into space? Who was the passenger? Such coincidence. :shock:

exactly

Quote
14.   The “hoax video” of MJ exiting the coroner's van in the parking lot, too authentic to me – And btw, what ever became of the person who released that footage?  Did not know that tv stations did those types of experiments to gauge audience response.  Did you?  If so please apprise me because this is a first for me.

It was fake, simple as that.

Quote
15.   The hoax picture of MJ in the ambulance is obviously a fake.  No one would have been allowed around the ambulance – perimeter would have been blocked off – much less close enough to take a picture INSIDE the ambulance (com on now!) Lucky dog

It was fake, but in no connection to MJ. Just some guy who wanted to make some extra cash.

Quote
16.   Paramedics at the home and at the hospital said MJ was unrecognizable – shriveled up old man.  But if we are to believe the ambu picture, he was surely recognizable on the way to the hospital.  So did he age enroute?   Who do we BeLieve?

He wasn't wearing make up.

Quote
17.   Joe actively soliciting for business at his beloved son’s Memorial

He was involved with killing him.

He is old and doesn't know better.

It's his way of coping.

Quote
18.   Private funeral held at night at which Michael arrived fashionably late

It was done to demonstrate that MJ was a big deal.

Quote
19.   Family balling at the club after the private Funeral

A lot of families have a celebration after a funeral.

[/quote]
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: AnaMarcia on April 07, 2011, 09:30:44 AM
Ok, Son.
Was worth you  try, but some answers remain without unsubstantiated. I do not think Murray would not be unpunished to this day, or about to be sentenced to only 4 years in jail if he intentionally murdered Michael. No evidence of this, simply because the police seem not to work with this hypothesis. It is unbelievable that a seemingly simple case, it would not be unresolved until today.
If only Murray was with Michael, there are no accurate witnesses of what happened before and if Murray disappear for three days ...  so, he would be already doomed!
The LAPD should not be so incompetent and corrupt way. Must be a reason for such slowness!
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 07, 2011, 04:24:46 PM
Quote from: son
I'll pretend to doubt for the sake of argument

 ;)

 :lol: I did not want to quote the whole post, but I like your opposit challenging. That's what we should do sometimes, try to view on facts as if Michael really dead, what is the answer of such event. Now it looks FULL OF SHIT COMEDY since to me none of those arguments are reasonable.
But I have a correction to make on # 11.Jackson boys on national tv went to the wrong cemetery.-Simple mistake
If you mean Jackson Dynasty documental, they did actually go to the right cemetery, one in Glendale. I was thinking the same, but when I watched one more time, it was Holly Terrace.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: MissG on April 08, 2011, 04:18:59 PM
This hoax, if at the end it´s proven that MJ is behind it, will be the reason to call him a great artist.
He has been using the hoax as a happening to create emotions on different people. That´s what i call art!
The hoax it´s an art piece itself!

G E N I O U S
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: GINAFELICIA on April 08, 2011, 10:16:46 PM
Quote from: "Gema"
This hoax, if at the end it´s proven that MJ is behind it, will be the reason to call him a great artist.
He has been using the hoax as a happening to create emotions on different people. That´s what i call art!
The hoax it´s an art piece itself!

G E N I O U S

Totally agree with you.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: bec on April 08, 2011, 10:29:40 PM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Or The Sun, or The Subject, or The Sister(s), or The Son(s), or Tupac Shakur, or Tell Stories, or Teach Science, or Three Scrooges, or The Spell, or whatever you want to make of it :lol:
Thread Starter  :ugeek:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 08, 2011, 11:28:00 PM
MICHAEL JACKSON HANDWRITTEN "TS" LYRICS


http://www.juliensauctions.com/auctions ... on-40.html (http://www.juliensauctions.com/auctions/2009/music-icons/michael-jackson-40.html)

One page hand-written lyrics, pencil on lined paper by Michael Jackson, titled "T.S." This would eventually be titled "D.S." and appeared on the album "HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book 1." The lyrics read in part, "They wanna get my ass dead or alive, invade my privacy/ They sure taken me by surprise [sic]." It is widely thought that the lyrics of this song refer to Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon, who lead the child abuse investigation against Jackson.

Can be any connection,clue.?(http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/mittelgrosse/medium-smiley-098.gif)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: mjj4ever777 on April 08, 2011, 11:33:17 PM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
MICHAEL JACKSON HANDWRITTEN "TS" LYRICS


http://www.juliensauctions.com/auctions ... on-40.html (http://www.juliensauctions.com/auctions/2009/music-icons/michael-jackson-40.html)

One page hand-written lyrics, pencil on lined paper by Michael Jackson, titled "T.S." This would eventually be titled "D.S." and appeared on the album "HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book 1." The lyrics read in part, "They wanna get my ass dead or alive, invade my privacy/ They sure taken me by surprise [sic]." It is widely thought that the lyrics of this song refer to Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon, who lead the child abuse investigation against Jackson.

Can be any connection,clue.?(http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/mittelgrosse/medium-smiley-098.gif)


I say that this is either a big clue, or just another "coincidence"! :mrgreen:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: And we all know what we think of "coincidences", right? :D

Nice catch Scorpionchik! Blessings to you friend! <3
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: RK on April 09, 2011, 12:29:55 AM
Quote from: "bec"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Or The Sun, or The Subject, or The Sister(s), or The Son(s), or Tupac Shakur, or Tell Stories, or Teach Science, or Three Scrooges, or The Spell, or whatever you want to make of it :lol:
Thread Starter  :ugeek:
Maybe Top Secret. However, illuminati agenda and plans won't be so top secret after MJ Bams and exposes their plans. Everyone's going to know. hee hee.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 09, 2011, 01:20:17 AM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
MICHAEL JACKSON HANDWRITTEN "TS" LYRICS


http://www.juliensauctions.com/auctions ... on-40.html (http://www.juliensauctions.com/auctions/2009/music-icons/michael-jackson-40.html)

One page hand-written lyrics, pencil on lined paper by Michael Jackson, titled "T.S." This would eventually be titled "D.S." and appeared on the album "HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book 1." The lyrics read in part, "They wanna get my ass dead or alive, invade my privacy/ They sure taken me by surprise [sic]." It is widely thought that the lyrics of this song refer to Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon, who lead the child abuse investigation against Jackson.

Can be any connection,clue.?(http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/mittelgrosse/medium-smiley-098.gif)

[youtube:3cfsfqpa]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4rXhUxAlNA&feature=related[/youtube:3cfsfqpa]


I love lyrics. Michael you are funny.  :lol: (http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/mittelgrosse/medium-smiley-047.gif)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Starchild on April 09, 2011, 07:15:47 AM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
MICHAEL JACKSON HANDWRITTEN "TS" LYRICS


http://www.juliensauctions.com/auctions ... on-40.html (http://www.juliensauctions.com/auctions/2009/music-icons/michael-jackson-40.html)

One page hand-written lyrics, pencil on lined paper by Michael Jackson, titled "T.S." This would eventually be titled "D.S." and appeared on the album "HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book 1." The lyrics read in part, "They wanna get my ass dead or alive, invade my privacy/ They sure taken me by surprise [sic]." It is widely thought that the lyrics of this song refer to Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon, who lead the child abuse investigation against Jackson.

Can be any connection,clue.?(http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/mittelgrosse/medium-smiley-098.gif)
Interesting.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: maninthemoon on April 11, 2011, 10:43:59 AM
TS could also stand for Thomas Sneddon. Doubt it? Me too. Because he is the one who accused Michael of child molesting. I don't think this has actually anything to do with the username TS. So don't be offended!

But let's see, D.S stands for Dom Sheldon. Am I right? :lol:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 11, 2011, 02:34:40 PM
Quote from: "angranity"
TS could also stand for Thomas Sneddon. Doubt it? Me too. Because he is the one who accused Michael of child molesting. I don't think this has actually anything to do with the username TS. So don't be offended!

But let's see, D.S stands for Dom Sheldon. Am I right? :lol:

Tom Sneddon is not intelligent enought to post such complicated things, he proved that with his 'case' against Mike. I even doubt he even knows how a computer works.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: fordtocarr on April 11, 2011, 02:40:42 PM
Besides, even if he is Tom Sneddon, why is he not being a dick??  He's actually nice.  BUT maybe it is a clue ??  to look back to Tom Sneddon??
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 11, 2011, 10:16:37 PM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "angranity"
TS could also stand for Thomas Sneddon. Doubt it? Me too. Because he is the one who accused Michael of child molesting. I don't think this has actually anything to do with the username TS. So don't be offended!

But let's see, D.S stands for Dom Sheldon. Am I right? :lol:

Tom Sneddon is not intelligent enought to post such complicated things, he proved that with his 'case' against Mike. I even doubt he even knows how a computer works.

Totally agree. Why would he try to help someone that he used to hate and tried to imprison?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: maninthemoon on April 12, 2011, 05:52:12 AM
Quote from: "PureLove"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "angranity"
TS could also stand for Thomas Sneddon. Doubt it? Me too. Because he is the one who accused Michael of child molesting. I don't think this has actually anything to do with the username TS. So don't be offended!

But let's see, D.S stands for Dom Sheldon. Am I right? :lol:

Tom Sneddon is not intelligent enought to post such complicated things, he proved that with his 'case' against Mike. I even doubt he even knows how a computer works.

Totally agree. Why would he try to help someone that he used to hate and tried to imprison?
I have to agree, sorry for sharing my opinion. It might've been offensive to some, - I never thought TS was Thomas Sneddon, I was just going with the lyrics here. But yeah.. you're right. It's probably just "Thread Starter".
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Its her on April 12, 2011, 08:51:19 AM
Quote from: "angranity"
Quote from: "PureLove"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "angranity"
TS could also stand for Thomas Sneddon. Doubt it? Me too. Because he is the one who accused Michael of child molesting. I don't think this has actually anything to do with the username TS. So don't be offended!

But let's see, D.S stands for Dom Sheldon. Am I right? :lol:

Tom Sneddon is not intelligent enought to post such complicated things, he proved that with his 'case' against Mike. I even doubt he even knows how a computer works.

Totally agree. Why would he try to help someone that he used to hate and tried to imprison?
I have to agree, sorry for sharing my opinion. It might've been offensive to some, - I never thought TS was Thomas Sneddon, I was just going with the lyrics here. But yeah.. you're right. It's probably just "Thread Starter".

Actually, to be accurate, we don't even KNOW that Tom Sneddon IS Tom Sneddon (the evil cold man), in reality. Consider this: If that trial wasn't staged, and during a NORMAL trial, MJ would have gone to jail anyway, simply for his ( :lol:  :P  :lol: ) antics  disrespecting the court, with the song he wrote. It is called "Contempt" (disrespect) of court. EVERYONE knew who he meant, despite changing the name. Such a public display of disrespect (on international Television, of his followers singing a song he appeared to have written for that purpose!!), would NOT have gone un-dealt with! Think about it...

Tom Sneddon COULD be one of the MJ Players. He's NOT just leaving MJ alone because the trial ended in a not guilty verdict...OR because he's been retired.  :? It would be WAAAAY out of character for SUCH an evil, "cold man" to just drop it!  :roll:  He didn't drop it the first time. Don't you guys know anything about evil??

Either T.S. never was the evil he performed, years ago, or, perhaps he's just been re-assigned by the puppet Master, Michael Jackson. :D  He has the education and the time, now, to write everything our "TS" here does, especially under the tutelage of MJ. It is not a stretch, if you open your mind.

Likewise, I apologize, in advance, for inflaming folk with my opinion. :oops:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: maninthemoon on April 12, 2011, 01:12:17 PM
Listening to D.S atm, haha. :lol:

Michael had really many involved in the hoax, - as he probably started planning it 'round 2000 to '02. So there's a good chance Thomas Sneddon was actually a good friend of MJ and was only a part of the hoax. No one can know for sure, but I doubt this really has anything to do with TS (the username, Thread Starter). :ugeek:
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: PureLove on April 12, 2011, 04:37:24 PM
Quote from: "angranity"
Listening to D.S atm, haha. :lol:

Michael had really many involved in the hoax, - as he probably started planning it 'round 2000 to '02. So there's a good chance Thomas Sneddon was actually a good friend of MJ and was only a part of the hoax. No one can know for sure, but I doubt this really has anything to do with TS (the username, Thread Starter). :ugeek:

TS signed one of his updates as The Sign. I think TS refers to it. :)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 12, 2011, 04:55:52 PM
Tom Sneddon a good friend of MJ? Don't believe it for a second. The trial was as real as you and I are and Tom Sneddon was paid to get MJ down by high profile people. The Arvizo's were chosen and sent to get Michael down, the Chandlers in the 90's were sent as well. Sneddon is just a puppet, but that certainly doesn't make him less evil. Michael changed the name in DS for legal reasons, because if he knew he would be sued anyway he would have just called it as it was. Michael has not been Sneddon's only victim, he went after more people. Read the V for Vendetta blog and you will know for SURE that Tom Sneddon is not Mike's friend, but his enemy. He should be prosecuted and put behind bars, as should his employers.

**note** the above opinion of Tom Sneddon, the Arvizos and the Chandlers being paid by high profile people remains just my opinion, and not fact.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 12, 2011, 04:56:23 PM
yet...
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 12, 2011, 07:06:38 PM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Tom Sneddon a good friend of MJ? Don't believe it for a second. The trial was as real as you and I are and Tom Sneddon was paid to get MJ down by high profile people. The Arvizo's were chosen and sent to get Michael down, the Chandlers in the 90's were sent as well. Sneddon is just a puppet, but that certainly doesn't make him less evil. Michael changed the name in DS for legal reasons, he knew he would be sued anyway he would have just called it as it was. Michael has not been Sneddon's only victim, he went after more people. Read the V for Vendetta blog and you will know for SURE that Tom Sneddon is not Mike's friend, but his enemy. He should be prosecuted and put behind bars, as should his employers.

**note** the above opinion of Tom Sneddon, the Arvizos and the Chandlers being paid by high profile people remains just my opinion, and not fact.

For objective purpose, all sides of facts should be analized impartially. Because I love MJ very much, I will not talk as if he did not have a bit of fault what happened to him. Had Michael acted more mature, nothing would have happened. Here is why, after Chandler case, Michael had a choice to turn down Arvizos, acting more careful. No matter what Sneddon had in plans, he did not force Michael assist and allow Arzivos to live in his house & sleep in his bedroom. Michael made a choice himself. Same as with Chandler. Michael chose to help him, keep boy in his house. What Sneddon has to do with that? Thus,  Sneddon  could not guarantee and know Michael's steps. Another thing. if Sneddon picked people to send to MJ provoking molestation case, he would have chose people with clean and stable work background, not Arvizos that had had background of false lawsuits left and right which was used by Tom M. as a defense.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 12, 2011, 09:17:01 PM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Tom Sneddon a good friend of MJ? Don't believe it for a second. The trial was as real as you and I are and Tom Sneddon was paid to get MJ down by high profile people. The Arvizo's were chosen and sent to get Michael down, the Chandlers in the 90's were sent as well. Sneddon is just a puppet, but that certainly doesn't make him less evil. Michael changed the name in DS for legal reasons, he knew he would be sued anyway he would have just called it as it was. Michael has not been Sneddon's only victim, he went after more people. Read the V for Vendetta blog and you will know for SURE that Tom Sneddon is not Mike's friend, but his enemy. He should be prosecuted and put behind bars, as should his employers.

**note** the above opinion of Tom Sneddon, the Arvizos and the Chandlers being paid by high profile people remains just my opinion, and not fact.

For objective purpose, all sides of facts should be analized impartially. Because I love MJ very much, I will not talk as if he did not have a bit of fault what happened to him. Had Michael acted more mature, nothing would have happened. Here is why, after Chandler case, Michael had a choice to turn down Arvizos, acting more careful. No matter what Sneddon had in plans, he did not force Michael assist and allow Arzivos to live in his house & sleep in his bedroom. Michael made a choice himself. Same as with Chandler. Michael chose to help him, keep boy in his house. What Sneddon has to do with that? Thus,  Sneddon  could not guarantee and know Michael's steps. Another thing. if Sneddon picked people to send to MJ provoking molestation case, he would have chose people with clean and stable work background, not Arvizos that had had background of false lawsuits left and right which was used by Tom M. as a defense.

I never said Sneddon was intelligent enough to pull it off in a believable way. Saying Mike is to blame is the same as when a woman gets raped and people say it was her own fault because her skirt was too short. And I think Mike knew what he was doing, I think there was a plan back then with that Batshit interview already, which went wrong because of the accusations. Something is up there.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 12, 2011, 10:39:02 PM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Tom Sneddon a good friend of MJ? Don't believe it for a second. The trial was as real as you and I are and Tom Sneddon was paid to get MJ down by high profile people. The Arvizo's were chosen and sent to get Michael down, the Chandlers in the 90's were sent as well. Sneddon is just a puppet, but that certainly doesn't make him less evil. Michael changed the name in DS for legal reasons, he knew he would be sued anyway he would have just called it as it was. Michael has not been Sneddon's only victim, he went after more people. Read the V for Vendetta blog and you will know for SURE that Tom Sneddon is not Mike's friend, but his enemy. He should be prosecuted and put behind bars, as should his employers.

**note** the above opinion of Tom Sneddon, the Arvizos and the Chandlers being paid by high profile people remains just my opinion, and not fact.

For objective purpose, all sides of facts should be analized impartially. Because I love MJ very much, I will not talk as if he did not have a bit of fault what happened to him. Had Michael acted more mature, nothing would have happened. Here is why, after Chandler case, Michael had a choice to turn down Arvizos, acting more careful. No matter what Sneddon had in plans, he did not force Michael assist and allow Arzivos to live in his house & sleep in his bedroom. Michael made a choice himself. Same as with Chandler. Michael chose to help him, keep boy in his house. What Sneddon has to do with that? Thus,  Sneddon  could not guarantee and know Michael's steps. Another thing. if Sneddon picked people to send to MJ provoking molestation case, he would have chose people with clean and stable work background, not Arvizos that had had background of false lawsuits left and right which was used by Tom M. as a defense.

I never said Sneddon was intelligent enough to pull it off in a believable way. Saying Mike is to blame is the same as when a woman gets raped and people say it was her own fault because her skirt was too short. And I think Mike knew what he was doing, I think there was a plan back then with that Batshit interview already, which went wrong because of the accusations. Something is up there.

And Michael is a raper or woman with too short skirt? :lol: Not a good example IMO. :)
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 13, 2011, 04:37:20 AM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Tom Sneddon a good friend of MJ? Don't believe it for a second. The trial was as real as you and I are and Tom Sneddon was paid to get MJ down by high profile people. The Arvizo's were chosen and sent to get Michael down, the Chandlers in the 90's were sent as well. Sneddon is just a puppet, but that certainly doesn't make him less evil. Michael changed the name in DS for legal reasons, he knew he would be sued anyway he would have just called it as it was. Michael has not been Sneddon's only victim, he went after more people. Read the V for Vendetta blog and you will know for SURE that Tom Sneddon is not Mike's friend, but his enemy. He should be prosecuted and put behind bars, as should his employers.

**note** the above opinion of Tom Sneddon, the Arvizos and the Chandlers being paid by high profile people remains just my opinion, and not fact.

For objective purpose, all sides of facts should be analized impartially. Because I love MJ very much, I will not talk as if he did not have a bit of fault what happened to him. Had Michael acted more mature, nothing would have happened. Here is why, after Chandler case, Michael had a choice to turn down Arvizos, acting more careful. No matter what Sneddon had in plans, he did not force Michael assist and allow Arzivos to live in his house & sleep in his bedroom. Michael made a choice himself. Same as with Chandler. Michael chose to help him, keep boy in his house. What Sneddon has to do with that? Thus,  Sneddon  could not guarantee and know Michael's steps. Another thing. if Sneddon picked people to send to MJ provoking molestation case, he would have chose people with clean and stable work background, not Arvizos that had had background of false lawsuits left and right which was used by Tom M. as a defense.

I never said Sneddon was intelligent enough to pull it off in a believable way. Saying Mike is to blame is the same as when a woman gets raped and people say it was her own fault because her skirt was too short. And I think Mike knew what he was doing, I think there was a plan back then with that Batshit interview already, which went wrong because of the accusations. Something is up there.

And Michael is a raper or woman with too short skirt? :lol: Not a good example IMO. :)

No, I think you didn't get my point.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: son on April 13, 2011, 08:14:10 AM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
For objective purpose, all sides of facts should be analized impartially. Because I love MJ very much, I will not talk as if he did not have a bit of fault what happened to him. Had Michael acted more mature, nothing would have happened. Here is why, after Chandler case, Michael had a choice to turn down Arvizos, acting more careful. No matter what Sneddon had in plans, he did not force Michael assist and allow Arzivos to live in his house & sleep in his bedroom. Michael made a choice himself. Same as with Chandler. Michael chose to help him, keep boy in his house. What Sneddon has to do with that? Thus,  Sneddon  could not guarantee and know Michael's steps. Another thing. if Sneddon picked people to send to MJ provoking molestation case, he would have chose people with clean and stable work background, not Arvizos that had had background of false lawsuits left and right which was used by Tom M. as a defense.

I agree Scorpionchik. I don't think we can truly vindicate MJ if we as fans continue to pretend he was some blameless victim. He had/has no ill intent, but he did make bad decisions that put him into the situation he was in, knowing what position it put him in a decade prior. That being said, it's possible that the Arvizos joined forces with Sneddon after the charges were first pressed against him.  :ugeek:  

While you can't blame a rape victim for being raped just because of their clothes, you can blame them for drinking heavily and staying out late in a place they don't know with no ride home late at night.  :?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: jacilovesmichael on April 13, 2011, 10:04:56 AM
Quote from: "son"
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
For objective purpose, all sides of facts should be analized impartially. Because I love MJ very much, I will not talk as if he did not have a bit of fault what happened to him. Had Michael acted more mature, nothing would have happened. Here is why, after Chandler case, Michael had a choice to turn down Arvizos, acting more careful. No matter what Sneddon had in plans, he did not force Michael assist and allow Arzivos to live in his house & sleep in his bedroom. Michael made a choice himself. Same as with Chandler. Michael chose to help him, keep boy in his house. What Sneddon has to do with that? Thus,  Sneddon  could not guarantee and know Michael's steps. Another thing. if Sneddon picked people to send to MJ provoking molestation case, he would have chose people with clean and stable work background, not Arvizos that had had background of false lawsuits left and right which was used by Tom M. as a defense.

I agree Scorpionchik. I don't think we can truly vindicate MJ if we as fans continue to pretend he was some blameless victim. He had/has no ill intent, but he did make bad decisions that put him into the situation he was in, knowing what position it put him in a decade prior. That being said, it's possible that the Arvizos joined forces with Sneddon after the charges were first pressed against him.  :ugeek:  

While you can't blame a rape victim for being raped just because of their clothes, you can blame them for drinking heavily and staying out late in a place they don't know with no ride home late at night.  :?

I see where you guys are coming from...but is it so wrong that a person would not even relate sleeping in a bed to sexual activity? It is us, society, who makes that connection. Michael Jackson was not apart of relguar society. He may not have had any idea that that conduct was considered inappropriate. The man had to heavily disguise himself just to leave his home, for god's sake. I'm going to go out on a limb and say he probably felt socially awkward and simply hadn't been "conditioned by the system" like we all have. Yes, he's human like everyone else. But he's lived a different life than most of us. If I had never paid much thought to child molestation or seen things on the news (which I'm sure Michael tried to avoid the news), then why would it cross my mind that it's wrong to let a sick child sleep in my bed? I think Michael Jackson had it right and it's the rest of the world that's sick. Yes, he still has to deal with the consequences. But changing his conduct would only be conforming to the corruption of the world. So I say good for him for sticking to his guns.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 13, 2011, 01:22:13 PM
Souza, I got your point. My question was a joke   :D

Let's say this way, guys, Michael had bad advisors. Starting from the attorney who advised Michael to settle the case wtih Chandler,who was  an idiot. Because people got settlement as an MJ's agreement with accusations and short cut not to go trial because..... MJ may lose. Michael never had really carying & loving people around who would give right advice and insist MJ listen and follow the advice for his benefit. That's how I understand.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: hesouttamylife on April 13, 2011, 01:25:10 PM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
yet...
Totally agree.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: mjj4ever777 on April 13, 2011, 01:54:02 PM
Quote from: "jacilovesmichael"
Quote from: "son"
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
For objective purpose, all sides of facts should be analized impartially. Because I love MJ very much, I will not talk as if he did not have a bit of fault what happened to him. Had Michael acted more mature, nothing would have happened. Here is why, after Chandler case, Michael had a choice to turn down Arvizos, acting more careful. No matter what Sneddon had in plans, he did not force Michael assist and allow Arzivos to live in his house & sleep in his bedroom. Michael made a choice himself. Same as with Chandler. Michael chose to help him, keep boy in his house. What Sneddon has to do with that? Thus,  Sneddon  could not guarantee and know Michael's steps. Another thing. if Sneddon picked people to send to MJ provoking molestation case, he would have chose people with clean and stable work background, not Arvizos that had had background of false lawsuits left and right which was used by Tom M. as a defense.

I agree Scorpionchik. I don't think we can truly vindicate MJ if we as fans continue to pretend he was some blameless victim. He had/has no ill intent, but he did make bad decisions that put him into the situation he was in, knowing what position it put him in a decade prior. That being said, it's possible that the Arvizos joined forces with Sneddon after the charges were first pressed against him.  :ugeek:  

While you can't blame a rape victim for being raped just because of their clothes, you can blame them for drinking heavily and staying out late in a place they don't know with no ride home late at night.  :?

I see where you guys are coming from...but is it so wrong that a person would not even relate sleeping in a bed to sexual activity? It is us, society, who makes that connection. Michael Jackson was not apart of relguar society. He may not have had any idea that that conduct was considered inappropriate. The man had to heavily disguise himself just to leave his home, for god's sake. I'm going to go out on a limb and say he probably felt socially awkward and simply hadn't been "conditioned by the system" like we all have. Yes, he's human like everyone else. But he's lived a different life than most of us. If I had never paid much thought to child molestation or seen things on the news (which I'm sure Michael tried to avoid the news), then why would it cross my mind that it's wrong to let a sick child sleep in my bed? I think Michael Jackson had it right and it's the rest of the world that's sick. Yes, he still has to deal with the consequences. But changing his conduct would only be conforming to the corruption of the world. So I say good for him for sticking to his guns.


I agree with you Jaci!! Michael's "intentions" were pure at heart, it is the corrupt minds of the Public,that turned this into something it wasn't!! In my eyes, Michael did nothing wrong, everything he does he does with Pure Honest Love, nothing else!! God Bless You Michael for being the loving man you are! I love you!

Blessings and Love to all!
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 13, 2011, 08:24:50 PM
[quote="jacilovesmichael

I see where you guys are coming from...but is it so wrong that a person would not even relate sleeping in a bed to sexual activity? It is us, society, who makes that connection. Michael Jackson was not apart of relguar society. He may not have had any idea that that conduct was considered inappropriate.

Really??? Michael did not have an idea that the conduct is inappropriate for the first time with Chandler and also second time with Arvizos? Really?
I don't think so. Michael was acting careless and immature, as well as his advisors were careless and incompetent to worn him. He allowed himself to be trapped. Multi miillioner businessman must be always sober.........or will  pay. That is the game rule all over the world.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 14, 2011, 05:45:37 AM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Michael was acting careless and immature, as well as his advisors were careless and incompetent to worn him. He allowed himself to be trapped. Multi miillioner businessman must be always sober.........or will  pay. That is the game rule all over the world.[/color]

I agree that MJ is no fool, but has it ever occured to you that there might have been a plan right there to smoke out some snakes? The fact that this went to trial is a mystery, since there was NO evidence. All Sneddon had was the testimony of the Arvizo's, who were very unreliable. So maybe he (or they, since I think the FBI was involved back then already) did not think this would happen.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: RK on April 14, 2011, 11:39:41 AM
Maybe TS is short for The Sting.  I'm of the opinion that Michael has had help with the whole planning and details of this operation and lately I'm swinging to the side that TS is more than an informer for MJ, He's a co creator.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 14, 2011, 02:01:27 PM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Michael was acting careless and immature, as well as his advisors were careless and incompetent to worn him. He allowed himself to be trapped. Multi miillioner businessman must be always sober.........or will  pay. That is the game rule all over the world.[/color]

I agree that MJ is no fool, but has it ever occured to you that there might have been a plan right there to smoke out some snakes? The fact that this went to trial is a mystery, since there was NO evidence. All Sneddon had was the testimony of the Arvizo's, who were very unreliable. So maybe he (or they, since I think the FBI was involved back then already)

Souza, I never said Michael is fool. MJ is smart, intelligent, genious, sweet, kind human being. BUT, at the same time he is too trustworthy, too kind, too careless,and sometimes naive. We all do mistakes being very smart and wise. MJ had his part of mistake avoiding extra causion. Nothing will change my point of view.  I am saying MJ must have been  very careful.
 Example]http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/mittelgrosse/medium-smiley-047.gif[/img]
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: ~Souza~ on April 14, 2011, 02:39:25 PM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Michael was acting careless and immature, as well as his advisors were careless and incompetent to worn him. He allowed himself to be trapped. Multi miillioner businessman must be always sober.........or will  pay. That is the game rule all over the world.[/color]

I agree that MJ is no fool, but has it ever occured to you that there might have been a plan right there to smoke out some snakes? The fact that this went to trial is a mystery, since there was NO evidence. All Sneddon had was the testimony of the Arvizo's, who were very unreliable. So maybe he (or they, since I think the FBI was involved back then already)

Souza, I never said Michael is fool. MJ is smart, intelligent, genious, sweet, kind human being. BUT, at the same time he is too trustworthy, too kind, too careless,and sometimes naive. We all do mistakes being very smart and wise. MJ had his part of mistake avoiding extra causion. Nothing will change my point of view.  I am saying MJ must have been  very careful.
 Example: MJ could say to his guests: "there are everywhere cameras in the house 24/7......." I would definitely say that. Why not? MJ has already had bad experience with Chandler. He had to learn lesson  that he is money magnet and some people after him. Moreover, MJ new that he has been under FBI investigation for the same reason for years, right? Extra causion of safety from such complaints would not hurt him. BUT, MJ did not have camera in his bedroom, Why he did not install camera in the bedroom while kids were in his house? This fact along with Arvizos complaint, even false, was enough for Sneddon to take case to the court. have you ever thought that Sneddon maybe was not paid but he simply believed that MJ did those things, hence, he was doing his job as a prosecutor? You don't have to defend Michael, I am not accusing him. :D I love him & upset that he could have prevented that second case from even becoming a case, and he did not do it. He new what he was doing? I don't think so, at least it was not a right choice then. I am sure MJ agrees with me & will be extra careful from now on.  (http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/mittelgrosse/medium-smiley-047.gif)

Sneddon spent millions from the American tax payers on the investigation and he didn't find anything. Not only in 2003, but also in 1993. He KNEW Mike was innocent but he was sent to get him down. Sneddon is not the mastermind behind all this, this goes way up. I am also aware of the fact that Mike is human and can make mistakes. He probably did make many, like we all do, but he knew they were after him and I think he knew for a very long time. But putting himself in that position might not have been naive, but planned, but the plan backfired. It's just my opinion, but I am VERY convinced that Sneddon was instructed and paid to get Mike.[/color]
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Im_convincedmjalive on April 22, 2011, 08:15:38 PM
viewtopic.php?f=125&t=3391 (http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=125&t=3391)
Quote
1-3. What Does the Username “TS” Stand For?

As far as the person(s) operating TIAI (dot-com): many people are not concerned who it is; they just see the importance of the message, and the evidence that it is genuine, and that is sufficient for them.

Others have tried to name a specific person behind it—such as Marlon Jackson, or someone with the personal initials of “TS”. If it really is Marlon, then surely TIAI would be genuine; however, even if I claimed to be Marlon, this would not prove that I really am Marlon. This is why I asked people to go by the evidence that the information is genuine, and not by my claim of who I am or where I got the information.

On the other hand, if I claimed to be someone with the initials of “TS”—this would not prove that I really have those initials; in fact, it wouldn’t even prove that I am not Marlon! And even if I really did have these initials, how could that be any evidence whatsoever that TIAI is or is not genuine??? And yet several have dismissed TIAI, merely on this idea that I have these personal initials!

For the sake of argument, let’s assume that I do have these personal initials—and if this fact became known, then that alone would prove TIAI to be a fake. Do you suppose that if this were actually the case, I would be so careless as to use “TS” for a username??? After all of the time and thought that was put into TIAI and STUDY: would “TS” thoughtlessly be picked for a username, if it would (supposedly) prove that TIAI is fake? Have any of you TIAI objectors stopped to think about how flimsy your objections really are? And by the way: did any of you sharp investigators notice that “TS” is an abbreviation for T-IAI and S-TUDY??
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: scorpionchik on April 23, 2011, 02:10:39 AM
Isn't this  his/her/their post since January last year saying that MJ was ready to come back.
"by TS » January 12th, 2010, 12:11 am
Great News!!! There is a real good chance that this is the last TIAI update which will be needed, before MJ is ready to “Return”! Please read this carefully, and encourage other hoaxers to read it, so that we can all be ready for the big day."

Until today MJ has not come back... although he was "ready" since last year, but things today with trial become more weird and controversal. How the link to TS is going to convince non-believers if it has not convinced me- the believer?
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Integrity on May 01, 2011, 06:58:10 PM
This is a great Idea Souza! penguin/
I agree with you 100% hesouttamylive bow/
by hesouttamylife » Sun Apr 03, 2011 6:56 pm

Thank you Souza for this thread. I also get the hypotheses from people saying that Michael would not do that to his children and I too beg to differ. Here are my reasons as I posted in another forum:

Michael said that he never wanted his children to be different, that he wanted them to live with normalcy? Can you imagine what normalcy they would have had if he had chosen to take them with him? None. They would have grown up afraid of everything and everybody and they would have been miserable for the rest of their lives. That is the reason I feel in my heart that Michael left them behind, so they could live a normal life. What ever he is going through, God bless him.

I have always believed in the saying if you love someone set them free. If they come back to you it was meant to be. I know that Michael’s children will grow to understand if they don’t already that what he did was courageous and done out of his love for them. He sacrificed himself for his one true love, his children. In doing so, he purposely is making a better way for them. He didn’t leave them behind out of selfishness, but to allow them the chance to live, to grow into caring, considerate, adults with something to offer the world they live in.

I don’t know what Michael is going through, however, I know that he thinks about them every minute he is away from them. I fear that he is sad and obviously unhappy that he had to do it, but coupled with those emotions that he is also content when he sees how well adjusted they have become and continues to be. Loving parents will go against all odds for their children to have what they didn’t have. Michael never had a childhood and he never had real, meaningful, fulfilling love. His children will have all of those things not in spite of but because Michael chose them over self. He made that possible. Michael is a genuis and he is a helluva daddy. I continue to pray for his peace and his well being. I have to believe that he is safe and is watching over us and them somehow. I have to believe that he knows that we are keeping vigil for him, we believe in his plan and that we will never let him part. we don’t judge him for doing what he obviously had to do. Here I must add that Michael will always be my angel and even if I never ever get the chance to see
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Its her on May 04, 2011, 11:27:12 AM
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Michael was acting careless and immature, as well as his advisors were careless and incompetent to worn him. He allowed himself to be trapped. Multi miillioner businessman must be always sober.........or will  pay. That is the game rule all over the world.[/color]

I agree that MJ is no fool, but has it ever occured to you that there might have been a plan right there to smoke out some snakes? The fact that this went to trial is a mystery, since there was NO evidence.  All Sneddon had was the testimony of the Arvizo's, who were very unreliable. So maybe he (or they, since I think the FBI was involved back then already) did not think this would happen.

  Hi Souza and all,

I just want to say that "testimony" no matter how bogus, is considered equal evidence, as well. Thankfully, in this case, the evidence was shot down for being crap, but look how ruinous it was, anyway. This is why it is so god-awful DANGEROUS and DAMNING, when people irresponsibly just run their mouths on and on about someone else, and mindlessly REPEAT crap they heard! omg, if we learn only ONE thing from all the dialog and information on this forum, let it be that words can kill, and to THINK before talking about another human being(someone with eyes, a smile, unique thoughts and gifts for the world, a heart, hopes, dreams, and RIGHTS to life, liberty, privacy and property; in other words, the PEACEFUL pursuit of happiness )....
 
What is a mystery to me is that the entire family wasn't prosecuted as follow up. MJ did nothing wrong. It simply chafed at some peoples' parenting, that MJ was so much nicer to other peoples' kids than they were, so they "just knew" there had to be an ulterior motive in the single grown man's heart... Fools. There certainly was enough evidence (testimony from previous marks) that these family members are career criminals, with the parent indoctrinating  :x the children!!
 
We train people how to treat us, and I think if there are never any consequences to their actions, they will repeat their scams again and again. THE loving thing, protecting others, and a lesson for any others with the same mind (targeting MJ), would have been to take advantage of the laws of the land and hold those people accountable for their actions. Some people NEVER learn and are bent on evil, but at least those kids would have had some POSITIVE  input into their character development, by directive of the Court, other than their twisted mother's work ethic. It is unfortunate, because now, IDK, they probably just think, "well this scam wasn't as successful as we wanted, darn it", and view it as a challenge to perfect their "craft" in future. :?

But, yeah, testimony is evidence...is THAT scary for ya?  Tell me about it.  afraid/ I am covered with the $#@!, as we speak.  :?      

Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: heartphantom on May 04, 2011, 12:12:00 PM
Nonbelievers have no place here, you are not even allowed to doubt because you are asked: "why did you join if you don't believe"
We are challenging nonbelievers but we don't welcome them. A nonbeliever came in chatroom and he was mocked so if we want to have a conversation with them let's give them a chance and let's treat everybody nice.
I would love to challenge and be challenged, it's good to take a realistic shot from different sides. Talking only to people who share the same vision is not very relevant.
Nonbelievers , please join this thread and let's have a nice debate in a respectful manner. bearhug
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: mrbigshot on May 26, 2011, 06:58:19 PM
All I would really need to say to someone who isn't a believer is that Michael's death certificate wasn't authenticated was unable to be signed by a practicing physician or doctor. If they don't believe Michael is a live after that statement, then I don't how they could keep an open mind or at least consider the possibility. From there, I'd probably just leave it at that. i'm just trying to convince anyone.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: JentleTouch on May 26, 2011, 08:27:49 PM
Do non-believers really visit this forum?  fresse/ Why? Only for having arguments? It's kinda morbid and such a waste of time.
I never go to any "Michael is dead" forums. I can't stand all those heartbreaking posts. But that's just me and that's no way anti-welcoming. I was just wondering.
And Iam lying right now lol. I forgot, I do visit one. The MJJCommunity. But I have my own reasons for it ( not arguing!lol ) and I never post on there.
Title: Re: New blog: Challenging the non-believers arguments – part
Post by: Grace on May 28, 2011, 08:21:06 AM
Quote from: "scorpionchik"
Explain how could Katherine go Target to do shopping, looking very calm on good,on the 3rd day of her sons sudden death? And how paparazzi again was right there, just like Ben the only pap. on June 25thy happened to be at Carolwood dr. [/color]

[youtube:12hj55rk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6aU_vAtw-Q[/youtube:12hj55rk]

LOL, I LOVED that.

Katherine shopping at

(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.tuaw.com/media/2010/10/target-logo-2.jpg)

buying

SLEEPING
(http://www.vincentchow.net/images/sleep-simpson.jpg)

Bags.
(http://www.picturesof.net/_images_300/A_Colorful_Cartoon_Boy_In_a_Sleeping_Bag_Reading_with_a_Flashlight_Royalty_Free_Clipart_Picture_110109-146197-008053.jpg)

(not sheets)

Quote
“I don’t want you sedating people”

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/35298192/ns/today-entertainment/t/jacksons-doctor-return-court-april/


Remember the overall and pervading S.L.E.E.P. theme?

 respect/  Lady Katherine. Blessings to all.
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal