Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
Latest News => The Redirects => TIAI => The Plan (Qanon, TIAI, BACK) => TIAI ~ 2010 => Topic started by: Serenitys_Dream on September 27, 2010, 03:34:08 AM
-
Redirected to the front page.
THISISALSOIT.com
Silencing the Critics, And $999 REwarD??? You bET
http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/tiai_Silencing_the_Critics.php
-
The HD videos are breathtaking. Wow is all I can say! Thanks TS.
-
Great overview and inclusion of all the links/videos etc which TS discusses in the most recent post on 09-09-10.
-
Good job girls. God bless you TS.
-
TS recognizing the good work, congratulations Mo and Souza ;)
-
TS says that MJ himself said at the London Press conference-- see you in July. And he underlined it.
This has really challenged me. I am one who has always maintained it wasn't Mike, but now I will have to go back over the O2 anouncement threads.
Well, it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something. If anyones looking for me, I'll be in the doubles threads.
-
Well done Mo/Souza/TS!!! Thank you!
-
Looks awesome.
-
Awesome work :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
Thank you ----- TS/Souza/Mo
Everyday I come online just to see all the updates.
-
Yes thanks Mo and Souza for your amazing work in putting this from TS all together in such a beautiful, easy to follow and organized way! Like TS said, when MJ BAM's there will be a flood from old members and entirely new to the hoax visitors, and your work will become one of the most important references. Sorry about not giving you credit before, I wasn't paying attention, just checking in quickly, and got enthralled with the videos right away.
-
It's easier to read this way ...good work
I see TS is following the 777 days - so we know he doesn't miss the important days.
I hope he will not change the rules of the game too soon. It's comforting to know we can rely on something solid.
And our friends from TMZ did posted news today, in fact about Prince helping in charity, and that seems linked to the previous redirect, which was about charity too.
-
This looks awesome - hats off to Souza & Mo for putting it together in such an organised and appealing way. And thank you TS for buoying up our faith. You are preparing us well :)
-
This looks awesome - hats off to Souza & Mo for putting it together in such an organised and appealing way. And thank you TS for buoying up our faith. You are preparing us well :)
Totally agree! Thank you Mo and Souza - a very easy to follow layout and very appealing.
TS -------> :) :) - You are amazing!
With L.O.V.E
-
Very Awesome <3
-
Ooh yes that is easier to read and this redirect also gave me an opportunity to reread this post. :)
Peace & LOVE
-
Beautiful work, Mo and Souza! A+ level on the report card! ;) You have raised the bar again with this reader-friendly, eye-catching format. TS, much appreciation for showcasing this new design.
-
Excellent job Souza and Mo, the page looks great. Much easier to read and understand what TS is telling us in this kind of format.
Just noticed something I thought was interesting in the section "Does MJ have any informers?"
It says that
"Elvis/Jesse had Dr. Hinton as an informer, and he helped to write the book"
and has this linked
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/DrHinton.jpg)
Then it says
"And Elvis/Jesse still has Linda as an informer"
and links to Linda Hoodsigmon's website
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/Linda.jpg)
Then it says:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS?"
and links to a post to Serenitys_Dreams
viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140 (http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140)
[attachment=0:133q2gqs]SD.jpg[/attachment:133q2gqs]
Is this suggesting that not only are TS and TMZ MJs reliable informers but that Serenitys_Dream is too???
The way it is written is weird and then it links to her post.
It really seems to me that it is pointing to Serenitys_Dream being MJ's "Linda"
Elvis/Linda = MJ/Serenity
-
I'm not going to comment on Serenitys_Dream, but I must say I've wondered recently whether certain people here are more than 'just' members. They seem to 'know' many things for certain, more than the rest of us, and I get a vibe that it's not just from more researching and investigating. I maybe imagining it of course!
-
I'm not going to comment on Serenitys_Dream, but I must say I've wondered recently whether certain people here are more than 'just' members. They seem to 'know' many things for certain, more than the rest of us, and I get a vibe that it's not just from more researching and investigating. I maybe imagining it of course!
I agree. If you're imagining, than I am imagining it too. :|
-
curls, I also agree. Your post sounds very much like something I would write.
-
I'm not going to comment on Serenitys_Dream, but I must say I've wondered recently whether certain people here are more than 'just' members. They seem to 'know' many things for certain, more than the rest of us, and I get a vibe that it's not just from more researching and investigating. I maybe imagining it of course!
I agree. If you're imagining, than I am imagining it too. :|
You've both read my mind Curls and GinaFelicia!! We have no idea who is posting here. Usernames are like masks to disguise one's true identity. Obviously there are some good investigators and researchers amongst us, but perhaps some have been able to tap into some exclusive information the rest of us don't have access to ;) :)
-
TS says that MJ himself said at the London Press conference-- see you in July. And he underlined it.
This has really challenged me. I am one who has always maintained it wasn't Mike, but now I will have to go back over the O2 anouncement threads.
Well, it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something. If anyones looking for me, I'll be in the doubles threads.
I keep thinking about that too. However, I had an interesting notion the other day. Even if it wasn't Mike at the 02, or in parts of TII, does that automatically mean that he wasn't behind the whole thing? If this whole thing is like a movie, then Mike could have hired actors to play his part while he is directing it. So perhaps it doesn't matter if it was really Michael at the 02, because the message was still the same and still straight from Mike's mouth as far as what he wanted to be said... "This It Is".
What do you think? Just trying to entertain all possible options!
-
TS says that MJ himself said at the London Press conference-- see you in July. And he underlined it.
This has really challenged me. I am one who has always maintained it wasn't Mike, but now I will have to go back over the O2 anouncement threads.
Well, it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something. If anyones looking for me, I'll be in the doubles threads.
I keep thinking about that too. However, I had an interesting notion the other day. Even if it wasn't Mike at the 02, or in parts of TII, does that automatically mean that he wasn't behind the whole thing? If this whole thing is like a movie, then Mike could have hired actors to play his part while he is directing it. So perhaps it doesn't matter if it was really Michael at the 02, because the message was still the same and still straight from Mike's mouth as far as what he wanted to be said... "This It Is".
What do you think? Just trying to entertain all possible options!
At first it seemed obvious to me that the 02 MJ was an imposter. But then I thought perhaps MJ was pretending to be an imposter. After all, would a real imposter walk the way he did? And that wig! Not to mention that silly smirk on his face. Michael is such a trickster, it wouldn't surprise me if the imposter is a fake!
-
TS says that MJ himself said at the London Press conference-- see you in July. And he underlined it.
This has really challenged me. I am one who has always maintained it wasn't Mike, but now I will have to go back over the O2 anouncement threads.
Well, it wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong about something. If anyones looking for me, I'll be in the doubles threads.
I keep thinking about that too. However, I had an interesting notion the other day. Even if it wasn't Mike at the 02, or in parts of TII, does that automatically mean that he wasn't behind the whole thing? If this whole thing is like a movie, then Mike could have hired actors to play his part while he is directing it. So perhaps it doesn't matter if it was really Michael at the 02, because the message was still the same and still straight from Mike's mouth as far as what he wanted to be said... "This It Is".
What do you think? Just trying to entertain all possible options!
At first it seemed obvious to me that the 02 MJ was an imposter. But then I thought perhaps MJ was pretending to be an imposter. After all, would a real imposter walk the way he did? And that wig! Not to mention that silly smirk on his face. Michael is such a trickster, it wouldn't surprise me if the imposter is a fake!
I still am not sure if it was Michael or not. It;s just my opinion that he has a double who looks almost like him, speaks and walks almost like him. But who knows?!
-
Excellent job Souza and Mo, the page looks great. Much easier to read and understand what TS is telling us in this kind of format.
Just noticed something I thought was interesting in the section "Does MJ have any informers?"
It says that
"Elvis/Jesse had Dr. Hinton as an informer, and he helped to write the book"
and has this linked
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/DrHinton.jpg)
Then it says
"And Elvis/Jesse still has Linda as an informer"
and links to Linda Hoodsigmon's website
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/Linda.jpg)
Then it says:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS?"
and links to a post to Serenitys_Dreams
viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140 (http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140)
[attachment=0:1myytz5f]SD.jpg[/attachment:1myytz5f]
Is this suggesting that not only are TS and TMZ MJs reliable informers but that Serenitys_Dream is too???
The way it is written is weird and then it links to her post.
It really seems to me that it is pointing to Serenitys_Dream being MJ's "Linda"
Elvis/Linda = MJ/Serenity
If you click the link you will see serenity's post is about the TMZ connection. TMZ is Mike's informer.
-
Excellent job Souza and Mo, the page looks great. Much easier to read and understand what TS is telling us in this kind of format.
Just noticed something I thought was interesting in the section "Does MJ have any informers?"
It says that
"Elvis/Jesse had Dr. Hinton as an informer, and he helped to write the book"
and has this linked
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/DrHinton.jpg)
Then it says
"And Elvis/Jesse still has Linda as an informer"
and links to Linda Hoodsigmon's website
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/Linda.jpg)
Then it says:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS?"
and links to a post to Serenitys_Dreams
viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140 (http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140)
[attachment=0:158sba6v]SD.jpg[/attachment:158sba6v]
Is this suggesting that not only are TS and TMZ MJs reliable informers but that Serenitys_Dream is too???
The way it is written is weird and then it links to her post.
It really seems to me that it is pointing to Serenitys_Dream being MJ's "Linda"
Elvis/Linda = MJ/Serenity
If you click the link you will see serenity's post is about the TMZ connection. TMZ is Mike's informer.
Yes Souza, I see that, but the question asked by TS is:
So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if NOT TMZ and/or TS?
So he is asking if the informers aren't TMZ or TS, then who are they, then he shows a screen shot of Serenitys_Dream.
So to me this suggests, that if TMZ or TS aren't the only reliable informers, then Serenitys_Dream is also a reliable informer.
-
I am reading again TS' last post and honestly I can say if TS can't convince people that Mr. Jackson could be alive, than nobody can, except of Mr. Jackson himself coming Back.
Even if TS has so much sense in what he says (most of the time I am surprised because he uses the arguments I would use, with the difference that he gives a better expression to these arguments) I admit I have my own doubts sometimes, like when I see his mother so sad or Neverland sold or auctions on Michael's assets...
I don't ask for more clues anymore, because we were given plenty, but I feel like we are in a critical moment of this story, a turning point or something like that. Something has to happen, something HAS to happen.... I just don't know if it's good or bad :?
-
Excellent job Souza and Mo, the page looks great. Much easier to read and understand what TS is telling us in this kind of format.
Just noticed something I thought was interesting in the section "Does MJ have any informers?"
It says that
"Elvis/Jesse had Dr. Hinton as an informer, and he helped to write the book"
and has this linked
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/DrHinton.jpg)
Then it says
"And Elvis/Jesse still has Linda as an informer"
and links to Linda Hoodsigmon's website
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/Linda.jpg)
Then it says:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS?"
and links to a post to Serenitys_Dreams
viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140 (http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140)
[attachment=0:22oase0o]SD.jpg[/attachment:22oase0o]
Is this suggesting that not only are TS and TMZ MJs reliable informers but that Serenitys_Dream is too???
The way it is written is weird and then it links to her post.
It really seems to me that it is pointing to Serenitys_Dream being MJ's "Linda"
Elvis/Linda = MJ/Serenity
If you click the link you will see serenity's post is about the TMZ connection. TMZ is Mike's informer.
Yes Souza, I see that, but the question asked by TS is:
So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if NOT TMZ and/or TS?
So he is asking if the informers aren't TMZ or TS, then who are they, then he shows a screen shot of Serenitys_Dream.
So to me this suggests, that if TMZ or TS aren't the only reliable informers, then Serenitys_Dream is also a reliable informer.
English might not be my first language, but I had in in school for about 9 years and to me this sentence:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if NOT TMZ and/or TS?"
Means:
Of course MJ has informers and since he has, why not TMZ and TS. In Dutch it's formulated quite the same way.
With all due respect for serenity and her posts, I think it's not good to put the stamp "Informer" on her for several reasons.
Serenity is doing what you all can do: search for information on the world wide web with the info provided to us. That doesn't mean she is an informer, it means she takes the effort to do a search, instead of just reading articles and discussing it here. Saying she is an informer means she needs to watch what she posts from now on, because if something she posts is off, or debunked by someone, it's easy to dismiss TS again as well, because people have decided they are linked. We all know by now how easy it is to forget the proof TS has provided...
Another danger is that people will be focussing only on serenity's posts and ignore other posts, taking serenity's for truth and look no further. That means people will miss interesting information and stop to think for themselves. I already see that happening in some threads. I am not saying serenity is posting BS, I am saying you shouldn't stop reading after serenity's post just because someone misread a sentence of TS. It would be better if you would instead do the same as her (and others on here as well) and start searching for information as well.
It also happens the other way around. A while back someone had a rant about Mo and I about the dog-theory, ridiculing it. Most people have heard of the dog-theory, but I think most of them NEVER read the info in it. Because if you would forget about the dog, there is a lot of information in those posts about the medicins that is interesting. Because some people ranted about the post that it was ridiculous, many didn't even read it and the posts after that, because most haven't read the Trial blog either, which has a lot of valuable info in it as well. All because someone said one of the posts was ridiculous, people stopped reading.
Most info is all to be found on the net, if you would only do a few searches. Yet I see people rather rely on "informers" then do a search for themselves. If we would all just dig a little deeper, we might find more information.
Are there people on here besides TS that give valuable information? Yes I think there are. They are not all MJ's informers, some are posters that, like I mentioned, took the effort to search for the info already available. Some might be MJ's informers (or maybe he himself), and I think they are the ones that give tiny bits of info to start a discussion, to make sure some stuff was 'found' on the internet, like videos that contain important info, but they will be the ones you least expect in my opinion.
It is important to keep thinking for yourself. All of us can be 'informers' if only we would stop following one certain person, or a few persons and search for ourselves. A few tips: www.google.nl; (http://www.google.nl;) www.wikipedia.nl; (http://www.wikipedia.nl;) http://www.thefreedictionary.com (http://www.thefreedictionary.com)
If we would all start using at least these 3 sites, maybe we would find some more info. A hundred will find more info than ten.
-
Excellent job Souza and Mo, the page looks great. Much easier to read and understand what TS is telling us in this kind of format.
Just noticed something I thought was interesting in the section "Does MJ have any informers?"
It says that
"Elvis/Jesse had Dr. Hinton as an informer, and he helped to write the book"
and has this linked
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/DrHinton.jpg)
Then it says
"And Elvis/Jesse still has Linda as an informer"
and links to Linda Hoodsigmon's website
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/Linda.jpg)
Then it says:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS?"
and links to a post to Serenitys_Dreams
viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140 (http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140)
[attachment=0:nwf5zzwg]SD.jpg[/attachment:nwf5zzwg]
Is this suggesting that not only are TS and TMZ MJs reliable informers but that Serenitys_Dream is too???
The way it is written is weird and then it links to her post.
It really seems to me that it is pointing to Serenitys_Dream being MJ's "Linda"
Elvis/Linda = MJ/Serenity
If you click the link you will see serenity's post is about the TMZ connection. TMZ is Mike's informer.
Yes Souza, I see that, but the question asked by TS is:
So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if NOT TMZ and/or TS?
So he is asking if the informers aren't TMZ or TS, then who are they, then he shows a screen shot of Serenitys_Dream.
So to me this suggests, that if TMZ or TS aren't the only reliable informers, then Serenitys_Dream is also a reliable informer.
English might not be my first language, but I had in in school for about 9 years and to me this sentence:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if NOT TMZ and/or TS?"
Means:
Of course MJ has informers and since he has, why not TMZ and TS. In Dutch it's formulated quite the same way.
With all due respect for serenity and her posts, I think it's not good to put the stamp "Informer" on her for several reasons.
Serenity is doing what you all can do: search for information on the world wide web with the info provided to us. That doesn't mean she is an informer, it means she takes the effort to do a search, instead of just reading articles and discussing it here. Saying she is an informer means she needs to watch what she posts from now on, because if something she posts is off, or debunked by someone, it's easy to dismiss TS again as well, because people have decided they are linked. We all know by now how easy it is to forget the proof TS has provided...
Another danger is that people will be focussing only on serenity's posts and ignore other posts, taking serenity's for truth and look no further. That means people will miss interesting information and stop to think for themselves. I already see that happening in some threads. I am not saying serenity is posting BS, I am saying you shouldn't stop reading after serenity's post just because someone misread a sentence of TS. It would be better if you would instead do the same as her (and others on here as well) and start searching for information as well.
It also happens the other way around. A while back someone had a rant about Mo and I about the dog-theory, ridiculing it. Most people have heard of the dog-theory, but I think most of them NEVER read the info in it. Because if you would forget about the dog, there is a lot of information in those posts about the medicins that is interesting. Because some people ranted about the post that it was ridiculous, many didn't even read it and the posts after that, because most haven't read the Trial blog either, which has a lot of valuable info in it as well. All because someone said one of the posts was ridiculous, people stopped reading.
Most info is all to be found on the net, if you would only do a few searches. Yet I see people rather rely on "informers" then do a search for themselves. If we would all just dig a little deeper, we might find more information.
Are there people on here besides TS that give valuable information? Yes I think there are. They are not all MJ's informers, some are posters that, like I mentioned, took the effort to search for the info already available. Some might be MJ's informers (or maybe he himself), and I think they are the ones that give tiny bits of info to start a discussion, to make sure some stuff was 'found' on the internet, like videos that contain important info, but they will be the ones you least expect in my opinion.
It is important to keep thinking for yourself. All of us can be 'informers' if only we would stop following one certain person, or a few persons and search for ourselves. A few tips: http://www.google.nl; (http://www.google.nl;) http://www.wikipedia.nl; (http://www.wikipedia.nl;) http://www.thefreedictionary.com (http://www.thefreedictionary.com)
If we would all start using at least these 3 sites, maybe we would find some more info. A hundred will find more info than ten.
AMEN to that, I wholeheartedly agree.
-
Here is the complete part of TS' post again:
Does MJ Have Any Informers?
Elvis/Jesse had Dr. Hinton as an informer, and he helped to write the book {see Update #6, http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11061}. And Elvis/Jesse still has Linda as an informer {http://lindahoodsigmontruth.com/index.php}. So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS? {http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140}
Is the Jackson family the only informers? And if so, why have they given almost no clues for quite a while? And if the family is against TMZ, then why have they done interviews with TMZ {http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/search.php?keywords=recap&terms=all&author=&fid%5B%5D=50&sc=0&sf=titleonly&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=100&t=0&submit=Search}? Why don’t they openly speak out against TMZ? Yes, Jermaine did mention a complaint about camera people laughing in court {http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oi3OiJMjilg}; but this is all that he mentioned, he said nothing against TMZ reporting MJ news and/or hoax information, etc.
And let’s go back to the beginning once more: why was TMZ first to report the MJ “death”? Some have suggested that this is merely because TMZ was faster than all the other media, and got the information ahead of everyone else. But would MJ be so sloppy, as to accidentally allow an internet tabloid site be the first to find out about the “death”? If MJ planned this all out so well for so long (see Updates #4 & #6): don’t you think that he would also plan what media facility he wanted to first announce the “death”?
Furthermore, if MJ does not have a news source in on the hoax: then how can he demonstrate the problem of the media running stories from other news facilities, without checking it out for themselves (which is exactly what happens when TMZ posts articles)? And if MJ did plan to demonstrate this, then what news company is he using—if not TMZ??
Even if MJ were really dead, it’s possible that one or more in the Jackson family would read the hoax theories on the internet. And if you are sure MJ is alive: then you can be certain that they are watching the hoax on the internet. And even if they read one and only one hoax forum, surely it would be this one (MJDHI); because it’s the first hit on Google, because you don’t have to sign up to read it, and because it is the only hoax forum on the TMZ blog roll {http://www.tmz.com/blogroll/}.
Now why would TMZ put only this hoax forum on blog roll—which is also the only forum that TS posts on? If MJ and/or TMZ is against the TIAI messages: then this forum should NEVER be the on the TMZ blog roll!
For those who have claimed that TS is only connected with TMZ, but not anything else in the hoax; here is the list yet again (with one more added). And this time there are sixteen ones with a * (instead of a #); these sixteen are all connections to more than just TMZ.
*1. MJ investigation complete, only two days after TIAI announced Update #1.
*2. 333 pages of FBI files, planned release on same day as TIAI Revealed.
*3. $9.99 while LaToya shopping, connecting with “99” days after 9-9-09.
#4. Six 911 articles on TMZ, the day after TIAI conspiracies on Google (911, etc).
#5. Murray on TMZ news four times, the same day as the TIAI Murray redirect.
*6. Vendetta on 11-5; Evan Chandler / Emerald City on 11-17 (70th anniversary).
*7. 2012 trailer, a week before “Jackson” and many other MJ parallels came out.
*8. TII Resurrection scene in a graveyard (not funeral & casket, etc).
*9. TII would Reveal the hoax (Smooth Criminal, no RIP, BAM statement, etc).
*10. TII would show the MJ “Return” (this very word is now on the DVD).
*11. 1998 autograph codes; 77 days & 7 days all pointed to 9-9-09, fulfilled by several TII and MJ related events.
*12. ALLJACK5ONS tweet on 1-18 about TIAI “Revealed” (also the 3-11 tweet).
#13. TMZ clue on January 25.
#14. TMZ, Murray, and murder versus hoax clue on February 5.
*15. High probability of “piece by piece” return starting in January (see #12, etc).
*16. Autopsy finalized 9-9-09, released just one day after I said “9-9-09 update”.
#17. TIAI redirect to TMZ, less than an hour before the big MJ Killed Himself post.
#18. Update #4 (4-44), #17 article posted on 4-4 at 4:00 AM (444).
*19. Elvis redirect on 5-10, several Elvis events happen from 5-12 to 5-20 (next).
*20. Update 5 (with 12 sections) on 5-12 at 5:12 AM; later that day TMZ starts LMP series from 5-12 to 5-17. Also, Linda talks to Jesse on 5-12.
*21. The final part of TIAI Update (#5d) is posted evening of 5-19 (CA time). On 5-19, Eliza posted a message on her homepage, for the first time in about four months; then on 5-20, the article by attorney Mayoras was posted (6-1, above).
*22. “Strong Evidence of TS’s Authenticity” {http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=13541; http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=0&t=13541&p=232799#p232795}
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Strongest Evidence that TS Is a Fake Informer
TIAI Update #6 was titled: “TIai update #6: Michael & Elvis, DOuble-bam This Summer?!?” And yes, summer is nearly over. So if there’s no bam soon, then I guess this is very strong evidence that TS is fake, right?
However, although the critics will no doubt be eager to use this reasoning as soon as summer is over, there is one minor problem with this reasoning—and that problem is the following list of the others who would also have to be fake, using the same basic reasoning: Jermaine, 5 Brothers, TMZ, Paris, Ortega, Janet, and even MJ himself!
Jermaine’s “The Tribute” has said “coming SOON” for about a year now {http://www.thetribute2010.com/}; actually, it was originally titled The Tribute 2009 {http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=%22the+tribute+2009%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=5d0b50e146560710}. The “5 Brothers Enterprises” website—with BAM illustrated visually and in the audio—has also said “coming SOON” since December 2009 {http://www.whois.net/whois/5brothersenterprises.com}.
TMZ had a “big clue” for January 18, 2010; but nothing happened {http://www.tmz.com/2009/11/18/michael-jackson-dr-conrad-murray-lapd-investigation-applied-pharmacy-search-warrant-las-vegas/; http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=3391}. And in the same month (January 2010), Paris said “Daddy was supposed to be here. Daddy was going to perform this year.” {http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=5024}
Many already know about Kenny Ortega’s tweet: “Smee: Captain, the ice is melting, the sun is out and the flowers are all in bloom Captain Hook: He’s back” {Sep 1st, 2009 via web; http://twitter.com/KennyOrtegaBlog/status/3684282550}. This was so obvious, that he got several questions about it; so only one day later, Kenny said: “... I was quoting text from Peter Pan. Please don’t look for hidden messages. Promise they’re not there. Just fun” {http://twitter.com/KennyOrtegaBlog/status/3706966897}.
Now if MJ were really dead, then we wouldn’t pay much attention to these tweets from Kenny; but if MJ is alive, then the first tweet was indeed a clue—and the second one was to deter further questioning. It is true that the first tweet doesn’t give a specific year, it only mentions springtime; however, unless he was referring to the very next spring (2010), then this tweet was essentially pointless—because it could be ANY spring from now until forever.
On June 14, 2010, Janet tweeted this: “It’s time the fans know the truth …”
{Jun 14th via web; http://twitter.com/JanetJackson/status/16174141128, verified account}. What “truth” was Janet referring to, that was then “time” for the fans to “know”? Perhaps that MJ is dead, and he was murdered? If so, that is nothing that hasn’t been said many times already. Furthermore, if MJ is alive, then murder would not be the “truth”—instead, the hoax would be the truth. Yet nearly three months have passed since then, and no hoax truth has come out publicly from the Jacksons.
Last but not least, MJ himself said at the London press conference: “see you in July”! If he really died, then this was merely a reference to the planned concerts in July 2009; but if he was planning a fake death, then the “July” did not refer to 2009. Of course he didn’t say what year, just like Kenny’s tweet; but once again, if MJ didn’t mean July 2010, then it could be any year—and therefore it would be practically meaningless.
Actually, if you’re going to include all of the above as fake MJ hoax informers, then you might as well include Dr. Hinton as a fake Elvis hoax informer; because Dr. Hinton—the very one who helped write the book with Elvis/Jesse—said Elvis would come out publicly in the year 2002, but it didn’t happen {http://lindahoodsigmontruth.com/page19}.
And what about attorney Mayoras, who is an informer with Eliza’s case? Back in May he said: “Eliza Presley’s court case is back on track and scheduled to come to a head this summer. … Stay tuned until this summer. That’s when the real fun begins.” {http://www.probatelawyerblog.com/2010/05/the-elvis-presley-conspiracy-part-iv-what-does-it-all-mean.html}. Summer is about over, so does “this summer” make him a fake informer? By the way “This Summer” is the exact phrase that I used in my Update #6—along with two question marks {http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11061}.
Eliza herself knows that there can be delays, when you are dealing with court cases. She said the following: “Of course, any time that you deal with the legal system, you cannot predict a time frame, can you?” {http://www.elvisinfonet.com/interview_elizapresley1.htm}.
Like everyone else involved in the MJ and Elvis hoaxes, I can’t give any certain dates for bam; I can only give possibilities. And at this point, don’t be too surprised if nothing major happens until after Eliza and/or Murray cases are done.
There are some interesting dates coming up: 10-10-10, Halloween, and November 5 (V for Vendetta); but as always, don’t put too much on any particular date.
What we do know for sure is that: “It’s all going to come out; it’s all going to unfold.” {http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bd0SoaOe-cs}. This is what Jermaine said back in February, 2010; and it was stated in the context of the “airport” slip, so we know he meant the hoax is all going to come out {http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=7010}.
Jermaine also reiterated this again on Larry King interview in June, 2010. “[Larry:] Do you think we’ll ever find out the whole story? [Jermaine:] Yes! Yes! You know why, because his [MJ’s] family is not going to let it not happen. ... We’re going to do everything in our power as a family to make sure the world knows what really happened.” {http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oi3OiJMjilg}.
Yes, there have been delays; and as time passes, more members may leave this forum (and many have left already). But don’t worry too much; they will all come rushing back right after bamsday—along with thousands and thousands of new members.
By reading all the above, it should be clear that TS is talking about TMZ, himself and the Jacksons, because many were still rejecting TMZ and him as valuable informers (hence the subject of his post: "Silencing the critics". In other words: stop opposing TMZ & TS/TIAI as informers, start seeing the info they provide.
-
Excellent job Souza and Mo, the page looks great. Much easier to read and understand what TS is telling us in this kind of format.
Just noticed something I thought was interesting in the section "Does MJ have any informers?"
It says that
"Elvis/Jesse had Dr. Hinton as an informer, and he helped to write the book"
and has this linked
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/DrHinton.jpg)
Then it says
"And Elvis/Jesse still has Linda as an informer"
and links to Linda Hoodsigmon's website
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/Linda.jpg)
Then it says:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS?"
and links to a post to Serenitys_Dreams
viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140 (http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140)
[attachment=0:3e2xcfpm]SD.jpg[/attachment:3e2xcfpm]
Is this suggesting that not only are TS and TMZ MJs reliable informers but that Serenitys_Dream is too???
The way it is written is weird and then it links to her post.
It really seems to me that it is pointing to Serenitys_Dream being MJ's "Linda"
Elvis/Linda = MJ/Serenity
If you click the link you will see serenity's post is about the TMZ connection. TMZ is Mike's informer.
Yes Souza, I see that, but the question asked by TS is:
So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if NOT TMZ and/or TS?
So he is asking if the informers aren't TMZ or TS, then who are they, then he shows a screen shot of Serenitys_Dream.
So to me this suggests, that if TMZ or TS aren't the only reliable informers, then Serenitys_Dream is also a reliable informer.
English might not be my first language, but I had in in school for about 9 years and to me this sentence:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if NOT TMZ and/or TS?"
Means:
Of course MJ has informers and since he has, why not TMZ and TS. In Dutch it's formulated quite the same way.
With all due respect for serenity and her posts, I think it's not good to put the stamp "Informer" on her for several reasons.
Serenity is doing what you all can do: search for information on the world wide web with the info provided to us. That doesn't mean she is an informer, it means she takes the effort to do a search, instead of just reading articles and discussing it here. Saying she is an informer means she needs to watch what she posts from now on, because if something she posts is off, or debunked by someone, it's easy to dismiss TS again as well, because people have decided they are linked. We all know by now how easy it is to forget the proof TS has provided...
Another danger is that people will be focussing only on serenity's posts and ignore other posts, taking serenity's for truth and look no further. That means people will miss interesting information and stop to think for themselves. I already see that happening in some threads. I am not saying serenity is posting BS, I am saying you shouldn't stop reading after serenity's post just because someone misread a sentence of TS. It would be better if you would instead do the same as her (and others on here as well) and start searching for information as well.
It also happens the other way around. A while back someone had a rant about Mo and I about the dog-theory, ridiculing it. Most people have heard of the dog-theory, but I think most of them NEVER read the info in it. Because if you would forget about the dog, there is a lot of information in those posts about the medicins that is interesting. Because some people ranted about the post that it was ridiculous, many didn't even read it and the posts after that, because most haven't read the Trial blog either, which has a lot of valuable info in it as well. All because someone said one of the posts was ridiculous, people stopped reading.
Most info is all to be found on the net, if you would only do a few searches. Yet I see people rather rely on "informers" then do a search for themselves. If we would all just dig a little deeper, we might find more information.
Are there people on here besides TS that give valuable information? Yes I think there are. They are not all MJ's informers, some are posters that, like I mentioned, took the effort to search for the info already available. Some might be MJ's informers (or maybe he himself), and I think they are the ones that give tiny bits of info to start a discussion, to make sure some stuff was 'found' on the internet, like videos that contain important info, but they will be the ones you least expect in my opinion.
It is important to keep thinking for yourself. All of us can be 'informers' if only we would stop following one certain person, or a few persons and search for ourselves. A few tips: http://www.google.nl; (http://www.google.nl;) http://www.wikipedia.nl; (http://www.wikipedia.nl;) http://www.thefreedictionary.com (http://www.thefreedictionary.com)
If we would all start using at least these 3 sites, maybe we would find some more info. A hundred will find more info than ten.
if not
perhaps; indicating possibility of being more remarkable (greater or better or sooner) than; "will yield 10% if not more"; "pretty if not actually beautiful"; "let's meet tonight if not sooner"
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/if+not
TS wrote "then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS?"
"if not" can be used to suggest an alternative.
"I am nothing if not brilliant"
For the sentence to mean what you are saying it does, it would have to be written as a question and then an answer.
like this: "then who are the reliable MJ informers? Perhaps TMZ and/or TS."
TS uses a dash for a pause, a moment to think, but it is a complete sentence, a question and it asks for an alternative.
TS answers his own question with the link to Serenitys_Dream's post.
reliable
Capable of being relied on dependable
able to be trusted; predictable or dependable
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/reliable
informer
a person who provides/supplies information
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/informer
information
Knowledge derived from study, experience, or instruction.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/infromation
TMZ is not actually giving information but they are giving clues, hints, DOTS.
TS is giving clues by redirecting TIAI and then providing insight on what the redirects mean.
Linda searched for information and then wrote posts about what she discoverd on her website.
This is what makes Linda, Elvis' reliable informant.
In TS's post, Linda's website is linked as Elvis' reliable informant.
I believe that TS is saying that Serenitys_Dream is MJ's reliable informant because if he meant that it was TMZ or TS was the reliable informant he would have linked to TMZ's website or to himself and not to a post by Serenitys_Dream.
Plus in the last update he has links to 3 of her posts and a thread with the title "To Serenity and TS". It looks like he thinks she is pretty reliable.
I understand your concern, but maybe TS wants people to take notice of her posts because it seems that a lot of people are ignoring them. TS tell us to read between the lines, I guess that goes for his posts too.
-
Excellent job Souza and Mo, the page looks great. Much easier to read and understand what TS is telling us in this kind of format.
Just noticed something I thought was interesting in the section "Does MJ have any informers?"
It says that
"Elvis/Jesse had Dr. Hinton as an informer, and he helped to write the book"
and has this linked
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/DrHinton.jpg)
Then it says
"And Elvis/Jesse still has Linda as an informer"
and links to Linda Hoodsigmon's website
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/Linda.jpg)
Then it says:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS?"
and links to a post to Serenitys_Dreams
viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140 (http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140)
[attachment=0:2mdb0wmh]SD.jpg[/attachment:2mdb0wmh]
Is this suggesting that not only are TS and TMZ MJs reliable informers but that Serenitys_Dream is too???
The way it is written is weird and then it links to her post.
It really seems to me that it is pointing to Serenitys_Dream being MJ's "Linda"
Elvis/Linda = MJ/Serenity
If you click the link you will see serenity's post is about the TMZ connection. TMZ is Mike's informer.
Yes Souza, I see that, but the question asked by TS is:
So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if NOT TMZ and/or TS?
So he is asking if the informers aren't TMZ or TS, then who are they, then he shows a screen shot of Serenitys_Dream.
So to me this suggests, that if TMZ or TS aren't the only reliable informers, then Serenitys_Dream is also a reliable informer.
English might not be my first language, but I had in in school for about 9 years and to me this sentence:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if NOT TMZ and/or TS?"
Means:
Of course MJ has informers and since he has, why not TMZ and TS. In Dutch it's formulated quite the same way.
With all due respect for serenity and her posts, I think it's not good to put the stamp "Informer" on her for several reasons.
Serenity is doing what you all can do: search for information on the world wide web with the info provided to us. That doesn't mean she is an informer, it means she takes the effort to do a search, instead of just reading articles and discussing it here. Saying she is an informer means she needs to watch what she posts from now on, because if something she posts is off, or debunked by someone, it's easy to dismiss TS again as well, because people have decided they are linked. We all know by now how easy it is to forget the proof TS has provided...
Another danger is that people will be focussing only on serenity's posts and ignore other posts, taking serenity's for truth and look no further. That means people will miss interesting information and stop to think for themselves. I already see that happening in some threads. I am not saying serenity is posting BS, I am saying you shouldn't stop reading after serenity's post just because someone misread a sentence of TS. It would be better if you would instead do the same as her (and others on here as well) and start searching for information as well.
It also happens the other way around. A while back someone had a rant about Mo and I about the dog-theory, ridiculing it. Most people have heard of the dog-theory, but I think most of them NEVER read the info in it. Because if you would forget about the dog, there is a lot of information in those posts about the medicins that is interesting. Because some people ranted about the post that it was ridiculous, many didn't even read it and the posts after that, because most haven't read the Trial blog either, which has a lot of valuable info in it as well. All because someone said one of the posts was ridiculous, people stopped reading.
Most info is all to be found on the net, if you would only do a few searches. Yet I see people rather rely on "informers" then do a search for themselves. If we would all just dig a little deeper, we might find more information.
Are there people on here besides TS that give valuable information? Yes I think there are. They are not all MJ's informers, some are posters that, like I mentioned, took the effort to search for the info already available. Some might be MJ's informers (or maybe he himself), and I think they are the ones that give tiny bits of info to start a discussion, to make sure some stuff was 'found' on the internet, like videos that contain important info, but they will be the ones you least expect in my opinion.
It is important to keep thinking for yourself. All of us can be 'informers' if only we would stop following one certain person, or a few persons and search for ourselves. A few tips: http://www.google.nl; (http://www.google.nl;) http://www.wikipedia.nl; (http://www.wikipedia.nl;) http://www.thefreedictionary.com (http://www.thefreedictionary.com)
If we would all start using at least these 3 sites, maybe we would find some more info. A hundred will find more info than ten.
For the sentence to mean what you are saying it does, it would have to be written as a question and then an answer.
like this: "then who are the reliable MJ informers? Perhaps TMZ and/or TS."
TS uses a dash for a pause, a moment to think, but it is a complete sentence, a question and it asks for an alternative.
TS answers his own question with the link to Serenitys_Dream's post.
reliable
Capable of being relied on dependable
able to be trusted; predictable or dependable
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/reliable
informer
a person who provides/supplies information
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/informer
information
Knowledge derived from study, experience, or instruction.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/infromation
TMZ is not actually giving information but they are giving clues, hints, DOTS.
TS is giving clues by redirecting TIAI and then providing insight on what the redirects mean.
Linda searched for information and then wrote posts about what she discoverd on her website.
This is what makes Linda, Elvis' reliable informant.
In TS's post, Linda's website is linked as Elvis' reliable informant.
I believe that TS is saying that Serenitys_Dream is MJ's reliable informant because if he meant that it was TMZ or TS was the reliable informant he would have linked to TMZ's website or to himself and not to a post by Serenitys_Dream.
Plus in the last update he has links to 3 of her posts and a thread with the title "To Serenity and TS". It looks like he thinks she is pretty reliable.
I understand your concern, but maybe TS wants people to take notice of her posts cuase it seesm that a lot of people are ignoring them. TS tell us to read between the lines, I guess that goes for his posts too.
I think you are misinterpreting the post TS has linked to and what it represents.
SD's post points out the Time-Warner, AOL, Warner Bros. etc. connections with TMZ, and the connection between these companies and Kingdom Entertainment, the company owned by Mike and Prince Alwaleed bin Talal. SD wrote: "One of the major shareholders [Prince Alwaleed bin Talal] (owners?) in Time-Warner (AOL, Warner bros. etc) is a good friend and business associate of Michael Jackson.". That is the information TS linked to, but it does not mean that TS is saying that SD is Mike's informer.
If a link from TS to a certain post indicates that the poster is Mike's informer, then we have a hell of a lot of informers on our boards.
Linda searched for information and then wrote posts about what she discoverd on her website.
This is what makes Linda, Elvis' reliable informant.
In TS's post, Linda's website is linked as Elvis' reliable informant.
My advice to you is to go back to Linda's website and read her info again. Linda is not simply researching and posting her findings, but you will have to read again in order to realize what is really going on there.
-
Excellent job Souza and Mo, the page looks great. Much easier to read and understand what TS is telling us in this kind of format.
Just noticed something I thought was interesting in the section "Does MJ have any informers?"
It says that
"Elvis/Jesse had Dr. Hinton as an informer, and he helped to write the book"
and has this linked
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/DrHinton.jpg)
Then it says
"And Elvis/Jesse still has Linda as an informer"
and links to Linda Hoodsigmon's website
(http://i759.photobucket.com/albums/xx234/frootloop7/Linda.jpg)
Then it says:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS?"
and links to a post to Serenitys_Dreams
viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140 (http://michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=11198&start=25#p189140)
[attachment=0:21ljto2r]SD.jpg[/attachment:21ljto2r]
Is this suggesting that not only are TS and TMZ MJs reliable informers but that Serenitys_Dream is too???
The way it is written is weird and then it links to her post.
It really seems to me that it is pointing to Serenitys_Dream being MJ's "Linda"
Elvis/Linda = MJ/Serenity
If you click the link you will see serenity's post is about the TMZ connection. TMZ is Mike's informer.
Yes Souza, I see that, but the question asked by TS is:
So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if NOT TMZ and/or TS?
So he is asking if the informers aren't TMZ or TS, then who are they, then he shows a screen shot of Serenitys_Dream.
So to me this suggests, that if TMZ or TS aren't the only reliable informers, then Serenitys_Dream is also a reliable informer.
English might not be my first language, but I had in in school for about 9 years and to me this sentence:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if NOT TMZ and/or TS?"
Means:
Of course MJ has informers and since he has, why not TMZ and TS. In Dutch it's formulated quite the same way.
With all due respect for serenity and her posts, I think it's not good to put the stamp "Informer" on her for several reasons.
Serenity is doing what you all can do: search for information on the world wide web with the info provided to us. That doesn't mean she is an informer, it means she takes the effort to do a search, instead of just reading articles and discussing it here. Saying she is an informer means she needs to watch what she posts from now on, because if something she posts is off, or debunked by someone, it's easy to dismiss TS again as well, because people have decided they are linked. We all know by now how easy it is to forget the proof TS has provided...
Another danger is that people will be focussing only on serenity's posts and ignore other posts, taking serenity's for truth and look no further. That means people will miss interesting information and stop to think for themselves. I already see that happening in some threads. I am not saying serenity is posting BS, I am saying you shouldn't stop reading after serenity's post just because someone misread a sentence of TS. It would be better if you would instead do the same as her (and others on here as well) and start searching for information as well.
It also happens the other way around. A while back someone had a rant about Mo and I about the dog-theory, ridiculing it. Most people have heard of the dog-theory, but I think most of them NEVER read the info in it. Because if you would forget about the dog, there is a lot of information in those posts about the medicins that is interesting. Because some people ranted about the post that it was ridiculous, many didn't even read it and the posts after that, because most haven't read the Trial blog either, which has a lot of valuable info in it as well. All because someone said one of the posts was ridiculous, people stopped reading.
Most info is all to be found on the net, if you would only do a few searches. Yet I see people rather rely on "informers" then do a search for themselves. If we would all just dig a little deeper, we might find more information.
Are there people on here besides TS that give valuable information? Yes I think there are. They are not all MJ's informers, some are posters that, like I mentioned, took the effort to search for the info already available. Some might be MJ's informers (or maybe he himself), and I think they are the ones that give tiny bits of info to start a discussion, to make sure some stuff was 'found' on the internet, like videos that contain important info, but they will be the ones you least expect in my opinion.
It is important to keep thinking for yourself. All of us can be 'informers' if only we would stop following one certain person, or a few persons and search for ourselves. A few tips: http://www.google.nl; (http://www.google.nl;) http://www.wikipedia.nl; (http://www.wikipedia.nl;) http://www.thefreedictionary.com (http://www.thefreedictionary.com)
If we would all start using at least these 3 sites, maybe we would find some more info. A hundred will find more info than ten.
if not
perhaps; indicating possibility of being more remarkable (greater or better or sooner) than; "will yield 10% if not more"; "pretty if not actually beautiful"; "let's meet tonight if not sooner"
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/if+not
For the sentence to mean what you are saying it does, it would have to be written as a question and then an answer.
like this: "then who are the reliable MJ informers? Perhaps TMZ and/or TS."
TS uses a dash for a pause, a moment to think, but it is a complete sentence, a question and it asks for an alternative.
TS answers his own question with the link to Serenitys_Dream's post.
reliable
Capable of being relied on dependable
able to be trusted; predictable or dependable
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/reliable
informer
a person who provides/supplies information
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/informer
information
Knowledge derived from study, experience, or instruction.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/infromation
TMZ is not actually giving information but they are giving clues, hints, DOTS.
TS is giving clues by redirecting TIAI and then providing insight on what the redirects mean.
Linda searched for information and then wrote posts about what she discoverd on her website.
This is what makes Linda, Elvis' reliable informant.
In TS's post, Linda's website is linked as Elvis' reliable informant.
I believe that TS is saying that Serenitys_Dream is MJ's reliable informant because if he meant that it was TMZ or TS was the reliable informant he would have linked to TMZ's website or to himself and not to a post by Serenitys_Dream.
Plus in the last update he has links to 3 of her posts and a thread with the title "To Serenity and TS". It looks like he thinks she is pretty reliable.
I understand your concern, but maybe TS wants people to take notice of her posts cuase it seesm that a lot of people are ignoring them. TS tell us to read between the lines, I guess that goes for his posts too.
You are missing the meaning of TS' sentence and taking it to literaly. He means to say that if TMZ and TS aren't informers, then who the hell are? Meaning if you don't believe they are reliable informers, then who are because they are the only ones that provide info that is useful and proven to be legit (yes, even TMZ between the lines).
TMZ IS giving information, if only you would read between the lines, so I strongly disagree with you on that. If Serenity is an informer, dozens of others on this forum are too, because they too provide information, which can be found on the web by anyone, if only some people would actually help find that information instead of waiting for others to do the work. TS is providing us with inside information, something no one in hoax land would have figured out. That is something else.
And ignoring posts longer than 3 paragraphs or not containing 'hot pics' is not really uncommon.
If you want to think serenity is an informer, that is fine by me, reading her posts will definitely not harm you, but TS' point (TMZ and TS are reliable informers, because...) is missed yet again.
-
Sorry, lost again.... :oops:
What is the TIAI redirect for 09/27? what should we focused on?
-
Sorry, lost again.... :oops:
What is the TIAI redirect for 09/27? what should we focused on?
TS' post "Silencing the Critics, And $999 REwarD??? You bET" : http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/ ... ritics.php (http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/tiai_Silencing_the_Critics.php)
-
Thanks hun :*
-
@ Souza, you cannot argue with the dictionary nor the proper use of punctuation in a sentence.
I am sorry, but I feel it is you not I, who is missing the point of TS's post.
And you are only giving your opinion, doesn't mean it's correct, just as I am giving my opinion.
I have read all of Serenity's posts (which I might add, definitely didn't harm me!) which is the main reason I have conlcuded that TS is saying that she is a reliable informer. She researches and investigates things that most people would not even think of, and takes the time to post it here, even though her posts are ignored much of the time.
Michael himself could be giving Serenity inside information, how can you be so sure he isn't ?
-
@ Souza, you cannot argue with the dictionary nor the proper use of punctuation in a sentence.
I am sorry, but I feel it is you not I, who is missing the point of TS's post.
And you are only giving your opinion, doesn't mean it's correct, just as I am giving my opinion.
I have read all of Serenity's posts (which I might add, definitely didn't harm me!) which is the main reason I have conlcuded that TS is saying that she is a reliable informer. She researches and investigates things that most people would not even think of, and takes the time to post it here, even though her posts are ignored much of the time.
Michael himself could be giving Serenity inside information, how can you be so sure he isn't ?
Kylie, as you completely ignored my reply to you, here it is again:
I think you are misinterpreting the post TS has linked to and what it represents.
SD's post points out the Time-Warner, AOL, Warner Bros. etc. connections with TMZ, and the connection between these companies and Kingdom Entertainment, the company owned by Mike and Prince Alwaleed bin Talal. SD wrote: "One of the major shareholders [Prince Alwaleed bin Talal] (owners?) in Time-Warner (AOL, Warner bros. etc) is a good friend and business associate of Michael Jackson.". That is the information TS linked to, but it does not mean that TS is saying that SD is Mike's informer.
If a link from TS to a certain post indicates that the poster is Mike's informer, then we have a hell of a lot of informers on our boards.
Linda searched for information and then wrote posts about what she discoverd on her website.
This is what makes Linda, Elvis' reliable informant.
In TS's post, Linda's website is linked as Elvis' reliable informant.
My advice to you is to go back to Linda's website and read her info again. Linda is not simply researching and posting her findings, but you will have to read again in order to realize what is really going on there.
-
@ Souza, you cannot argue with the dictionary nor the proper use of punctuation in a sentence.
I am sorry, but I feel it is you not I, who is missing the point of TS's post.
And you are only giving your opinion, doesn't mean it's correct, just as I am giving my opinion.
I have read all of Serenity's posts (which I might add, definitely didn't harm me!) which is the main reason I have conlcuded that TS is saying that she is a reliable informer. She researches and investigates things that most people would not even think of, and takes the time to post it here, even though her posts are ignored much of the time.
Michael himself could be giving Serenity inside information, how can you be so sure he isn't ?
I will not argue you anymore, I have made my point about the meaning of the sentence and I don't see TS meaning anything else with it. And like I said before, people should focus on more posts that are thoroughly investigated, not just Serenity's posts because there are many on this board who are widely ignored WAY MORE than SD, who also come up with good info, I don't think SD is that ignored. And I said serenity's posts wouldn't harm you, but that doesn't mean her posts are informer's posts.
How I am so sure she is not getting her info from Mike himself? Besides a gut feeling... it is clear she is searching for info the same way as we all do, by thinking, taking the info provided and search the net. If serenity is an informer, many on here are. But hey, you are free to believe whatever you want, I just give you my opinion with arguments.
-
@ Mo
Sorry, I didn't ignore your post, I replied to Souza and then put my children to bed. I didn't even reealise you had posted.
I understand what you are saying, but what TS asked is:
Who are Michael's reliable informers IF NOT TMZ and/or TS ?
So the fact that Serenity's post is about TMZ does not answer TS's question. He is asking who else it could be other than TMZ or TS.
Perhaps it could be Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, as he is also linked in that post, but I somehow doubt it.
I find it highly coincidental that TS's link after he asked that question shows a thread entitled "To Serenity and TS"
Why would he not just link directly to TMZ's website, or to his own profile here on this forum if he wanted to show TMZ and TS are the only reliable informers.
And I also disagree with your statement that if Serenity is an informer then there are a hell of a lot of informers on here.
Personally I do not believe that anyone on this forum researches so many diverse topics as Serenity, nor do they present their information and back it up like Serenity does.
This is why I believe that TS is saying that Serenity is an informer because she researches things that nobody else has even thought about, and perhaps TS is saying that we should heed the information in her posts, rather than ignore it.
-
So the fact that Serenity's post is about TMZ does not answer TS's question. He is asking who else it could be other than TMZ or TS.
Perhaps it could be Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, as he is also linked in that post, but I somehow doubt it.
You doubt that a connection between TMZ and Kingdom Entertainment is what TS' purpose of linking to SD's post is..? I'm sorry, but that is one of THE connections that proves that TMZ is a reliable informer. TS already has proven himself to be a reliable informer by all the evidence he has posted so far.
TS' question was:
"So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS? ".
After linking to the post from SD, TS continues:
Is the Jackson family the only informers? And if so, why have they given almost no clues for quite a while? And if the family is against TMZ, then why have they done interviews with TMZ?
Here again TS is pointing out to TMZ, pointing out to the Jacksons cooperating with TMZ.
TMZ and TS have proven to be a reliable informers, SD has not. In fact, SD has replied many times that she has nothing to do with MJ/TS, nor that she has inside information. The fact that SD is researching and posting findings like many do here doesn't make SD an informer, leave alone a reliable informer.
I rest my case.
-
@ Mo
Sorry, I didn't ignore your post, I replied to Souza and then put my children to bed. I didn't even reealise you had posted.
I understand what you are saying, but what TS asked is:
Who are Michael's reliable informers IF NOT TMZ and/or TS ?
So the fact that Serenity's post is about TMZ does not answer TS's question. He is asking who else it could be other than TMZ or TS.
Perhaps it could be Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, as he is also linked in that post, but I somehow doubt it.
Sorry, but I really still think you are not understanding the sentence... But nevermind, you see it that way.
I find it highly coincidental that TS's link after he asked that question shows a thread entitled "To Serenity and TS"
Why would he not just link directly to TMZ's website, or to his own profile here on this forum if he wanted to show TMZ and TS are the only reliable informers.
I don't find that highly coincidental, since that is the thread where that info was posted. It's the info about TMZ TS is pointing at. The link TMZ-Mike
And I also disagree with your statement that if Serenity is an informer then there are a hell of a lot of informers on here.
Personally I do not believe that anyone on this forum researches so many diverse topics as Serenity, nor do they present their information and back it up like Serenity does.
This is why I believe that TS is saying that Serenity is an informer because she researches things that nobody else has even thought about, and perhaps TS is saying that we should heed the information in her posts, rather than ignore it.
Wow, do you only read SD's posts? That's not very nice to your fellow board members and also not true, some on here have done research for over a year and provided lots of important information. I myself feel pretty slapped in the face as well, since Mo and I have done weeks of research for each blog we posted. The Trial blog alone took us 2 months of research and the other ones around 3 to for weeks, at least 16 hours a day. And although serenity's posts are informative, most are not the result of weeks of research. Sorry, but I think that post is a little insulting to us and all others on here who researched this for over a year and posted very valuable information. I think you should read this forum more often and like I said earlier, not stop after SD's posts, because clearly you did and never saw all the other information provided here.
-
Another reason to believe in TMZ is the fact that they are still reporting on events connected to Michael on an almost daily basis. What other news blog is doing that?
-
@ Mo
Sorry, I didn't ignore your post, I replied to Souza and then put my children to bed. I didn't even reealise you had posted.
I understand what you are saying, but what TS asked is:
Who are Michael's reliable informers IF NOT TMZ and/or TS ?
So the fact that Serenity's post is about TMZ does not answer TS's question. He is asking who else it could be other than TMZ or TS.
Perhaps it could be Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, as he is also linked in that post, but I somehow doubt it.
Sorry, but I really still think you are not understanding the sentence... But nevermind, you see it that way.
I find it highly coincidental that TS's link after he asked that question shows a thread entitled "To Serenity and TS"
Why would he not just link directly to TMZ's website, or to his own profile here on this forum if he wanted to show TMZ and TS are the only reliable informers.
I don't find that highly coincidental, since that is the thread where that info was posted. It's the info about TMZ TS is pointing at. The link TMZ-Mike
And I also disagree with your statement that if Serenity is an informer then there are a hell of a lot of informers on here.
Personally I do not believe that anyone on this forum researches so many diverse topics as Serenity, nor do they present their information and back it up like Serenity does.
This is why I believe that TS is saying that Serenity is an informer because she researches things that nobody else has even thought about, and perhaps TS is saying that we should heed the information in her posts, rather than ignore it.
Wow, do you only read SD's posts? That's not very nice to your fellow board members and also not true, some on here have done research for over a year and provided lots of important information. I myself feel pretty slapped in the face as well, since Mo and I have done weeks of research for each blog we posted. The Trial blog alone took us 2 months of research and the other ones around 3 to for weeks, at least 16 hours a day. And although serenity's posts are informative, most are not the result of weeks of research. Sorry, but I think that post is a little insulting to us and all others on here who researched this for over a year and posted very valuable information. I think you should read this forum more often and like I said earlier, not stop after SD's posts, because clearly you did and never saw all the other information provided here.
Very insulting indeed. I can agree that Serenity does a great job and has a unique style. But I can also say that in my humble opinion, I've had some good posts as well. :lol: Everyone is different and we cannot choose to only heed the words of certain people because of how professional it looks or how much wikipedia is used, etc. Sometimes the information found online is simply wrong, and we must utilize other resources as well as opinions that differ from our own, and then proceed to draw our own conclusions - or, better yet, to keep an open mind to whatever the truth ends up being when it decides to reveal itself.
No offense to you, Serenity, I do value your posts very much. I just value my own opinion and research as well as other's opinions and research with equal regard.
-
Maybe that TS will "answer" this to seal the deal?
A lot of talk about you Serenity, where are you? :lol:
-
Sorry but I've read enough..
I have nothing against Serenitys_Dreams and her posts but this situation is ridiculous..
Kylie, you are registered on this board since December 14, 2009 and you posted only 8 comments, 6 in this thread, nothing against you as well but since I'm the most suspicious person in the world I find it very strange... Why do you want so bad to give to Serenity_Dreams the role of Hoax informer..? You wrote that you believe in TS 100%, but are you sure about that..?
And @Serenitys_Dreams I'd really appreciate if you will clarify it, because I saw that you read here this morning but you didn't bother to post anything...Thanks..
-
Serenity has said that she was not TS nor an informer, is it her fault if one person still think she is? Kylie has obviously misunderstood TS' sentence and link...I think this is TS who can clear this up better if he believes it is necessary. Will Kylie believe Serenity? OMG I feel like I'm writing a soap opera scenario... :?
Well, I just wanted to add that I am really appreciative of the hard work that Mo and Souza have done here and also to all the clue finders and every single poster in here because I feel like I'm more a "thought sharer" so I really appreciate when people come up with good stuff. We are all important here. God bless you all.
-
Serenity has said that she was not TS nor an informer, is it her fault if one person still think she is? Kylie has obviously misunderstood TS' sentence and link...I think this is TS who can clear this up better if he believes it is necessary. Will Kylie believe Serenity? OMG I feel like I'm writing a soap opera scenario... :?
It's not SD's fault that Kylie is convinced that SD is Mike's informer, but it would have helped had SD posted a reply in this thread. Kylie started her posts about this yesterday, so the matter could have been cleared 24 hours ago already.
There is no need for TS to clear this up because, like some including you already wrote, Kylie has obviously misunderstood TS' sentence and link.
-
Serenity has repeatedly said it has nothing to do with Michael, both from her post as blogs de Souza and Mo are very valuable.
I think the difference is that blogs are more elaborate and very detailed research, I acknowledge that I have not read all, for me the best way is to print all like the TS post, well I could do other people do not may do so, but it is much more comfortable and causes less fatigue and irritation in the eyes, (that's me). All the information I've read on blogs is very valuable as far as I read, I recommend that people have read, and keep an open mind, the mind is like a parachute, it works great when it opens. The listening provides many benefits, new ideas, different approaches
-
Serenity has repeatedly said it has nothing to do with Michael, both from her post as blogs de Souza and Mo are very valuable.
I think the difference is that blogs are more elaborate and very detailed research, I acknowledge that I have not read all, for me the best way is to print all like the TS post, well I could do other people do not may do so, but it is much more comfortable and causes less fatigue and irritation in the eyes, (that's me). All the information I've read on blogs is very valuable as far as I read, I recommend that people have read, and keep an open mind, the mind is like a parachute, it works great when it opens. The listening provides many benefits, new ideas, different approaches
Not only SD's posts and our blogs, but there is so much valuable info on this board that is ignored.
-
Souza,
You say much valuable information is being ignored. If you have the time, could you point to a couple of things that we should be paying more attention to? There's so much here that I often get overwhelmed and don't know which threads to follow and which I should ignore. Thanks so much!
-
Souza,
You say much valuable information is being ignored. If you have the time, could you point to a couple of things that we should be paying more attention to? There's so much here that I often get overwhelmed and don't know which threads to follow and which I should ignore. Thanks so much!
Oh my, there are over 13,000 topics on here... I will see if I can find some stuff tonight if I have the time, but I can't promise you anything.
-
I scanned through the job Mo@So have done. I am impressed! Congratulations! so much work to make us understand.
I will need to re-read it all to make a conclusion.
Thanks!
About Serenity, I understand what Kylie means and I do also think that she gets "info" but in a different way.
I can also add, that many of Serenity´s researches don´t come out from the blue and I am a "witness" of it, in the way that some of the subjects of her researchs has been already pointed to other people as well but she had the guts, brain, time and capacity to put it all together and give it shape and after that, presenting it to us....solving the "hints" understanding some of the "messages" presented to her.
So, after comparing some of her researches to some of the researches of other people who are not posting them publically because they don´t feel like it...or don´t trust or understand the "messages"...., in some way, we can say that Serenity "got info" from the source...or at least, that is how I understand it.
This "speech" of mine does not mean that I agree 100% with some of the researches and interpretations Serenity has done but i give her credit for it.
I always appreciate every ones input in and for the hoax, even the most silly detail can develop in a full investigation.
Everybody is important in this forum, the most active posters and the less, the lurkers, the jokers, the faithful, the angry......every single one, because we all are searching for one common goal, the truth about the death of our beloved Michael Jackson.
Thanks to every one of you who make possible to learn more about MJ and thanks MJ for uniting us.
Hugs to all of you.
-
@ Puff,
Not that I need to justify myself to you but, I have mostly posted in this thread because I feel very strongly that TS is pointing at Serenity being an informer, and none of you are able to see it, that is why I have to keep posting here.
Yes, I wrote that I believe TS 100%, why do you doubt that ?
Is it because I am reading the sentence in the correct way, as it is written, and you are reading it in the way that you want ?
I really do not know how else I can say it, but I will say it again....
The actual question TS asks is:
So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS?
IF NOT TMZ AND/OR TS ....MEANS INFORMERS OTHER THAN TMZ OR TS, SO THE FACT THAT SERENITY'S POST IS ABOUT TMZ HAS NO RELEVANCE BECAUSE TS IS SAYING OTHER THAN TMZ......
Just because I only have a few posts and you have hundreds, does not mean that you know more than me, or that I do not do my own research. In fact, I have also done much research, I just choose to keep it to myself. Forums aren't really my thing, due to the bitching and politics that is rife among them.
And I did not mean to offend anyone, I do read other posts, all I am saying is that in my belief, Serenity researches such a wide range of topics, many of which go ignored because the posts are too long, or that others feel that her information cannot be relevant to the hoax.
Whatvever, anyway...I am not going to waste any more of my time here.
We must all have differences of opnions, that what makes the world go around, and I can see that as much as many here claim to have open minds and can accept anything, this may not actually be the truth.
-
Okay I see the confusion, and this is how I see it. "Who are Mike's informers if not TS/TMZ"... is like saying, "Who can you trust if not your mother", meaning...you can't trust anybody if you can't trust your mother. So...if TMZ and TS are not Mike's informers, then there are no informers. Meaning...they are most likely his informers. So if we believe in TS, then we should believe in TMZ.
I don't see how an english speaking person wouldn't understand this way of speaking. And I don't think TS would try to confuse us like that. I really don't think this is worth further debate because it's just a matter of a mishap in communication, not really backed up with anything else...
-
Okay I see the confusion, and this is how I see it. "Who are Mike's informers if not TS/TMZ"... is like saying, "Who can you trust if not your mother", meaning...you can't trust anybody if you can't trust your mother. So...if TMZ and TS are not Mike's informers, then there are no informers. Meaning...they are most likely his informers. So if we believe in TS, then we should believe in TMZ.
I don't see how an english speaking person wouldn't understand this way of speaking. And I don't think TS would try to confuse us like that. I really don't think this is worth further debate because it's just a matter of a mishap in communication, not really backed up with anything else...
Amen to that Jaci. The boards are loaded with people who's native language is English, so in case the meaning of TS' words was indeed pointing out to SD being an informer, it would have been picked up on shortly after TS posted his post. It's crystal clear what that sentence means, especially when you take notice of the rest of the "Does MJ Have Any Informers?" part TS posted which is all strong evidence of TMZ being a reliable informer, so I'm not going to waste any more time on it.
-
@ Puff,
Not that I need to justify myself to you but, I have mostly posted in this thread because I feel very strongly that TS is pointing at Serenity being an informer, and none of you are able to see it, that is why I have to keep posting here.
Yes, I wrote that I believe TS 100%, why do you doubt that ?
Is it because I am reading the sentence in the correct way, as it is written, and you are reading it in the way that you want ?
I really do not know how else I can say it, but I will say it again....
The actual question TS asks is:
So would MJ have no informers? And if that doesn’t make sense, then who are the reliable MJ informers—if not TMZ and/or TS?
IF NOT TMZ AND/OR TS ....MEANS INFORMERS OTHER THAN TMZ OR TS, SO THE FACT THAT SERENITY'S POST IS ABOUT TMZ HAS NO RELEVANCE BECAUSE TS IS SAYING OTHER THAN TMZ......
Just because I only have a few posts and you have hundreds, does not mean that you know more than me, or that I do not do my own research. In fact, I have also done much research, I just choose to keep it to myself. Forums aren't really my thing, due to the bitching and politics that is rife among them.
And I did not mean to offend anyone, I do read other posts, all I am saying is that in my belief, Serenity researches such a wide range of topics, many of which go ignored because the posts are too long, or that others feel that her information cannot be relevant to the hoax.
Whatvever, anyway...I am not going to waste any more of my time here.
We must all have differences of opnions, that what makes the world go around, and I can see that as much as many here claim to have open minds and can accept anything, this may not actually be the truth.
Twisting TS' words doesn't mean reading the sentence in the correct way... but I see you didn't get the point...
Please, read what Jaci wrote!
Okay I see the confusion, and this is how I see it. "Who are Mike's informers if not TS/TMZ"... is like saying, "Who can you trust if not your mother", meaning...you can't trust anybody if you can't trust your mother. So...if TMZ and TS are not Mike's informers, then there are no informers. Meaning...they are most likely his informers. So if we believe in TS, then we should believe in TMZ.
I don't see how an english speaking person wouldn't understand this way of speaking. And I don't think TS would try to confuse us like that. I really don't think this is worth further debate because it's just a matter of a mishap in communication, not really backed up with anything else...
is it clear now...? :ugeek:
-
You know, Souza, you really have some points about the valuable info here. I've been here nearly a year, and I've read just about every interesting theory, clue thread and TS post. The problem is, I don't know what I'm supposed to look for. Like I see the new section for coherent theories, and realize that most of the posts there, like Bec's and yours, are also mine! So posting there seems unnecessary for me, I wouldn't be saying anything new. And when you say:
TMZ IS giving information, if only you would read between the lines, so I strongly disagree with you on that. If Serenity is an informer, dozens of others on this forum are too, because they too provide information, which can be found on the web by anyone, if only some people would actually help find that information instead of waiting for others to do the work. TS is providing us with inside information, something no one in hoax land would have figured out.
Well, that's something I often think about. But again, I just don't know what to look for, it's hard to know when there's so many interpretations, whether or not people who speak out are is truly "in on it", the threads about MJ being Jesus or all of that hyper-spiritual-philosophical stuff- I'm a pretty simple lady, I know I'm not as intelligent as most people here because of my education and I'm tired of feeling overwhelmed, and very tired of being referred to as a "lab rat" trapped in some "ARG" lab experiment/maze while someone watches- that's not the way I think of the hoax; I'm usually short, sweet and to the point, I just want to find something useful so that we can move along and finally hear the complete story for once and for all from the source of all of this..
-
You know, Souza, you really have some points about the valuable info here. I've been here nearly a year, and I've read just about every interesting theory, clue thread and TS post. The problem is, I don't know what I'm supposed to look for. Like I see the new section for coherent theories, and realize that most of the posts there, like Bec's and yours, are also mine! So posting there seems unnecessary for me, I wouldn't be saying anything new. And when you say: TMZ IS giving information, if only you would read between the lines, so I strongly disagree with you on that. If Serenity is an informer, dozens of others on this forum are too, because they too provide information, which can be found on the web by anyone, if only some people would actually help find that information instead of waiting for others to do the work. TS is providing us with inside information, something no one in hoax land would have figured out.
Well, that's something I often think about. But again, I just don't know what to look for, it's hard to know when there's so many interpretations, whether or not people who speak out are is truly "in on it", the threads about MJ being Jesus or all of that hyper-spiritual-philosophical stuff- I'm a pretty simple lady, I know I'm not as intelligent as most people here because of my education and I'm tired of feeling overwhelmed, and very tired of being referred to as a "lab rat" trapped in some "ARG" lab experiment/maze while someone watches- that's not the way I think of the hoax; I'm usually short, sweet and to the point, I just want to find something useful so that we can move along and finally hear the complete story for once and for all from the source of all of this..
I totally understand and appreciate your point of view. I do think it's important though to realize that this whole thing is affecting everyone in different ways. They hyper-spiritual-philosohical stuff is the stuff that I can relate to most. I get frustrated in the threads about the legal side of things and all the technicalities, so I can relate to your frustration even though it's regarding something different. I think that's what's so cool about it all though is that it is reaching many different kinds of people, bringing us all together so that what each of us lack individually can be made up by the strengths of someone else. If we were all the same and like-minded, we may never find the truth...
-
I can relate to everyone's frustration. I too want it all written out for me in an A-Z fashion at one all inclusive source where everything is properly catalogued, no cross postings, no drama, etc. It's somewhat like reading a great mystery novel. The temptation is to read the last few pages to see who done it cuz the suspense is killing you. This is, of course, much more than that. Many of us have had profound life changing experiences. We've made friends, stretched our minds to encompass new possibilities about our history and our future, and spent some time looking at that (wo)man in the mirror. I guess what I'm saying is that this really is a great adventure and we may as well enjoy the ride as long as it lasts, without too much concern as to where it is leading.
-
Another reason to believe in TMZ is the fact that they are still reporting on events connected to Michael on an almost daily basis. What other news blog is doing that?
I've definitely been asking myself that same question for awhile now. ;)
-
Okay I see the confusion, and this is how I see it. "Who are Mike's informers if not TS/TMZ"... is like saying, "Who can you trust if not your mother", meaning...you can't trust anybody if you can't trust your mother. So...if TMZ and TS are not Mike's informers, then there are no informers. Meaning...they are most likely his informers. So if we believe in TS, then we should believe in TMZ.
I don't see how an english speaking person wouldn't understand this way of speaking. And I don't think TS would try to confuse us like that. I really don't think this is worth further debate because it's just a matter of a mishap in communication, not really backed up with anything else...
I only know English (albeit lousy at writing, and know a tiny bit of French and Low German), and I also read this as the first part being the question, answered completely ("if" is not hypothetical here) by the second part. "Who are Mike's informers?" and "if not TS/TMZ". Kylie, you are continuing the statement when it doesn't suggest that. In a way it is similar to a rhetorical question, in that the whole sentence could also be a question, that needs no answer but is for dramatic effect. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ ... l+question (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rhetorical+question)
rhetorical question –noun
a question asked solely to produce an effect or to make an assertion and not to elicit a reply, as “What is so rare as a day in June?”
a question to which no answer is required: used esp for dramatic effect. An example is Who knows? (with the implication Nobody knows )
A question posed without expectation of an answer but merely as a way of making a point: “You don't expect me to go along with that crazy scheme, do you?”
Idioms & Phrases
A question asked without expecting an answer but for the sake of emphasis or effect. The expected answer is usually "yes" or "no." For example, Can we improve the quality of our work? That's a rhetorical question . [Late 1800s]
Famous Quotations
rhetorical question
"Whoever inquires about our childhood wants to know some..."
"Art has always been this—pure interrogation, rhetorical..."
The only ones I've ever remotely suspected, are Mo and Souza, because they/you have been here since the beginning, and have done an incredible amount of work and know so much! Sorry Mo and Souza! :lol: But this whole scenario is so surreal, in that we don't know what each other look like or a whole lot about each others' backgrounds. And for a year we've been inundated by people posing as other people with good or bad intentions, so who can blame us for being suspicious by nature? :? :lol:
I know this sounds goofy but it reminds me of an ice-breaker game of "Murder" I've played where a group of 10 or so sit in a circle, each is given a playing card, with one person randomly given a predesignated "murder" card. That person must try to kill each of the others by winking at them secretly, but not be noticed by the others. If she catches you in the eyes, you must place your card face-up in the middle so all know you are dead. Everyone is looking around for the winker but hoping not to catch her in the eyes, and anyone can try to guess who she is to stop her, but if they are wrong they have to put in their card, too. Sometimes someone is wrongly accused because they accidently blink or twitch their eye. The winner of a set of games is who can kill the most before being caught. It's fun! So what I am saying is that maybe there IS an informer amongst us, but he/she has to be very careful not to be detected.
:mrgreen: Kinda suits the craziness of this MJ-ARG!
-
MJonmind, I can assure you I have not the education nor the intelligence to write posts like TS'. I have also never met Mr. Jackson and I am not following his 'orders', so I am not an informer either. The fact that I am still here is because I found out about a year ago that this whole project is bigger than life and so very important for all of us and needs support in any way possible. I am also someone who can't let go. When I start something that triggers my interest that much, I want to 'keep watchin'. I realize many are having the most outlandish theories about why we are still putting so much energy into this, but I guess they have never been hit that hard by something that turned out that important to them. In the past year 'hoaxing' I have learned 1,000 times more than in the 12 years I went to school and for that alone I will be always grateful.
-
MJonmind, I can assure you I have not the education nor the intelligence to write posts like TS'. I have also never met Mr. Jackson and I am not following his 'orders', so I am not an informer either. The fact that I am still here is because I found out about a year ago that this whole project is bigger than life and so very important for all of us and needs support in any way possible. I am also someone who can't let go. When I start something that triggers my interest that much, I want to 'keep watchin'. I realize many are having the most outlandish theories about why we are still putting so much energy into this, but I guess they have never been hit that hard by something that turned out that important to them. In the past year 'hoaxing' I have learned 1,000 times more than in the 12 years I went to school and for that alone I will be always grateful.
Souza, I am so thankful to you and Mo for keeping this site up and running. I too have learned so much valuable information - a lot of it I was aware of before, as I've always been a "conspiracy sister", but this site has provided so much more for me. I believe in what Michael is doing and I'd like to think I'm doing my part by making others aware of what's really going on in the world (even when I'm often met with eye-rolling) and by just being a good person and helping people in any way I can. So Souza, I am grateful that you put so much energy into our site - I don't know what I'd do without it! :)