Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - son

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1]
Meaning, what if no one (not even his family) is really aware of Michael Jackson's fate? I would say it would explain the ambiguity behind the Jacksons behavior (perhaps better than MJ directly orquestrating everything). Why the family is fairly lenient with us hoaxers, why Paris can apparently make light of her father's "death". Why so many people say they've never seen the body, and why the family seems to be going in different directions. Maybe they've received instructions on what to do in case Michael "disappeared" (as far as you or anyone else is concerned I'm dead). I still believe there was a "body" but they were instructed not to look at it. Though some of those close to him broke that rule, yet they just went with the flow. Many of MJ's associates might just assume that he had a "few more surgeries" prior to his projected concerts, but those closest to him knew the body wasn't real. Some members are holding out hope that he's alive while others have "accepted the reality" that he's gone. Regardless the family seems to agree with the public image of a "dead MJ". With the mysterious body and the conrad murray case too out of control to say otherwise. Though behind closed doors the matter may be different entirely.

Or is this too convoluted?

General Hoax Talk / Everybody give me a present....
« on: January 31, 2012, 04:19:25 PM »
Ignore, this post....

References & Similarities / Challenging the Religious theory
« on: October 15, 2011, 01:12:13 PM »
On Michael:

We need to focus on MJ's human side, what evidence can we say alludes to the faked death actually happening and then try to peace together a purpose. A problem with many hoax believers is they make theories without gathering direct evidence first. I would argue that's why we lost people like JonellStar (one of her theories being MJ is with his real Children, since black people can't have white kids), or HelenaB who said MJ faked his death so he could live his life as Janet after finishing his sex change (not exaggerating her theory). The worse thing about these theories is not only are they flimsy at best, but they contradict MJ's own words. MJ's testimony over the testimony of others is what really powers the hoax death. We undermine it by developing these ideas, which includes the religious theory.
Michael is/was a Jehovah's witness. There were rumors that he separated from them after thriller but they were debunked sometime in an interview in the 2000s

TV Guide in 2001 Michael was asked: "Are you still a Jehovah's Witness?" The King of Pop unhesitatingly answered: "Yeah." He further added: "I've done, you know, we call it pioneering [full-time preaching]. We do 90 hours a month. [This quota has been reduced since.] I don't do as much now because I'm busy. You go door to door. I wear a fat suit, pop-bottle glasses, mustache, buck teeth, and, like, an Afro wig. And I knock on the door and say we're Jehovah's Witnesses."   

Michael Still claimed to be one in 2001 and had his "funeral" in a Jehovah's witness church, with a Jehovah's witness minister giving the final prayer at the memorial. By all intents and purposes MJ still wants people to think of him as one and there has yet to be a rebuttal found from him.

What do Jehovah's witnesses believe about Jesus? In general they share the same belief that Jesus is the son of God, the distinction lies from the trinitarian Majority in their belief that Jesus was the Archangel Michael (as opposed to being a part of a Godhead). Michael understands that the Archangel Michael is distinct from the Michael/Jesus he worships, which is why he clearly stated that he was trying to be Christ-like, as opposed to the next Christ.

JSYK, I'm a trinitarian Christian personally.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login 

On Jesus:

I'll respond to Blue Fox of Love first to get things started here.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Ok, first. There is nothing wrong with comparing Mike with Jesus.
The reason why some people think it's a shame to do it, is because they have a "divine" perception of Jesus.
Whatever our beliefs are, we have to really stay down to earth. My understanding of the first post is in no way saying that Michael would "replace" Jesus. The 2 men are from different times, so how could that be possible anyway? Jesus did what he had to do at its own era, and so did Michael. So nobody should feel offense about the comparison: they are 2 great guys that did great things to spread their message of love and respect.

I agree here more of less but it seems kind of disingenuous to your next few words.
Historical proofs and historical writings showed the historical existence of Jesus. Not it's "divine" existence. The "divine" reputation of Jesus was spread by the unoriginal gospel (the only gospel founded are translations). So right from there, that belief is not based on proofs but on the interpretations that some religious dudes had at the time... and those translaters rewrote the story about 100 years after the crucifixion, and they filled the missing parts on people sayings. Not what we can call a reliable source. Thinking that Jesus was not a human is your belief, it is your right and your choice, but that doesn't mean it is the only way to see it. I personnaly see Jesus as an amazing revolutionary man, and I would have been one of his followers for sure, but to me he's in no way a God or God himself.

Instead of quoting scholars that confirm your biases, do some research for yourself. For example, most scholars agree that Paul's epistles are the earliest of the Christian writings. Paul's writings state in multiple places that salvation is attained through Jesus Christ. This does not overtly appear in  any of the synoptic gospels, but it does appear in John. John's gospel qualifies this "salvation through Jesus" rhetoric by also saying Jesus is "one with the father" he is God. We can extrapolate from there the the divine Jesus was the intended interpretation by his immediate followers. You can argue whether or not THEY were wrong, but that was the early intention.

And if he was fulfilled with a light, it is the exact same light we are ALL fulfilled with.

The reason why I'm saying all this is to make you see that in that perspective, yes, Mike can easily be compared to Jesus.
1) They are both very popular and influent;
2) They both spread a message of tolerance, love and respect;
3) They are both healers;
4) They both have been incredibly harrassed and teased;
5) They both faked their death.*
...And 6) I wish to say one day that they have both "resurrected".
* Those are old discoveries that seem to show that Jesus has been rescued not long after his crucifixion. He has been take care of and when he went back to see his friends, as we can read in the bible, they didn't recognise him at first. Further, the story says that he was often "appearing" in a garden... and at the time, only butchers and garden keepers had the right to... shave! 

I know the legend you are referring to. Jesus survived the crucifixion went to another town where he was nursed to health and where he remained for the rest of his life. The town still has a place where they think his tomb is. The problem is that legend isn't all that old compared to the gospel accounts, it attempts to be more "realistic" but the chances of surviving a crucifixion are pretty slim. Not to mention it bears similarities to gnostic origins (much later than the chosen canon) which stated Jesus wasn't crucified in the first place. Also tolerance wasn't a part of Jesus' message (Love, Respect, and Humility yes, tolerance no). Michael was a healer?

Conspiracy Theories / Illuminati: Ill defined evil
« on: August 15, 2011, 07:43:04 PM »
What does the Illuminati stand for, what is their ultimate goal? I mean we can imply they're pushing for mind control of the masses but how do we know we don't already "agree" with their ends despite the fact that we disagree with their means? we presume the Illuminati is against what "we" believe but we all disagree on everything. Lady Gaga's "role" is perhaps the most interesting, is she pioneering for the Illuminati or creating awareness to be against it? Does her pro-LGBT message dictate her anti-Illuminati affiliation or pro? Is the Illuminati working with any religion (Christianity in particular) or against all of them? Why are "they" after Michael? Is the goal going to be something along the lines of brave new world (Conservative fear) or some sort of Utilitarian Fascist Dystopia (Liberal fear)? Is the atheistic perspective correct and that Religion will be the force to control people? Is Obama (and the previous presidents for that matter) working with them?

Something to think about

Other Odd Things / Whatever happened to "fated"?
« on: June 07, 2011, 12:27:45 PM »
Remember the graphic novel MJ was supposed to have worked on which was supposed to be released last year?

Has it already come out? Have we disregarded it as evidence or is it still being withheld by the publishing company/the estate?

Exactly what it says on the tin

Is it possible that Jermaine's statement is related to the controversy with Bin Laden's death? A lot of people (including the Taliban) don't believe he died and a lot of people are demanding pictures. Maybe Bin Laden's assassination messed up MJ's plans.

What do you all think?

The Double Theory / Tangled Web: Enemy doubles?
« on: April 26, 2011, 10:28:34 PM »
Yeah, I read too much sci-fi

 :geek:  :geek:  :geek:  :geek:  :geek:  :ugeek:  :ugeek:  :ugeek:  :ugeek:

I might be overthinking this but if we attempt to combine the hoax death theory and the murder conspiracy theory (TINI) thought about an interesting possibility:

What if both "sides" (MJ himself and his enemies) had their own collection of MJ doubles?  :?

Like the fake Lindsay Lohan TMZ said was used to get her in trouble, etc.

Now I believe that a double died in MJ's stead, but maybe some of the MJs online are doubles used to help us out (work for MJ) or throw us off (Enemy doubles). Maybe a double was dating that Jason guy? The possibilities are almost endless.  :?

References & Similarities / Debunked Clues
« on: April 17, 2011, 10:32:09 PM »
I'm not sure if this has been done already but it might be a good idea to post a list of the clues that have been  
(unanimously) debunked. I don't have much to contribute here but just an idea.

References & Similarities / Importance
« on: April 02, 2011, 02:58:10 PM »
Within the hoax death theory what clues would you say are the most foundational? Of course there isn't one single piece of evidence that that supports the hoax death theory but rather they all work together like a network. But do you think there are certain clues that would cause the hoax theory to fall (or at least become more flimsy) apart if it was debunked?

I would rank the clues like this (in my opinion):
This is it, MJ's own statments, Joe vs Jospeh, Fated

Slip ups, inconsistent stories, Themes: Liberian girl, etc.

Hoax references in other media, Elvis/Tupac/Paul McCartney comparisons

Coherent Theories ~ Connect the dots / Theory vs. Theory
« on: February 16, 2011, 04:20:50 PM »
I haven't posted in some time. Taking an idea from my religious studies class, we could attempt to compare an contrast certain inconsistencies within the hoax death theory. After which we possibly can come up with a single strong plausible theory. For example comparing the active chessmaster (director) theory with the vacation (recovery) theory. Or the short notice hoax theory, vs. the long-time plan theory. And of course the comback theory vs. the not coming back theory. I'll try to provide more later on...

General Hoax Talk / Who is involved?
« on: November 09, 2010, 01:39:15 PM »
After watching the interview with Oprah I'm starting to believe that she wasn't involved in the hoax. I believe she and Michael loved each other deeply but Michael couldn't involve her in the hoax because she didn't (or he felt she didn't) trust him. She said "Michael's nose looked like a tooth pick", and he had more than two (cosmetic) surgeries and "he was embarrassed" so he didn't tell the truth. She also didn't believe him about the drugs and she allegedly didn't believe him about his life being in danger. If Michael did tell the truth (which I believe) I would imagine that his mother's doubt probably offended him deeply "my own mother don't believe me". Remember that one article a few months back about Michael saying "devastating" things about his family. One thing was that he was "disappointed" in his mother. However if Katherine is indeed uninvolved who else can we rule in/out in this?

General Hoax Talk / Support petition
« on: March 25, 2010, 07:10:12 PM »
Please help us to stop that crappy movie "Gone too soon" by Ian Halperin by signing our petition. He's the guy who wrote that book "MJ Unmasked" in which he claimed MJ did outlandish things that will not be discussed here. Now this liar makes a movie which will come out on June 25th and claims he does it for MJ's fans. MJ can't defend himself, so now it's us fans who got to stand up for him. We have a chance because the petition started only 3 days ago and already has over 1000 signatures.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Dave Dave / "MJ would NEVER disguise himself as a burn victim.... "
« on: March 11, 2010, 07:04:27 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

according to his body guards^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ he did.

Pages: [1]
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal