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.
Messages - gracesong
Filter to certain boards:
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
« on: June 14, 2010, 08:39:43 PM »
OK, as much as I would like to beleive this is true, there just isn't enough proof to go on.
First off, there's only your word telling us that a bodyguard told you Michael was in the building. Now, that is a strange thing for a bodyguard to say, if he didn't hear you guys talking about the hoax. What could he have meant otherwise?
Do you think he was being sarcastic? Perhaps he'd recently encounterd lots of hoax believers who'd annoyed him a lot and decided that you and your brother must be like them, too. so, he decided to be sarcastic and mess with you guys.
why someone would do that, I don't know. Perhaps he was hurt that anyone could think that Michael would put his family and children through all that pain just to fake his own death. Just thinking aloud.
2
« on: May 17, 2010, 12:14:54 AM »
I'm reading the first post of the link to the forum you'd posted. It seems interesting, but I'm wondering how this person drew their conclusions.
It seems to me like a piece chalked full of speculation but no real documented evidence. I did happen to see the video mentioned wherein Michael calls Matola a racist etc.
From what I've seen of Michael, it's very out of character for him to publicly verbally rake someone over the coals as he did. Tommy must've done something very upsetting to warrant that wrath from a generally gentle man.
I'll finish reading; it seems interesting.
Last note, though. I think that even if one beleives in the hoax, it's very important to look at all sides of the issue. As hard as things may be sometimes, it's necessary, and IMO crucial, that one examines everything, lest they fall into either being an ostrich with their head in the sand or being ignorant of facts that may help us move on with our lives.
3
« on: April 16, 2010, 12:35:19 AM »
you know, the entertainment biz would be so much better if only people show the same class that both Michael and Paul showed.
Plus, if people create music the way Michael and Paul did, I think people would actually put some work and effort into their songwriting. If only, though. If only...
4
« on: April 14, 2010, 12:15:34 AM »
And she does not have to correct herself during genuine conversation. We can take it.  Well, she would need to correct herself if she realized that people wouldn't know what she meant.
5
« on: April 13, 2010, 06:26:16 PM »
OK, just gonna play devil's advocate here, but what if she meant that he was still here in spirit? I mean, if someone's lvoed one had passed on, they could refer to the loved one still being with them in spirit, i.e. "My mother is always with me, and she guides me in all I do."
6
« on: February 21, 2010, 12:52:44 AM »
Yes, but just because Frank was involved in criminal activity does not mean that Michael was. Guilt by association should not apply here. From this link that i've found, You are not allowed to view links.
Register or LoginI gather that he was a former family advisor. I don't know. I just think that although he seems genuine, his article just left me witha bad impression. By putting in print that one speculates that Michael Jackson was associating with criminal groups really does not do justice to the person's reputation. In my opinion if he'd wanted to inform the world about Michael's activities with criminal groups, he should have written a well-researched, properly worded, scholarly serious article, not a newspaper, headline-grabbing article designed to attract readers. It upsets me that someone would do this to him.
7
« on: February 20, 2010, 03:41:36 PM »
For me, the main problem believing in this hoax is that if Michael was under mind control and being threatened by the Illuminati (aka secret society that control government and media), how would the government or law enforcement officials be in the on the hoax when they themselves have to answer to a higher power?
The existence of the Illuminati to me is horse crap personally. If a society really was secret, we wouldn't have any clue. Especially if it controls the government and such, that would be a nearly impossible secret to discover. For me, the main problem believing in this hoax is that if Michael was under mind control and being threatened by the Illuminati (aka secret society that control government and media), how would the government or law enforcement officials be in the on the hoax when they themselves have to answer to a higher power?
The existence of the Illuminati to me is horse crap personally. If a society really was secret, we wouldn't have any clue. Especially if it controls the government and such, that would be a nearly impossible secret to discover. I think you are correct on your view about the Illuminati. While I do believe there are unseen forces running our government, I don't think there are sinister plots around every corner. I do believe governments employ technologies beyond our current general understanding to control some and monitor many. Good question, though. I'll have to look up on that myself. P.S. Michael was definitely a messenger for love and peace. He wanted us to be informed about the things going on behind the scenes that many people are unaware of, but I don't think Michael would want us to follow him much like acult would follow a master. I realize what I just said was rather controversial, but Michael's only human. He is just the messenger encouraging us to take charge of our own ships, not a captain ready to stand at the helm of a global warship against the powers that be and not a general ready to head his global army of followers. He's human, just as we all are.
8
« on: February 20, 2010, 01:17:04 PM »
While this article contains some very interesting information, some of which may very well be true, I highly doubt the credibility of this article. The way in which it is written seems to be for the sole purpose of inciting conflict and provoking controversy.
Do I believe that some shady people were after michael? Yes, that I do believe.
Do I believe that Michael flirted witht he Mafia? No, that I don't believe.
Although he is rich, he does have morals, and he does have kids.
any sort of intentional dealings with illegal groups would automatically put his kids in danger due to the inherent risks of dealing with an illegal group.
Furthermore, his life would not only be owned by the media, but it would be owned by this group, too. If even anything he does begins to remotely irritate or bother this group, his life, property, assets, and children would be at their mercy.
Frankly, this article reads like something off of a certain magazine that exists to smear dirt on people. Look at those headings. Bopping with Belzebub? They're filled with trigger words that are designed to incite aversion toward whomever or whatever they're writing about.
Be careful. In my humble opinion, this article demonstrates poor journalism.
9
« on: February 19, 2010, 08:55:46 AM »
Wow, this is really exciting! You know, Michael's got one important thing working for him in this whole thing.
Because of how he's structured the hoax, he's got just enough people suspicious and looking deeper into things to make it worth it, but he's also got enough of a majority who doesn't believe in the hoax to make it discreet enough for his purposes.
This is part of the genious because if he managed to ruffle too many people's feathers, then someone would cry "foul", putting a stop to this whole thing.
P.S. I looked at the link for the author page, but i'm very curious to see who her sources are in the book. I also wouldn't be surprised if Michael's hired both a sociologist and a psychologist, maybe a social psychologist, to help him in all this.
10
« on: February 19, 2010, 12:05:50 AM »
I admit, when I saw the subject line for this thread, I was pretty skeptical. I thought it was gonna be another one of those borderline slip-ups where one could clearly and logically argue their way out of it, but this is a very awkward slip-up. Not only was he slightly uncomfortable, but I could tell the interviewers were rather puzzled.
Airport? What does airport have to do with anything?
11
« on: February 16, 2010, 11:32:30 PM »
Honestly, I don't want Jermaine to become the lead singer. Not only does he not have the best voice and, imho, artistic sense, but I think he's very controling. I saw him on the Jackson family dynasty thing, and he just seemed to like to boss Jacky and everyone else around.
I really felt bad for Jacky that Jermaine was sort of taking his sogn.
Tito had commented he thought Jacky was a bit possessive of his music, but honestly, what songwriter doesn't treat their music like babies? Sure, I can let you play around with the chord progression I used, but don't ruin my artistic vision of it. lol
I just think it would spell eventual disaster for the group.
P.S. That jealousy of his will eat him up, too. I personally feel nothing spoils true artistry like jealousy.
12
« on: February 15, 2010, 10:36:57 PM »
Honestly, I don't think he has a reason to come back. What if his kids already know about this whole thing?
he's at peace now, and the entity, as in business entity, is no longer with us, just the man.
He's just a man now. Maybe the death of michael Jackson was a metaphorical one. The entertainer is no longer here, but the man sure is.
His life does not belong to us. He's given us forty-some-odd years of it. Let's let him have the 40+ more years for himself.
13
« on: February 13, 2010, 10:14:48 PM »
Yeah, I guess he'd have to be. Aw'well, worth a shot.
14
« on: February 13, 2010, 07:52:08 PM »
Sorry, should've clarified. You are not allowed to view links.
Register or LoginWhat's shown in those pictures?
15
« on: February 13, 2010, 07:24:16 PM »
Yeah, when I'd read the transcript of the message a while ago, that's exactly what came to my mind.
|
Show Posts