TIAI September 27

[Kylie]

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


Then it says
"And Elvis/Jesse still has Linda as an informer"  
and links to Linda Hoodsigmon's website


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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
[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: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
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"
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

informer
a person who provides/supplies information
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

information
Knowledge derived from study, experience, or instruction.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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.

[*Mo*]

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


Then it says
"And Elvis/Jesse still has Linda as an informer"  
and links to Linda Hoodsigmon's website


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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
[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: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

informer
a person who provides/supplies information
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

information
Knowledge derived from study, experience, or instruction.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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.

[~Souza~]

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


Then it says
"And Elvis/Jesse still has Linda as an informer"  
and links to Linda Hoodsigmon's website


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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
[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: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
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"
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

informer
a person who provides/supplies information
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

information
Knowledge derived from study, experience, or instruction.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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.

[MissG]

Sorry, lost again.... :oops:

What is the TIAI redirect for 09/27? what should we focused on?

[Puff]

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" : You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

[MissG]

Thanks hun :*

[Kylie]

@ 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 ?

[*Mo*]

@ 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~]

@ 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.

[Kylie]

@ 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.

[*Mo*]

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.

[~Souza~]

@ 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.

[liegi]

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?

[jacilovesmichael]

@ 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.

[Sarahli]

Maybe that TS will "answer" this to seal the deal?

A lot of talk about you Serenity, where are you?  :lol: