0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: The unseen JackSON
November 07, 2010, 05:03:48 PM
I can see everyone's point here though Sprint shouldn't have lost their temper.  Bec is making a good point, Gema I know you post a lot about your dreams well some would say what does that have to do with the hoax? And there are so many articles pictures etc posted regarding every tiny thing that just might be related to MJ even looking for clues in every movie.  So I don't see why posting this pic is so bad, its a gossip tabloid like TMZ and many others.  However I do agree that Sprint should have kept their temper in check.  I've always said no matter what we think of other members theories we don't have the right to say they're wrong because none of us knows.  I hope all this negativity and bickering stops soon, it was bad enough last night LOL
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
In a world filled with despair, we must still dare to dream.  And in a world filled with distrust, we must still dare to believe.

*

MissG

Re: The unseen JackSON
November 07, 2010, 05:13:49 PM
Quote from: "*Mo*"

There are several topics on the forum that are not directly connected to MJ, but that doesn't mean they can't be posted and discussed.  

Oh, don´t get me wrong. I am tolerant to any thread and I don´t discuss in many if does not fit.
In this case I asked because I have seen a pattern of connecting MJ with UFOS and not only in that thread. Just wanted to have a clear answer.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
("Minkin güerveeeee")
Michael pls come back


"Why a four-year-old child could understand this hoax. Run out and find me a four-year-old child. I can't make head nor tail out of it"

*

MissG

Re: The unseen JackSON
November 07, 2010, 05:16:11 PM
Quote from: "bec"

Because they turn accepted reality on it's head and show how that which is largely believed as "truth" may have a completely legitimate yet utterly unheard of alternative explanation.

They show how the concept of "truth" is quite liquid and flexible and not at all the rigid framework that we greatly expect.

Fair enough.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
("Minkin güerveeeee")
Michael pls come back


"Why a four-year-old child could understand this hoax. Run out and find me a four-year-old child. I can't make head nor tail out of it"

*

MissG

Re: The unseen JackSON
November 07, 2010, 05:34:59 PM
Quote from: "trustno1"
I can see everyone's point here though Sprint shouldn't have lost their temper.  Bec is making a good point, Gema I know you post a lot about your dreams well some would say what does that have to do with the hoax? And there are so many articles pictures etc posted regarding every tiny thing that just might be related to MJ even looking for clues in every movie.  So I don't see why posting this pic is so bad, its a gossip tabloid like TMZ and many others.  However I do agree that Sprint should have kept their temper in check.  I've always said no matter what we think of other members theories we don't have the right to say they're wrong because none of us knows.  I hope all this negativity and bickering stops soon, it was bad enough last night LOL

Well, i did not find the point of "breaking news" about an article trashing Michael and a video that one needs to pay for.

TMZ is a gossip site, but it brings some reality to legal issues at least ;)

Regarding the dreams thread, it has been discussed there as well this UFO phenomenom.
In that thread the research done "contributing to the hoax" has been inmense, mostly by the posts created by @serenitysdream.
Also other sides of MJ have been discussed to try to understand his psyche and/ or motivations within this case, plus, one would get shocked finding out how the brain works in order to get "messages".


And to end the drama ;)  I don´t support the behaviour displayed by this member towards me or other posters. I addressed the situation accordingly.

Being here for 17 months I have encountered all kind of situations and every member has given their points within respect when sensitive or more confrontative questions have been asked, and we are many.

I have tolerance 0 to this kind of abusive patterns of behaviour and do not support any form of verbal aggresion under any circumstance.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
("Minkin güerveeeee")
Michael pls come back


"Why a four-year-old child could understand this hoax. Run out and find me a four-year-old child. I can't make head nor tail out of it"

Re: The unseen JackSON
November 07, 2010, 06:08:58 PM
Gema

 I was in no way suggesting I don't think your posts on dreams aren't valid, like I said each to their own.  It just seemed you were questioning the relevance of someone else's views, as Mo said there's a lot of stuff discussed that doesn't seem directly connected but we don't usually point it out.  Sprint totally shouldn't have reacted as strongly as they did and I am not defending that behaviour at all.
  I know you've been here as a member much longer than I have but that doesn't mean I haven't been around reading and learning.  It only took me so long to register because there were so many others doing so much great research and as a busy mother of three I couldn't devote as much time to research myself there was nothing I could add because there was so much info here already.  Once I had read a large amount I felt confident enough to join in the forum discussions.  I didn't mean to suggest you were causing drama, Sprint did that by being aggressive.  Your responses to Mo and bec were so short yet you suggest I haven't read about the spiritual theories.  Is that because I'm a newer member?  I see why newer members are thought of that way but like I said I didn't say I found your posts irrelevant or give my opinion on that at all. I have read those threads just as I have read many others.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
In a world filled with despair, we must still dare to dream.  And in a world filled with distrust, we must still dare to believe.

Re: The unseen JackSON
November 07, 2010, 08:49:22 PM
Urm, okay, I just want to know if it's possible for anyone who is registered at the site to put up the video here?  Most of us aren't able to see it..
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

bec

Re: The unseen JackSON
November 07, 2010, 09:20:25 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

here, which this thread is actually a double post of.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Are you entertained?

Re: The unseen JackSON
November 07, 2010, 09:29:10 PM
Quote from: "bec"
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

here, which this thread is actually a double post of.
Thanks, beccles!
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

 

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal