2 MJ's

[Australian MJ BeLIEver]

oh, without a doubt, bashir tapes are a goldmine. and in fact will say, if you can't see it there, never will

[suspicious mind]

I just came across this on Arnold Klein's Facebook page 2hrs ago.  Arnold Klein is on a roll with confirming it WAS
NOT Michael at the London announcement, but rather an impersonator.......

Arnold W. Klein
the problem with AEG....during the London interview this was not Michael ...look at the chin!

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Arnold W. Klein
the impersonator had a cleft in the bottom of his chin like a tooth. When /i rebuilt Michael's face there was no cleft!!! look at the width of the impersonator's mouth.Like ·  · Share · 3 hours ago · 10 people like this..

Lesley Anthony You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Lesley Anthony... latex MJ moulded mask  Ines Parrain.. What do mean Arnold ? I mean, Michael had a chin's cleft for ages.... Look at the 2005' pictures... Anyway, there was an impersonator in TII, I agree with that.

Lesley Anthony ..Arnold W. Klein can you please comment on this blog / article that claims, that you were reonstructing his face so he could get away unrecognized? You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

does he ever mention a period of time over which he rebuilt his face? did every michael we saw in tii have that cleft or at least the ones we got a good look at ? and tell me why it has taken him so long to come out with this?

[Australian MJ BeLIEver]

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Klein has come out a number of times and made these claims. This is nothing new. Just Klein talking about it again and it's been picked up again by hoaxers.

The alleged reconstructive surgery was in 09 getting him ready for TII - see link

[curls]

Enjoying your posts guys, but nothing you've shown me says it wasn't MJ messing about all the time.

Aussie's idea that 2 MJ's was about sowing seeds for a future death hoax, has been the only attempt at an answer to my 'Why?' question. (Thanks Aussie!) Seriously there needs to be a motive, and I can't see one, especially for it having started in childhood.
 
I've had an open mind and have almost been wanting someone to come up with something indisputable - imagine the world's reaction when not only does he come back from the dead, but there's 2 of 'em! But I haven't been convinced.

Katherine's book appears to have date of birth errors (Janet and Randy, but maybe it's Wiki that's wrong!), 'The Jacksons: An American Dream' as a drama can't be taken as factual, pictures can be interpreted however you want (light and perspective matter hugely, as does professional v casual pics, though they are dismissed by many). Intelius has it's limitations too for reasons I outlined before.

Michael Jackson showed changes - we all do. We can all look different 'in the flesh' because of natural changes in age, weight, health, mood, expression, or cosmetic changes in hairstyles, make-up, surgery, botox etc. Then add the confusion of what may be a low quality off-the-cuff snap/vid or a professionally directed and posed photo/film, which is all we have to work with! No 'in the flesh' for us!

So the question remains whether the more extreme differences people have seen were MJ himself (intentional or otherwise), or a second person, twin/brother/unrelated brought-in-for-a-job guy, or indeed just imagination on the part of the observer, brought about by the clever suggestions of a master illusionist!

I suspect, like most everything else MJ related, we're simply never going to find a definitive answer to this are we?!

[Datroot]

Can't think of a scientific answer to this.  The O2 MJ looked like he was wearing a latex mask.  Complexion seemed too rubbery to me but otherwise it just seemed like the MJ we don't normally see or hear - probably due to the fact that he was slightly out of it and had to be sobered up beforehand.

[suspicious mind]

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Klein has come out a number of times and made these claims. This is nothing new. Just Klein talking about it again and it's been picked up again by hoaxers.

The alleged reconstructive surgery was in 09 getting him ready for TII - see link

thanks for info aussie.

did i see in some trial testimony about the propofol use that one of these doctors said murray brought michael in for a repeat visit about some little part around the eyes i think that he wasn't satisfied with and he acted as though he had never been there before. could it be that the person was not michael or that someone else had been there in his place? otherwise you have to wonder if there is truth to all the use and that it had effected his memory. the whole propofol testimony has messed with me badly , it was my main argument against death so i am pretty rattled.

[curls]

...... probably due to the fact that he was slightly out of it and had to be sobered up beforehand.

Of course I don't know MJ and cannot say what he would or wouldn't do but I think I'm on pretty safe ground saying that getting yourself drunk just before you kick off the biggest production of your life and present it to the world ("... and when I say this is it, it really means this is it, because, umm ..." deep knowing laugh!), is not the behaviour one would expect from a self-proclaimed perfectionist.

[bec]

...... probably due to the fact that he was slightly out of it and had to be sobered up beforehand.

Of course I don't know MJ and cannot say what he would or wouldn't do but I think I'm on pretty safe ground saying that getting yourself drunk just before you kick off the biggest production of your life and present it to the world ("... and when I say this is it, it really means this is it, because, umm ..." deep knowing laugh!), is not the behaviour one would expect from a self-proclaimed perfectionist.

Nor like any behavior he ever exhibited prior so I'd say that's pretty much a salacious fabrication that I'm shocked to read here.

[gwynned]

Enjoying your posts guys, but nothing you've shown me says it wasn't MJ messing about all the time.

Aussie's idea that 2 MJ's was about sowing seeds for a future death hoax, has been the only attempt at an answer to my 'Why?' question. (Thanks Aussie!) Seriously there needs to be a motive, and I can't see one, especially for it having started in childhood.
 
I've had an open mind and have almost been wanting someone to come up with something indisputable - imagine the world's reaction when not only does he come back from the dead, but there's 2 of 'em! But I haven't been convinced.

Katherine's book appears to have date of birth errors (Janet and Randy, but maybe it's Wiki that's wrong!), 'The Jacksons: An American Dream' as a drama can't be taken as factual, pictures can be interpreted however you want (light and perspective matter hugely, as does professional v casual pics, though they are dismissed by many). Intelius has it's limitations too for reasons I outlined before.

Michael Jackson showed changes - we all do. We can all look different 'in the flesh' because of natural changes in age, weight, health, mood, expression, or cosmetic changes in hairstyles, make-up, surgery, botox etc. Then add the confusion of what may be a low quality off-the-cuff snap/vid or a professionally directed and posed photo/film, which is all we have to work with! No 'in the flesh' for us!

So the question remains whether the more extreme differences people have seen were MJ himself (intentional or otherwise), or a second person, twin/brother/unrelated brought-in-for-a-job guy, or indeed just imagination on the part of the observer, brought about by the clever suggestions of a master illusionist!

I suspect, like most everything else MJ related, we're simply never going to find a definitive answer to this are we?!

ou
I think you are right.  I have been on this forum for now 4 years.  I thought I knew something about 3 years ago, but I've merely gotten increasingly confused since then.  Who really IS Michael Jackson?  Can one person truly encompass all of Michael's amazing attributes:  genius artist, singer, dancer, director, humanitarian, doting father, astute businessman, etc., all the while contriving the most amazing and complex hoax of all time, going through trials and legal battles,  romances, etc.  I think for me sometimes my love and appreciation for 'Michael' prevents me from looking at things honestly, like a child, without preconceptions.  For me, he is everything I would want to be and want to see in another person.  But somedays, I don't want to get out of bed, snap at people, and cry over nothing.  I'm only human.  I imagine Michael, the person(s) and not the persona(s), has those days too, whoever and wherever he may be. 

Wasn't it Arnold Klein who 'slipped' and said that MJ was the greatest 'actor' of all times?  I think this is the closest to the truth as has been spoken.  Whether there is one Michael, a twin, or a thousand doubles.  It doesn't matter.  It's the story that counts and it doesn't matter which Michael, black or white, plays the part.  It makes more sense to me that Michael Jackson plays a central role in a script that was written FOR him and not BY him. 

Oddly, the idea that Michael may merely be a fictional character played by a series of actors, only makes him feel more real to me!  Haven't we all been moved to tears by great acting even when we know for certain the story is fiction?  Aren't we as well moved to tears by a heartfelt song?  I can recall 4 years ago watching Smooth Criminal for the first time.  I was awestruck in the truest sense.  Great art truly can uplift because great artists convey, as Michael said, the divine, in their work.  I certainly felt the divine being conveyed in those first two weeks of hoax obsession when I couldn't get enough Michael and wept shamelessly at the beauty of it all. 

[Datroot]

...... probably due to the fact that he was slightly out of it and had to be sobered up beforehand.

Nor like any behavior he ever exhibited prior so I'd say that's pretty much a salacious fabrication that I'm shocked to read here.

Do you mean MJ 'allegedly' being drunk before the Press Conference being a salacious fabrication or me mentioning it?  I, of course, was referring to Randy Phillips' account of what was going on directly before the Press Conference and the reasons why he was supposedly 3 hrs late, being a possible reason for his different persona.  As opposed to it not actually being MJ and a double.

[paula-c]

I don't know what you all are pretending to say, all those photos belong to the same man---> MJ, the ears, mouth, eyes, etc... seem to be different depending on perspective, I have pics where I look totally different depending on the light, position, etc.. and however I am the same person.

I can see differences in the ears, are a little more elongated, not much but yes I see

[bec]

...... probably due to the fact that he was slightly out of it and had to be sobered up beforehand.

Nor like any behavior he ever exhibited prior so I'd say that's pretty much a salacious fabrication that I'm shocked to read here.

Do you mean MJ 'allegedly' being drunk before the Press Conference being a salacious fabrication or me mentioning it?  I, of course, was referring to Randy Phillips' account of what was going on directly before the Press Conference and the reasons why he was supposedly 3 hrs late, being a possible reason for his different persona.  As opposed to it not actually being MJ and a double.

Both. It's malicious slander at worst, a storyline scripted statement at best. What could make you believe that it is within the rhelm of potentially realistic possibility that MJ would show up drunk to a public appearance?

[gwynned]

...... probably due to the fact that he was slightly out of it and had to be sobered up beforehand.

Nor like any behavior he ever exhibited prior so I'd say that's pretty much a salacious fabrication that I'm shocked to read here.

Do you mean MJ 'allegedly' being drunk before the Press Conference being a salacious fabrication or me mentioning it?  I, of course, was referring to Randy Phillips' account of what was going on directly before the Press Conference and the reasons why he was supposedly 3 hrs late, being a possible reason for his different persona.  As opposed to it not actually being MJ and a double.

Both. It's malicious slander at worst, a storyline scripted statement at best. What could make you believe that it is within the rhelm of potentially realistic possibility that MJ would show up drunk to a public appearance?

Really?  Is he not human?  Not saying he did or didn't.  I wasn't there.  For all we know Jesus might have been a bit tipsy when he turned that water into wine.  Reminds me of the time early on in the hoax when I noticed a bunch of misspellings in the hoax videos.  I thought to point this out once and was reprimanded....'Life isn't perfect.'  Dare I say it?  Neither is Michael whoever he might be. 

[bec]

Of course he's human but there's no pattern of behavior or past performance to suggest that might be true, it's just wild, slanderous speculation based on nothing and I'm surprised to see it referred to as a potential truth. That is all.

[a18wheelslady]

I have no idea if there is more than one Michael.
BUT---  Ever since i have been reading and hearing about Michael it has been shown that he is Very shy and Reserved. Or at least that is what i have picked up in a few of his interviews.
When his video came out with Lisa Marie ( You are not Alone) having only a sheet over him at times i found this interesting for a shy person, just not something i would think Michael would do.
Could this have been someone else doing the video?

I love this video always makes me smile, thinking of how happy they both looked.