For or against Hoax Being Mentionned in the Medias ?

[Sarahli]

This poll is just to have an overview of what members think about the hoax mentionned in the medias as everybody is not posting their thoughts.

Feel free to add any comment of course.

Thank you. God bless you.

Edit: somekindofsign you're right it's clearer that way. I made this in a hurry.

[suspicious mind]

it doesn"t matter! the cow is already out of the barn now folks!maybe your poll would have helped before the fact not after.

[somekindofsign]

Sorry, I think the poll is a very good idea, that should have been done BEFORE accepting the Sun thing.
But the question is not clearly made.
Whay am I stating if I vote NO, that I´m nor against or not for?
I can´t ask are you A or B? and then give YES or NO as possible answers.
Could you do a not ambiguous question or changen the answers into FOR/AGAINST so everybody clearly knows what they are voting?
Can we start it over?
Can people stop voting until that is clear?
Thank you!

[reasonables+luvs+MJ]

I voted for yes:

If you know that it's a hoax, you won't go crazy trying to find the answer.

if you voted/will vote for "no":

you're going to go crazy looking for the answer.

If you don't know, you just don't know! :D

[somekindofsign]

But what does YES means?
What is anyone voting yes stating?
Is that person against or For?
In Statistics and polls a clear question is very important.

[Sarahli]

But what does YES means?
What is anyone voting yes stating?
Is that person against or For?
In Statistics and polls a clear question is very important.

Changed.

[MJLover1990]

AGAINST, AGAINST, AGAINST, AGAINST! :evil:

But what does YES means?
What is anyone voting yes stating?
Is that person against or For?
In Statistics and polls a clear question is very important.

Sadly that means they are for.

[somekindofsign]

But what does YES means?
What is anyone voting yes stating?
Is that person against or For?
In Statistics and polls a clear question is very important.

Changed.

Thank you very much Sarahli!
Crystal clear now!  ;)

[awesome1]

well the hoax was going to make it into the media eventually one way or another... maybe its better to get the idea into peoples minds now.

build excitement for the Return

[MJLover1990]

Again, it's not up to US to get THAT idea into people's minds why can't anyone see that. Yes it would have gone into the media but it wouldn't have gone so far if some people would just have shut their mouths! Sorry I'm still furious and I'm going to stand for what I believe.

I know I will hear the same crap all over again. So please don't tell me.

[rowdyangel]

Just to clarify my 'For' vote.  Having read all of the email correspondence between Mo/Souza and that woman at The Sun, it is very very clear that the published article only focussed on ONE theory, and that, unfortunately was Dave Dave.  The Sun did that, NOT Mo and Souza.  They picked out just one part of the piece that Mo and Souza wrote - no mention of the other stuff in the original piece - and it just so happened (surprise surprise) that The Sun picked the most controversial tit-bit!

Being in the UK, I wouldn't have expected anything less from this tabloid trash.  However, I agree that getting the hoax into the global domain was going to happen sooner or later.

The downside of this is that we are all now being labelled as crazy mo-fo's (even more than before) and it seems that most non-believers of the hoax assume that we all think Michael is now walking around disguised as Dave Dave all of the time.  Mo and Souza did not say that in their article, they said that Michael appeared as Dave Dave on Larry King on the day of the memorial.  It's just like a game of Chinese Whispers - someone starts the message and by the time it comes back round again, it's been distorted so much that it resembles nothing of the original message.  It's a pity that people are going mad about this just because they don't know the FULL facts.

On balance, I am 'For' the hoax being mentioned in the media.  People thought we were crazy anyway so why not give them something to chew on?

[Stranger In Chi-town]

I voted "No idea". LOL  :lol: I'm neutral about it; on the fence.
It's interesting that the idea that this is a hoax is out in the media, though.   :?  :P

[michaelsupporter]

As much as I would love to claim that I know/understand Michael, I simply don't (hence, I cannot vote). Therefore, I cannot explain why he chose to hoax his death (although I can presume to know). However, as much as many pieces of evidence scare the bejeebers out of me, my logic tells me that if MJ was seriously threatened his kids would be in protective custody as well as MJ. With that being said, I am leaning towards other reasons for the hoax.  I do believe it will all come to light eventually....piece by piece.

I honestly feel that MJ is a genius and is "playing" the media in his favor. He, of all people, knows just how well the media twists the truth and prints sensational stories to sell their stuff. I would suspect that MJ knows that this would result along the way and he has calculated all of this risk into the equation.  I don't believe it is a matter of going to the press or not.  The information has always been there for everyone to gain-----it's only a matter of being open to the truth and presenting the truth in the most factual light---that has been and continues to be the problem. Again, that is what happened regarding the "Sun" article.

I belong to this forum because I am a believer and want the truth. For what I can see....we are collectively attempting to find that truth. My question for the past 11 months has been why it has taken the media----who have the proper resources to do so, haven't investigated the truth.  They truly have the power to probe and prod, track people down, keep tabs on them, and obtain information that the common man cannot. Is it, perhaps, because they already know it??!??!?!?!  Would it be realistic to think they know but in telling would not sell their product?  Perhaps they will utilize this time to continue to print concocted, twisted truths, to entice people to continue to buy their tabloid trash.

I don't think that MJ would desire us to react emotionally towards one another, but respond appropriately to the source of the problem. I still feel his message is to be constructive, rather than destructive. We need to build one another up, to LOVE, to make positive change in our world by first looking at ourselves and applying it to our fellow man. It's about paying it forward; it is, indeed, a ripple effect-that every action has a reaction but it begins with good intention.

MJ, know that emotions run high in your absence. In spite of this, your message is, indeed, heard and heeded. We love you and wish you well!

[THE JACKSONOLOGIST]

Im not going to vote.

One, because I dont know exactly why MJ hoaxed his death....Was it to protect himself and his kids? If I vote yes and this is the actual reason he did it then Im voting to put MJ in more danger.

Two, did he hoax it because he was trying to get a point across? If I vote no and this is the actual reason he did it, then again Im voting againt MJ. I dont want to be againt MJ, so I feel I need more proof of his reasons before I can vote appropriately.

:mrgreen:

[somekindofsign]

Very good point THE JACKSONOLOGIST!