Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • 17 Replies
  • 2419 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bec

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Minion Reserve
  • Posts: 6387
    • Exploring The Hoax

Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 06, 2012, 01:57:51 AM
Are you entertained?

Offline Australian MJ BeLIEver

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 2632

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 06, 2012, 04:05:37 AM
can i ask, are there any forum users here that were on MJJC board at that time?

i guess i am curious as to how many who used to converse with back became believers after 'DOD'
People laugh when I explain. And though they may laugh, that doesn't change the fact that it's still the truth.


Michael is Alive
The end of evil is nigh
Trust in God
The righteous will prevail

Offline bec

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Minion Reserve
  • Posts: 6387
    • Exploring The Hoax

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 06, 2012, 12:34:26 PM
Considering the environment there, I doubt if many did. I speculate that this is why back kept posting after 6/25/09. Pre 6/25, the vast majority of members seemed to openly believe that back was MJ. So openly that perhaps it was too many... back posting post 6/25/09 like he did was the tipping point for them to disregard their suspicions and "move on" as deaders. The environment turned quickly hostile for back on mjjc once they "realized" he was NOT MJ, they largely seem to have "turned" on him.

I believe the mood was manipulated, however. I believe there's a lot going on behind the hoax scenes in regards to mjjc... for whatever reason... it is like Babylon, the city of sin... or so it seems. They were the home place of the birth of the ARG, and were given a chance to see the light... but the environment was tainted and the mob mentality took over and in their anger, fear, and grief, turned against the Jackson Fam in totality, and their true colors showed through... as they attacked even Katherine Jackson, as the target of their suspicions of impropriety.

Consider how KJ was given a prime place in the spotlight considering those "fake" vocals, with Shaeffel and his "Jackson Family Vault" or whatever and his simultaneous release of "Opis None" (confusion) with KJ's name prominently attached to it... and subsequently removed. It primed the pump perfectly. Think of how many other times KJ has had her name in the news attached to little money making ventures in MJ's name since 6/25/09--> several times. Gentle suggestions, take it as you will. They took it as they would, did they not?

It's like they had the same red flags that something was ary as we did... but in addition they had back... who was still alive and well. They looked at the evidence 1+1+1 and came up with 2... MJ is dead, back is a troll, and Jackson family has nefarious intentions... which makes me shake my head in disbelief and shame... I wonder how much of this counter-conclusion to be draw was coaxed, goaded, manipulated by MJ to be fostered, to bring it out to the surface so it could be dealt with... and how much was an emotion that went rogue on him before his eyes, as fans fell to mob mentality and peer influence, made susceptible by fear and grief... they went to the dark side one by one in droves.

However at the end, it seems quite strategic, as you will see, and considering what we now know about posting on specific dates and times, how back's serious of warnings to the board about the treatment of KJ coming on 11/5/09, exactly 3.5 years after he signed up as "back" on the message board. 3.5 years seems key, and mapped out ahead of time... it's too coincidental to be completely a result of action-reaction and not part of a strategic agenda. Oops it's actually 4.5 years, May 2005-->November 2009 so never mind about 3.5 years. 11/5 warnings remain a key event considering the date (11/5) and occurring exactly 1 year prior to Michael album release preparations; Breaking News and Opis None (circa 11/5/2010).

Especially considering back's prophesy about a new MJ album: http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/smf2.0/index.php?topic=21872.0


A new MJ album will "create fault lines" and it will be due to the fans themselves. Well... that's exactly what happened one year after the 11/5 warnings to mjjc, the Michael album and it's "fake" lyrics nearly ripped the place (mjjc) apart at the seams... by driving a HUGE wedge between members, and cleaving their numbers into two camps (fake/not fake) to the point the mods there divided the discussion into two threads, one for those who thought the lyrics were fake, and one who thought they were legit, with strict rules limiting interaction and a zero tolerance policy for nonobservance of this new rule. They drew the line down the middle of the community and everyone took a side. It was epic. The place nearly burned down.

What's a fault line? A giant crack created by an earthquake, yes. But it is also a line that separates tectonic plates in the earth, giant slabs of earth's core that will always remain distinctly separate. When they rub against each other and settle, the vibrations create earthquakes and the destructive power within.

I find this prophesy truly fascinating.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2012, 12:44:22 PM by bec »
Are you entertained?

Offline bec

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Minion Reserve
  • Posts: 6387
    • Exploring The Hoax

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 06, 2012, 12:50:27 PM
Just noticed, 3.5 years... back made this prophecy 3.5 years before the actual event. Date of above post: 5/17/2007, beginning of Michael album "fake lyrics" fallout with Breaking News release 11/5/10 = almost exactly 3.5 years.
Are you entertained?

Offline suesuzzfaithkeeper

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 394

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 06, 2012, 01:34:38 PM
Considering the environment there, I doubt if many did. I speculate that this is why back kept posting after 6/25/09. Pre 6/25, the vast majority of members seemed to openly believe that back was MJ. So openly that perhaps it was too many... back posting post 6/25/09 like he did was the tipping point for them to disregard their suspicions and "move on" as deaders. The environment turned quickly hostile for back on mjjc once they "realized" he was NOT MJ, they largely seem to have "turned" on him.

I believe the mood was manipulated, however. I believe there's a lot going on behind the hoax scenes in regards to mjjc... for whatever reason... it is like Babylon, the city of sin... or so it seems. They were the home place of the birth of the ARG, and were given a chance to see the light... but the environment was tainted and the mob mentality took over and in their anger, fear, and grief, turned against the Jackson Fam in totality, and their true colors showed through... as they attacked even Katherine Jackson, as the target of their suspicions of impropriety.

Consider how KJ was given a prime place in the spotlight considering those "fake" vocals, with Shaeffel and his "Jackson Family Vault" or whatever and his simultaneous release of "Opis None" (confusion) with KJ's name prominently attached to it... and subsequently removed. It primed the pump perfectly. Think of how many other times KJ has had her name in the news attached to little money making ventures in MJ's name since 6/25/09--> several times. Gentle suggestions, take it as you will. They took it as they would, did they not?

It's like they had the same red flags that something was ary as we did... but in addition they had back... who was still alive and well. They looked at the evidence 1+1+1 and came up with 2... MJ is dead, back is a troll, and Jackson family has nefarious intentions... which makes me shake my head in disbelief and shame... I wonder how much of this counter-conclusion to be draw was coaxed, goaded, manipulated by MJ to be fostered, to bring it out to the surface so it could be dealt with... and how much was an emotion that went rogue on him before his eyes, as fans fell to mob mentality and peer influence, made susceptible by fear and grief... they went to the dark side one by one in droves.

However at the end, it seems quite strategic, as you will see, and considering what we now know about posting on specific dates and times, how back's serious of warnings to the board about the treatment of KJ coming on 11/5/09, exactly 3.5 years after he signed up as "back" on the message board. 3.5 years seems key, and mapped out ahead of time... it's too coincidental to be completely a result of action-reaction and not part of a strategic agenda. Oops it's actually 4.5 years, May 2005-->November 2009 so never mind about 3.5 years. 11/5 warnings remain a key event considering the date (11/5) and occurring exactly 1 year prior to Michael album release preparations; Breaking News and Opis None (circa 11/5/2010).

Especially considering back's prophesy about a new MJ album: http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/smf2.0/index.php?topic=21872.0


A new MJ album will "create fault lines" and it will be due to the fans themselves. Well... that's exactly what happened one year after the 11/5 warnings to mjjc, the Michael album and it's "fake" lyrics nearly ripped the place (mjjc) apart at the seams... by driving a HUGE wedge between members, and cleaving their numbers into two camps (fake/not fake) to the point the mods there divided the discussion into two threads, one for those who thought the lyrics were fake, and one who thought they were legit, with strict rules limiting interaction and a zero tolerance policy for nonobservance of this new rule. They drew the line down the middle of the community and everyone took a side. It was epic. The place nearly burned down.

What's a fault line? A giant crack created by an earthquake, yes. But it is also a line that separates tectonic plates in the earth, giant slabs of earth's core that will always remain distinctly separate. When they rub against each other and settle, the vibrations create earthquakes and the destructive power within.

I find this prophesy truly fascinating.

sorry a lil off topic maybe you all already know? i didnt..but when i was reading this and what struck out along with other things was..opis none (confusion)..OPIS is in the bible maps its a city near Babylonia during the Greek Empire..
huggs n love n faith to you bearhug
suzz

Offline bec

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Minion Reserve
  • Posts: 6387
    • Exploring The Hoax

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 06, 2012, 01:51:17 PM
I did not know that, suzz, good info.

Any more about this city?
Are you entertained?

Offline mjj4ever777

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 1467
  • BE LOVE..LIVE LOVE! I LOVE you all, so very much!

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 06, 2012, 04:38:01 PM
Considering the environment there, I doubt if many did. I speculate that this is why back kept posting after 6/25/09. Pre 6/25, the vast majority of members seemed to openly believe that back was MJ. So openly that perhaps it was too many... back posting post 6/25/09 like he did was the tipping point for them to disregard their suspicions and "move on" as deaders. The environment turned quickly hostile for back on mjjc once they "realized" he was NOT MJ, they largely seem to have "turned" on him.

I believe the mood was manipulated, however. I believe there's a lot going on behind the hoax scenes in regards to mjjc... for whatever reason... it is like Babylon, the city of sin... or so it seems. They were the home place of the birth of the ARG, and were given a chance to see the light... but the environment was tainted and the mob mentality took over and in their anger, fear, and grief, turned against the Jackson Fam in totality, and their true colors showed through... as they attacked even Katherine Jackson, as the target of their suspicions of impropriety.

Consider how KJ was given a prime place in the spotlight considering those "fake" vocals, with Shaeffel and his "Jackson Family Vault" or whatever and his simultaneous release of "Opis None" (confusion) with KJ's name prominently attached to it... and subsequently removed. It primed the pump perfectly. Think of how many other times KJ has had her name in the news attached to little money making ventures in MJ's name since 6/25/09--> several times. Gentle suggestions, take it as you will. They took it as they would, did they not?

It's like they had the same red flags that something was ary as we did... but in addition they had back... who was still alive and well. They looked at the evidence 1+1+1 and came up with 2... MJ is dead, back is a troll, and Jackson family has nefarious intentions... which makes me shake my head in disbelief and shame... I wonder how much of this counter-conclusion to be draw was coaxed, goaded, manipulated by MJ to be fostered, to bring it out to the surface so it could be dealt with... and how much was an emotion that went rogue on him before his eyes, as fans fell to mob mentality and peer influence, made susceptible by fear and grief... they went to the dark side one by one in droves.

However at the end, it seems quite strategic, as you will see, and considering what we now know about posting on specific dates and times, how back's serious of warnings to the board about the treatment of KJ coming on 11/5/09, exactly 3.5 years after he signed up as "back" on the message board. 3.5 years seems key, and mapped out ahead of time... it's too coincidental to be completely a result of action-reaction and not part of a strategic agenda. Oops it's actually 4.5 years, May 2005-->November 2009 so never mind about 3.5 years. 11/5 warnings remain a key event considering the date (11/5) and occurring exactly 1 year prior to Michael album release preparations; Breaking News and Opis None (circa 11/5/2010).

Especially considering back's prophesy about a new MJ album: http://www.michaeljacksonhoaxforum.com/smf2.0/index.php?topic=21872.0


A new MJ album will "create fault lines" and it will be due to the fans themselves. Well... that's exactly what happened one year after the 11/5 warnings to mjjc, the Michael album and it's "fake" lyrics nearly ripped the place (mjjc) apart at the seams... by driving a HUGE wedge between members, and cleaving their numbers into two camps (fake/not fake) to the point the mods there divided the discussion into two threads, one for those who thought the lyrics were fake, and one who thought they were legit, with strict rules limiting interaction and a zero tolerance policy for nonobservance of this new rule. They drew the line down the middle of the community and everyone took a side. It was epic. The place nearly burned down.

What's a fault line? A giant crack created by an earthquake, yes. But it is also a line that separates tectonic plates in the earth, giant slabs of earth's core that will always remain distinctly separate. When they rub against each other and settle, the vibrations create earthquakes and the destructive power within.

I find this prophesy truly fascinating.


Great post Bec!!!  Thanks for all of your hard work! Taking a look "Back" is very "informative"!
Sending you LOVE!!!
 bearhug

Offline PureLove

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 5891
  • To die would be an awfully big adventure.

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 06, 2012, 05:05:43 PM
Bec, you're doing an amazing job. Thank you really for this hard work. I was wondering if there's a way to paste Back's posts without enlarging the page? That's ok if that is not possible but I guess that would be easier to read the entire page without scrolling right and left.

Offline ~Souza~

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Hoaxer
  • *****
  • Mrs. SEHF
  • Posts: 10146
    • Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 06, 2012, 07:28:14 PM
Bec, you're doing an amazing job. Thank you really for this hard work. I was wondering if there's a way to paste Back's posts without enlarging the page? That's ok if that is not possible but I guess that would be easier to read the entire page without scrolling right and left.

I thought of that, but then I would have had to schrink the images and they would have been too hard to read, so I uploaded them exactly as bec sent them to me.

Offline suesuzzfaithkeeper

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 394

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 06, 2012, 08:07:54 PM
I did not know that, suzz, good info.

Any more about this city?
sorry bec i had to laydown and just noticed you replied
this is what i found...
http://fouman.com/history/Iranian_History_00539BC.html
The Battle of Opis

Jul, 25, 539 BC

The armies of Persia under Cyrus the Great and the Neo-Babylonian Empire under Nabonidus engaged at the Battle of Opis, fought on Sep, 25, 539 BC.
At the time, Babylonia was the last major power in western Asia that was not yet under Persian control. The battle was fought near the strategic riverside city of Opis, north of the capital Babylon. It resulted in a decisive defeat for the Babylonians.
Opis was a place of considerable strategic importance at one end of the Median Wall. Control of Opis enabled Cyrus the Great to break through the fortified city walls and open the road to the capital.
A few days later, the city of Sippar surrendered to the Persians and Cyrus's forces entered Babylon apparently without a fight. Cyrus was subsequently proclaimed king of Babylonia and its subject territories, thus ending the independence of Babylon and incorporating the Babylonian Empire into the greater Persian Empire. (Updated: May, 21, 2011)
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Cyrus The Great Enters Babylon

Sep, 30, 539 BC

The Achaemenid king, and the founder of Iran, Cyrus The Great became king in 559 B.C. Born in 585 B.C., he was a nobleman in all ways. His father was Cambyses son of Cyrus and his great grand fathers were all Persian kings generation after generation. His mother Mandana was the daughter of Astyages who was from a continuous generation of Median rulers. Cyrus was called the father of his people.
He defeated the Median king Astyages who sent an army to Anshan commanded by Harpagus in 550. This implied taking over several subject Median countries: Armenia, Cappadocia, Parthia, Drangiana, and Aria ruled by vassal kings called Satraps.
His army defeated Crusus and captured Sardis in 545 B.C. adding Lydia to his realm. One of the greatest historical events of all times is conquering Babylon and capturing king Nabonidus by the Persian army with almost no resistance. There, Cyrus The Great freed the Jews from their Babylon captivity, and Aramaic language was instituted to the greater near east as official language. Cyrus was killed in 530 B.C. fighting against a nomadic tribe called Massagetes in today's Kazakhstan and left his reign to Cambyses.
His mother had died same year in winter when Cyrus was in Pars. People of Akkad and Babylon mourned his death for 5 days according to inscriptions left from priest of Babylon. According to Torah, Cyrus The Great is the Messiah sent by Yahweh while Babylonians claimed Cyrus was sent by their God; That makes Cyrus the great and whatever he left for us as a world heritage. His legacy is the founding not only of an empire but of a culture and civilization that continued to expand after his death and lasted for two centuries. (Updated: Dec, 23, 2007)
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



World Cyrus Day

Oct, 29, 539 BC

Oct, 29 is the world Cyrus day celebrated worldwide. Babylon's seizure completed on this day. Supporters of human rights cherish this day to mark the famous Cylinder of Cyrus which is known to be the first chapter of human rights in the world history, now kept in the British museum. Cyrus The Great observed a policy of tolerance during his time that was the key to creation of the greatest empire on the earth so far.
Cyrus The Great conquered by diplomacy as well as by force. He was the subject of a rich legend in Persia and Greece. He appears in the Bible as the liberator of the Jews held captive in Babylon. He has long been revered by Persians almost as a religious figure. Some Iranians believe that he is also the savior with two horns in Quran, and that prophet Mohammad's Ghoreish tribe were descendants of Cyrus. (Updated: Dec, 15, 2007)
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Cyrus Builds Babylon City Walls

Apr, 1, 539 BC

Cyrus The Great started a manner just the opposite of other conquerers who burnt and destroyed conquered cities. He brought peace and security to the societies and that was the reason why citizens of Babylon had asked for his help to get rid of the oppressive king Nabonidus. Cyrus personally took shovel and basic construction materials and started building city walls for Babylon. The same people who had become weak under constant pressure regained their dignity. Unlike other kings who claimed being prophets of God, sons of God, or God himself Cyrus showed people that he was one of them which was an essential material for creating world's greatest empire. The Cyrus Cylinder is the first declaration of human rights that bans slavery, guarantees freedom of religion and is one of its kind to this date.
Achaemenid architecture was based on spatial relationships, orientation and support of activities within a designed environment. The ruins of Perspolis reveals the fact that every nation's identity within the empire was to be preserved as a precious gift of God in order to build, decorate, and operate complex structures; a revolutionary view describing human civilization. (Updated: Dec, 6, 2007

here is some more..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Opis
Battle of Opis


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




 


Battle of Opis
 


Part of the Campaigns of Cyrus the Great
 





Date
 
September 25-September 28?, 539 BC
 


Location
 
Opis, Babylonia
 


Result
 
Decisive Persian victory.
 


Territorial
 changes
 
Neo-Babylonian Empire annexed by Persia.
 



Belligerents
 


Neo-Babylonian Empire
 
Achaemenid Empire
 


Commanders and leaders
 


Nabonidus of Babylonia,
 Belshazzar of Babylonia? †?,
 unknown others
 
Cyrus the Great,
 Gobryas of Gutium,
 unknown others
 


Strength
 


Unknown
 
Unknown
 


Casualties and losses
 


Heavy?[1]
 
Unknown
 






[hide]
v ·
 d ·
 e
 
Campaigns of Cyrus the Great
 






Persia (552 BC) – Hyrba (552 BC)
 Persian Border (551 BC)
 Pasargadae (550 BC)
 Pteria (547 BC) – Thymbra (547 BC)
 Sardis (546 BC) – Opis (539 BC)
 


The Battle of Opis, fought in September 539 BC, was a major engagement between the armies of Persia under Cyrus the Great and the Neo-Babylonian Empire under Nabonidus during the Persian invasion of Mesopotamia. At the time, Babylonia was the last major power in western Asia that was not yet under Persian control. The battle was fought in or near the strategic riverside city of Opis, north of the capital Babylon. It resulted in a decisive defeat for the Babylonians. A few days later, the city of Sippar surrendered to the Persians and Cyrus's forces entered Babylon apparently without a fight. Cyrus was subsequently proclaimed king of Babylonia and its subject territories, thus ending the independence of Babylon and incorporating the Babylonian Empire into the greater Persian Empire.
 




Contents
  [hide]  1 Location
 2 Sources
 3 Background
 4 The battle
 5 Aftermath
 6 Historiography
 7 In popular culture
 8 References
 

[edit] Location
 
The site of the battle was at the city of Opis on the river Tigris, located about 50 miles (80 km) north of modern Baghdad. The city is thought to have been a preferred point to cross the river; Xenophon describes a bridge there.[2][3] The timing of the invasion may have been determined by the ebb of the Mesopotamian rivers, which are at their lowest levels - and therefore are easiest to cross - in the early autumn.[4]
 
Opis was a place of considerable strategic importance; apart from the river crossing, it was at one end of the Median Wall, a fortified defensive barrier north of Babylon that had been built several decades earlier by Nebuchadnezzar II. Control of Opis would have enabled Cyrus to break through the Median Wall and open the road to the capital.[5]
 
[edit] Sources
 
The main contemporary source of information on Cyrus's Mesopotamian campaign of 539 BC is the Nabonidus Chronicle, one of a series of clay tablets collectively known as the Babylonian Chronicles that record the history of ancient Babylonia. Some additional detail is provided by one of the few documents to have survived from Cyrus's lifetime, the Cyrus Cylinder. Further information on Cyrus's campaign is provided by the later ancient Greek writers Herodotus and Xenophon, though neither mention the battle at Opis and their accounts of the campaign differ considerably from the Persian and Babylonian sources. Most scholars prefer to use the Nabonidus Chronicle as the main source on the battle, as it is a contemporaneous source.[6]
 
Although much of the Nabonidus Chronicle is fragmentary, the section relating to the last year of Nabonidus's reign - 539 BC - is mostly intact. It provides very little information about Cyrus's activities in the years immediately preceding the battle. The chronicler focuses on events of immediate relevance to Babylonia and its rulers, only occasionally records events outside Babylonia and does not provide much detail other than a bare outline of key incidents. There is almost no information for the period 547-539. Most of the chronicle's text for this period is illegible, making it impossible to assess the significance of the few words that can be read.[7]
 
[edit] Background
 




The ancient Near East in 540 BC, prior to the Persian invasion of Babylonia
At the time of the Battle of Opis, Persia was the leading power in the Near East. Its power had grown enormously under its king, Cyrus II, who had conquered a huge swathe of territory to create an empire that covered an area corresponding to the modern countries of Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iran, Kyrgyzstan and Afghanistan. The only remaining significant unconquered power in the Near East was the Neo-Babylonian Empire, which controlled Mesopotamia and subject kingdoms such as Syria, Judea, Phoenicia and parts of Arabia. It had been closely linked with Cyrus's enemies elsewhere, having been a formal ally of Croesus of Lydia, whose kingdom had been overrun by the Persians a few years earlier.[8]
 
By the time of the battle, Babylonia was in an unpromising geopolitical situation; the Persian empire bordered it to the north, east and west. It had also been suffering severe inflation exacerbated by plague and famine, and its king Nabonidus was said to be unpopular among many of his subjects for his unconventional religious policies. According to Mary Joan Winn Leith,[9] "Cyrus's success is credited to military acumen, to judicious bribery, and to an energetic publicity campaign waged throughout Babylonia, which portrayed him as a lenient and religiously tolerant overlord." On the other hand, Max Mallowan notes: "Religious toleration was a remarkable feature of Persian rule and there is no question that Cyrus himself was a liberal-minded promoter of this humane and intelligent policy," and such a publicity campaign was in effect a means of permitting his reputation to proceed his military campaign.[10] Cyrus was said to have persuaded a Babylonian provincial governor named Gobryas (and a supposed Gadates) to defect to his side. Gutium, the territory governed by Gobryas, was a frontier region of considerable size and strategic importance, which Cyrus was said to have used as the starting point for his invasion.[8]
 
The Nabonidus Chronicle records that prior to the battle, Nabonidus had ordered cult statues from outlying Babylonian cities to be brought into the capital, suggesting that the conflict had begun possibly in the winter of 540 BC. In a fragmentary section of the chronicle which is presumed to cover 540/39 BC, there is a possible reference to fighting, a mention of Ishtar and Uruk, and a possible reference to Persia.[7] The Battle of Opis was thus probably only the final stage in an ongoing series of clashes between the two empires.[8]
 
[edit] The battle
 




Route of the Persian invasion of Babylonia, September-October 539 BC
The Nabonidus Chronicle records that the battle took place in the month of Tashritu (27 September-27 October) "at Opis on the [bank of the] Tigris."[11] Very little is known about the events of the battle; the chronicle does not provide any details of the battle's course, the disposition of the forces on either side or the casualties inflicted. The Persian army under Cyrus fought "the army of Akkad" (meaning the Babylonians in general, not the city of that name). The identity of the Babylonian commander is not recorded in the chronicle but it has traditionally been assumed that Belshazzar, the son of Nabonidus, was in command. His fate is unclear and he may have been killed in the battle.[12]
 
The outcome of the battle was clearly a Babylonian defeat, possibly a rout, as the defeated Babylonian army is not mentioned again in the chronicle. Following the battle the Persian forces "took plunder" from the defeated Babylonians.[11] Most translations of the Chronicle also refer to a "massacre" of "the people of Akkad",[13] though translators disagree on which side was responsible[14] and who was killed - the population of Opis or the retreating Babylonian army.
 
Pierre Briant comments: "This victory was followed by an immense haul of booty and the massacre of those who attempted to resist."[15] Andrew Robert Burn comments: "Indeed on one reading of the text, Akkad broke out into open revolt, and Nabonidus' last military achievement was slaughter of rebels."[16] Maria Brosius interprets the massacre as a punitive action, "mak[ing] an example of a city trying to resist the Persian army."[17] Cuyler Young comments on the Chronicle accounts: "This reference in the Chronicle suggests that the Persians captured intact the main camp of Nabonidus' army and that, as is so often the case, the real killing of the engagement came after the Babylonians had fallen prey to fear and panic and had retreated from the field." [18] Amélie Kuhrt comments that the references to a massacre and looting suggest that the battle was "probably a hard-won victory."[19] W. G. Lambert argues a contrarian view that there was no massacre or slaughter at all.[20]
 
The battle is not mentioned in the inscription on the Cyrus Cylinder, which portrays Cyrus as liberating Babylon peacefully and with the consent of its people. However, the battle demonstrates that the existing Babylonian regime actively resisted Cyrus's invasion of Mesopotamia.
 
[edit] Aftermath
 
The defeat at Opis appears to have ended any serious resistance to the Persian invasion. The Nabonidus Chronicle states that following the battle, "on the fourteenth day [6 October] Sippar was captured without battle. Nabonidus fled."[13] The chronicle's wording implies that Nabonidus was present in Sippar when the Persians arrived.[21] Cyrus remained in Sippar, and "on the sixteenth day [12 October] Ug/Gubaru, governor of Gutium, and the army of Cyrus without a battle entered Babylon." Nabonidus himself was captured shortly afterward when he returned to Babylon.[13] His ultimate fate is unclear, but according to the 3rd century BC Babylonian historian Berossus, Nabonidus was spared and he went into exile in Carmania, where he died years later.[22] Persian troops took control of the city, though the Nabonidus Chronicle provides little detail of how this was done. The chronicle makes a point of noting the conquering army's protection of the city's most important temples and records that "Interruption of (rites/cults) in [the] Esagila [temple] or the [other] temples there was none, and no date was missed." Seventeen days later, on 29 October, Cyrus himself entered Babylon, where he was proclaimed king, issued royal proclamations and appointed governors of his newly conquered realm.[13]
 
Ancient Greek accounts of Cyrus's campaign and the fall of Babylon differ significantly from the cuneiform accounts preserved in the Nabonidus Chronicle and the Cyrus Cylinder, suggesting that the Greeks were drawing on—or perhaps inventing—different traditions about the conquest of Babylonia. The two ancient Greek sources for the campaign, Herodotus and Xenophon, present broadly similar versions of events. According to Herodotus, Cyrus marched to Babylon along the side of the Diyala river (past Opis, though the battle is not mentioned), where the Persians fought a battle with the Babylonians near the capital. Cyrus subsequently laid siege to Babylon, ordering his troops to dig a canal to drain off part of the Euphrates to enable his troops to penetrate the city through weak points in its defences. Xenophon provides a similar but more elaborate account, claiming that Cyrus dug a huge trench around the city to divert the Euphrates and make the river bed passable for the Persian army. Herodotus, Xenophon and the Biblical Book of Daniel all assert that the Babylonians were taken by surprise while celebrating a festival.[23]
 
Berossus presents an account that is different again, asserting that Cyrus defeated Nabonidus, who "fled with certain others and shut himself up in Borsippa. Meanwhile Cyrus occupied Babylon and ordered to destroy the exterior walls of the city, because the city seemed very formidable to him and difficult to capture. Afterward Cyrus marched to Borsippa, in order to organize the siege against Nabonidus. But Nabonidus did not await the end of the siege, and surrendered."[6]
 
These accounts, written long after the Persian conquest, contradict many aspects of the contemporary cuneiform evidence, which does not mention any sieges, engineering works or battles near Babylon. The cuneiform descriptions of a peaceful surrender of Babylon are corroborated by archaeological evidence from the city, as no evidence of conflagrations or destruction have been found in the layers corresponding to the fall of the city to the Persians.[6] Scholars are in general agreement that Herodotus's account is an invention,[24] while Kuhrt comments that Xenophon's account in his Cyropedia is "virtually impossible to use ... as a strictly historical source" due to its literary form, as a moral treatise on Cyrus in the form of an historical novella.[7] Paul-Alain Beaulieu suggests that the Greek accounts may constitute an aggregate of various folk tales and legends which came to be associated with the fall of Babylon."[23] David George Hogarth and Samuel Rolles Driver commented on what they saw as Herodotus's unreliability:
 

The untrustworthiness of the accounts in Herodotus is evident as soon as they can be definitely compared with monumental records. The famous siege and capture of Babylon by Cyrus is contradicted by his inscription, which relates that, after a battle at Opis and another at Sippara, his general, Gobryas, entered the city without a struggle. Babylon had stood many sieges before the time of Cyrus, and stood many more afterwards : it is thought that one of the two captures by Darius, whose general was also named Gobryas, may have been confused with the entry of Cyrus.[25]
 
According to the Behistun Inscription, Babylon revolts again from Darius, only to be recaptured by his general Gobryas. In this case Herodotus only mentions the first revolt of Babylon in which Zopyrus captures the city for Darius, and omits this second revolt from Darius and its capture by Gobryas.[26]
 
[edit] Historiography
 
The Babylonian defeat at Opis and the apparently unopposed Persian entry into Babylon ended the independence of Babylonia (although there were a number of unsuccessful revolts against later Persian rulers). That the Babylonian collapse was swift and apparently total is confirmed by the ancient accounts of Cyrus's campaign in Mesopotamia and corroborating evidence such as cuneiform inscriptions dating to shortly after the Persian conquest. A number of explanations have been advanced for the rapid collapse of the Babylonian state. The Cyrus cylinder and the roughly contemporary Verse Account of Nabonidus attribute Nabonidus's failure to the desire of the god Marduk to punish a regime that had opposed his will. The strongly anti-Nabonidus tone of these documents, which accused the former king of behaving capriciously and neglecting the worship of the gods, suggests that their authors - the Babylonian priestly elite - were alienated from Nabonidus and may have welcomed a Persian takeover. It is, however, unclear how widely the Persians were supported within Babylonia, as accounts of the invasion and Nabonidus's rule are coloured by Cyrus's subsequent propaganda.[27]
 
Other writers have advanced a number of additional or alternative explanations for the Babylonian defeat. M. A. Dandamaev suggests variously that the regime suffered from a lack of allies; a lack of support among the general population; opposition from subject peoples such as the Jews, who may have seen the invading Persians as liberators; and the inability of the Babylonian forces to resist numerically superior and better equipped opponents.[6]
 
[edit] In popular culture
 
The circumstances surrounding the Battle of Opis are depicted in one of the four parallel storylines of D.W. Griffith's classic silent film Intolerance (1916). The contending armies and a vast Babylonian courtyard are lavishly recreated.
 
[edit] References
 
1.^ Boardman, John "Nabonidus: Babylonia from 605-539 B.C.", in The Cambridge Ancient History vol. 3.2, p. 249. Contributor John Boardman. Cambridge University Press, 1991. ISBN 0521227178
 2.^ Oppenheim, A.L. "The Babylonian Evidence of Achaemenian Rule in Mesopotamia", in The Cambridge History of Iran vol. 2, p. 539. Ilya Gershevitch (ed). Cambridge University Press, 1993. ISBN 0521200911
 3.^ Briant, Pierre. From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire, p. 362. Eisenbrauns, 2002. ISBN 1575061201
 4.^ Tolini, Gauthier. "Quelques elements concernant la prise de Babylone par Cyrus." Note 3 of Achaemenid Research on Texts and Archaeology, March 2005
 5.^ T. Cutler Young, Jr., "The rise of the Persians to imperial power under Cyrus the Great", in The Cambridge Ancient History vol. 4, p. 39. John Boardman (ed). Cambridge University Press, 1982. ISBN 0521228042
 6.^ a b c d Dandamaev, MA; Vogelsang, WJ (trans.). A Political History of the Achaemenid Empire, pp. 41-42, 49. BRILL, 1989. ISBN 9004091726
 7.^ a b c Kuhrt, Amélie. "Babylonia from Cyrus to Xerxes", in The Cambridge Ancient History: Vol IV - Persia, Greece and the Western Mediterranean, pp. 112-138. Ed. John Boardman. Cambridge University Press, 1982. ISBN 0521228042
 8.^ a b c Briant, Pierre. From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire, pp 40-43. Eisenbrauns, 2002. ISBN 1575061201
 9.^ Coogan, Michael D.; Mary Joan Winn Leith, "Israel among the Nations: The Persian Period" (1998). The Oxford History of the Biblical World. Oxford University Press. pp. 376–377.
 10.^ [Max Mallowan. Cyrus the Great. In Cambridge History of Iran (Volume 2: The Median and Achaemenian Periods), Cambridge , Cambridge University Press, pp.392-419.]
 11.^ a b Grayson, A.K. Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles. Locust Valley, NY: JJ Augustin, 1975. ISBN 0802053157
 12.^ Albertz, Rainer; Green, David (trans.). Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E., pp. 69-70. Society of Biblical Literature, 2003. ISBN 1589830555
 13.^ a b c d Kuhrt, A. The Persian Empire: A Corpus of Sources of the Achaemenid Period, pp. 48-51. Routledge, 2007. ISBN 0415436281
 14.^ A. Leo Oppenheim attributes the blame to Nabonidus (see Oppenheim, A. Leo, in Pritchard, James B. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton University Press, 1950); other translators attribute the massacre to Cyrus (see e.g. Grayson; Brosius, Maria. The Persian Empire from Cyrus II to Artaxerxes I. LACTOR, 2000; Kuhrt, A. The Persian Empire: A Corpus of Sources of the Achaemenid Period, pp. 48-51. Routledge, 2007. ISBN 0415436281).
 15.^ (Pierre Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander: History of Persian empire, Published by EISENBRAUNS, 2002)
 16.^ Andrew Robert Burn,"Persia and the Greeks", Published by Stanford University Press, 1984
 17.^ Brosius, Maria. The Persians, p. 11. Routledge, 2006. ISBN 0415320909.
 18.^ Contributor John Boardman, "The Cambridge ancient history" Edition: 2, illustrated, Published by Cambridge University Press, 1988, ISBN 0521228042, 9780521228046
 19.^ Kuhrt, Amélie. "Usurpation, conquest and ceremonial: from Babylon to Persia." Rituals of Royalty: Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies, p. 48. David Cannadine, Simon Price (eds). Cambridge University Press, 1992. ISBN 0521428912
 20.^ Wilfred G. Lambert has suggested that the relevant line of the Nabonidus Chronicle should be read as referring to the Babylonian army rather than the people of Opis, and that it reports a defeat rather than a massacre. See Lambert, Wilfred G., "Notes Brèves 14 - Cyrus defeat of Nabonidus", Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires no. 1, 2007 (March).
 21.^ Vanderhooft, David. "Cyrus II, Liberator or Conqueror? Ancient Historiography concerning Cyrus in Babylon", in Lipschitz, Oded; Oeming, Manfred (eds.), Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period, pp. 351-372.
 22.^ Leick, Gwendolyn. "Nabonidus". Who's who in the Ancient Near East, p. 112. Routledge, 1999. ISBN 0415132304
 23.^ a b Beaulieu, Paul-Alain. The Reign of Nabonidus, King of Babylon, 556-539 B.C., p. 226. Yale University Press, 1990. ISBN 0300043147
 24.^ Campbell, Duncan B.; Hook, Adam. Ancient Siege Warfare: Persians, Greeks, Carthaginians and Romans 546-146 BC, p. 9. Osprey Publishing, 2005. ISBN 1841767700
 25.^ Hogarth, David George; Driver, Samuel Rolles. Authority and Archaeology, Sacred and Profane, p. 202. Ayer Publishing, 1971. ISBN 0836957717
 26.^ Dewald, Carolyn; John, Marincola; The Cambridge Companion to Herodotus, Cambridge University Press, 2006 p. 279. ISBN 052183001X
 27.^ McIntosh, Jane. Ancient Mesopotamia, pp. 113-14. ABC-CLIO, 2005. ISBN 1576079651

i know that's alot lol but there is just a lil more i want to add that really is great!!!.. the numbers the uniforms..but i will have to add it in the am..sorry again
huggs n love n faith bearhug
suzz

Offline Australian MJ BeLIEver

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 2632

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 06, 2012, 09:35:12 PM
ok, just logged in to see some pretty amazing replies to this thread including answers to my initial Q's. (thanks bec) havent read the posts yet, but can already tell that i am going to enjoy this thread.

i must get to work. lots to read  ::P
People laugh when I explain. And though they may laugh, that doesn't change the fact that it's still the truth.


Michael is Alive
The end of evil is nigh
Trust in God
The righteous will prevail

Offline bec

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Minion Reserve
  • Posts: 6387
    • Exploring The Hoax

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 06, 2012, 09:47:46 PM
Quote
Jul, 25, 539 BC

The armies of Persia under Cyrus the Great and the Neo-Babylonian Empire under Nabonidus engaged at the Battle of Opis, fought on Sep, 25, 539 BC.
At the time, Babylonia was the last major power in western Asia that was not yet under Persian control. The battle was fought near the strategic riverside city of Opis, north of the capital Babylon. It resulted in a decisive defeat for the Babylonians.
Opis was a place of considerable strategic importance at one end of the Median Wall. Control of Opis enabled Cyrus the Great to break through the fortified city walls and open the road to the capital.
A few days later, the city of Sippar surrendered to the Persians and Cyrus's forces entered Babylon apparently without a fight. Cyrus was subsequently proclaimed king of Babylonia and its subject territories, thus ending the independence of Babylon and incorporating the Babylonian Empire into the greater Persian Empire.

This is interesting. The Battle of Opis gave Cyrus access to poise to take Babylon. Like stepping stones.

Especially considering this part:

Quote
Cyrus The Great started a manner just the opposite of other conquerers who burnt and destroyed conquered cities. He brought peace and security to the societies and that was the reason why citizens of Babylon had asked for his help to get rid of the oppressive king Nabonidus. Cyrus personally took shovel and basic construction materials and started building city walls for Babylon. The same people who had become weak under constant pressure regained their dignity. Unlike other kings who claimed being prophets of God, sons of God, or God himself Cyrus showed people that he was one of them which was an essential material for creating world's greatest empire. The Cyrus Cylinder is the first declaration of human rights that bans slavery, guarantees freedom of religion and is one of its kind to this date.
Achaemenid architecture was based on spatial relationships, orientation and support of activities within a designed environment. The ruins of Perspolis reveals the fact that every nation's identity within the empire was to be preserved as a precious gift of God in order to build, decorate, and operate complex structures; a revolutionary view describing human civilization.

I never knew that. It's interesting the parallels that could be made there.
Are you entertained?

Offline Australian MJ BeLIEver

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 2632

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 07, 2012, 01:00:49 AM
bec, thanks for your detailed and well articulated report of what happened back at MJJC around june 2009.
so you are basically saying that everyone believed back was MJ - then MJ 'died' and back kept posting. because of this
he was instantly branded a fraud.

wow... how shallow the respect must have been to 'drop' someone that you once had 'faith in' - now i understand the
term TS uses of 'fake fans' - not that the term just applies to these ppl.

i appreciate you going into detail about the michael album. i was not online much pre june 2006 - let alone on the MJ
forums, so had no idea this is what went down. yes the michael album certainly is controversial. actually sometimes i
think that the album is more controversial amongst MJs own fans, than the general public.

so yes indeed, backs words were prophetic and this album certainly caused a division. but to go as far as speaking nasty
abt MJs family - you know that proves they are 'fake fans' (i am sure not all at MJJC - are tarred with the same brush)
have to say, i am a member at MJJC and there is still a nagative attitude about Mjs family, hoaxers and back as well as
this site. there is even negative statements about members here. to be honest i dont waste much time there anymore.
i went there to see other arguments to 'disprove' hoax to myself... but i couldnt  ;)

anyways... back to the above...

this post of backs not only makes even more sense after hearing the background information of what happened at MJJC,
but the prophetic words are even weightier and validate backs authenticity. (as has much of his work)
Thank you for this explanation.


so question, do you think that MJ deliberately made this album slighly left of his usual style / voice, etc to raise suspicions
and draw the line in the middle? i mean, dont get me wrong, i like the michael album, but you think that it is strategically
and deliberately 'off' ...  (not that i think its off. damn. im, finding it hard to explain what i mean)

or you think that the controversy is more related to the fact that it is a post humous album?
(and obviously as the MJJC beleive MJ is dead, they see it as a cash grab by the Jacksons)



NB - your explanation, brought up angry feelings in me abt that community turning its back on back (no pun intended) idiots...
wait til bam.. what are they going to think abt their lack of loyalty to MJ then as well as his family who supported him through this...


 :evil: >:( :evil:
« Last Edit: January 07, 2012, 01:03:07 AM by Australian MJ BeLIEver »
People laugh when I explain. And though they may laugh, that doesn't change the fact that it's still the truth.


Michael is Alive
The end of evil is nigh
Trust in God
The righteous will prevail

Offline Australian MJ BeLIEver

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 2632

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 07, 2012, 01:05:48 AM
@ bec - p.s - i chuckled to myself when i went to my unread replied... so many to read today...
i chuckled when i thought about what your unread replies 'inbox' might look like today after all of
the threads you started.

good work btw.
People laugh when I explain. And though they may laugh, that doesn't change the fact that it's still the truth.


Michael is Alive
The end of evil is nigh
Trust in God
The righteous will prevail

Offline bec

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Minion Reserve
  • Posts: 6387
    • Exploring The Hoax

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 07, 2012, 03:19:40 AM
Aussie, here the blog posts I did at the time:

About Breaking News "fake" vocals: http://exploringthehoax.wordpress.com/2010/11/12/michael-jackson-breaking-news/

About release of Opis None: http://exploringthehoax.wordpress.com/2010/11/13/opis-no-one-is-paying-attention/

About MJJC's reaction: http://exploringthehoax.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/awaken-ye-non-believers-and-for-some-of-you-its-with-cold-water/

And what's behind Hold My Hand: http://exploringthehoax.wordpress.com/2010/11/17/hold-my-hand-really/

Yes I think it was set up. I think MJ tweaked the vocals on purpose to arouse suspicion and incite controversy in his own fan base. I think there is strong evidence that they are a target of the hoax (along with other entities) and having explored this information, I have come to the conclusion, as you have read from me before, that we are being hoaxed as well, in some as of yet unforeseen way.
Are you entertained?

Offline Australian MJ BeLIEver

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 2632

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 07, 2012, 04:32:41 AM
Quote
I have come to the conclusion, as you have read from me before, that we are being hoaxed as well, in some as of yet unforeseen way.

i have no doubt about it... i mean. we are believers. mj must be happy with us for that. but never for a second do i kid myself to think that we
are immune to his wiley ways...

sneaky sneaky man... and  just *adore him* for it!



ok, fake death planned. check... now i must cook up a little nasty treat for my hoax believers...

smiley_spider /cook/ smiley_spider




bec, regarding your blog, you may be surpised to know that i have read some of it already, ages ago not long after i first signed up here.
with many of the long time members here, especially reputable mods like yourself, i have checked to see if they have a website, blog,
twitter or youtube channel so i can catch up. i have read a few of the writings in yours and laylas blog, though not all. its one of those things,
out of sight out of mind. so thanks for the reminder, i am actually going to go back now that i am more advanced in the hoax, since first
starting out here, and re-read your stuff.


cheers  beerchug


(its so warm in melbourne right now, im having a beer - cheers to the hoaxers)

peace!



People laugh when I explain. And though they may laugh, that doesn't change the fact that it's still the truth.


Michael is Alive
The end of evil is nigh
Trust in God
The righteous will prevail

Offline Australian MJ BeLIEver

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 2632

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 07, 2012, 04:41:10 AM
by the way, this statement from your blog....

Quote
Of course HMH is only the first track, but I’m interested in how it goes down with this single and what the other songs on the album will be.
I’m starting to do the: …what if… the album itself is a hoax? I mean of course it’s a real album, with real songs, and you can really go buy it….
but a hoax in that it’s not designed to be simply for listening to songs, nor resurrecting a music career for Sony to make money off of. Maybe it’s
a message carrier, a means to help advance a larger agenda, a package of bottomless newspaper story inspirations, ingredients for Twitter wars,
and to spark scripted and improvisational debates far and wide. Effectively and thereby kicking this hoax into the next phase… maybe?


fits the interactive ARG / Reality movie theory nicely..   ;)

it also sounds very michael... he loves to be talked about...
People laugh when I explain. And though they may laugh, that doesn't change the fact that it's still the truth.


Michael is Alive
The end of evil is nigh
Trust in God
The righteous will prevail

Offline PureLove

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 5891
  • To die would be an awfully big adventure.

Re: Everyone here is famous-back post 3/17/2009

  • on: January 07, 2012, 08:55:18 AM
Bec, you're doing an amazing job. Thank you really for this hard work. I was wondering if there's a way to paste Back's posts without enlarging the page? That's ok if that is not possible but I guess that would be easier to read the entire page without scrolling right and left.

I thought of that, but then I would have had to schrink the images and they would have been too hard to read, so I uploaded them exactly as bec sent them to me.

Ahhh I understand. Thank you so much for the explanation Souza and for your and bec's hard work. So much appreciated. 
« Last Edit: January 07, 2012, 08:59:40 AM by PureLove »

 

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal