OK Bec, I think we're gonna meet in the middle on this issue. <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
So the rationale, from your point of view, boils down to clearing the stigma which never went away.
You said: "Having his name cleared and removing the stigma from his legacy for his children. It's a monumental task that surely requires a monumental undertaking... if at all even possible to accomplish. But nothing was changing by doing nothing."
I have two things to say:
1. What's preferable, in your view:
One-time allegation (1 kid) which got settled out of court (civil case), with nothing ever proven?
OR
Second-time allegation (2 kids now) that ended in a criminal trial which in turn ended with an acquittal & caveats like "yes, but there was the celebrity factor..." (familiar from OJ Simpson case)?
I personally would take the first, not the latter, option!
And it seems to me that things had died down re: "child molestation" for MJ... I don't feel there was much stigma left by the late 1990s (MJ had married LMP, he'd had kids...), and think there was more stigma (and there was likely to be more) after the second case.
My personal experience, when speaking to people who aren't immersed in "all things MJ", is that they're skeptical of the 2005 verdict (even if they don't say it directly, to my face) or even if they say they believe in the acquittal, they show no sympathy for Michael and say stuff like "Well, he brought it upon himself. Such poor judgment!" So really I doubt Michael fared better, in people's estimation, after June 2005 than in, say, 2000.
2. DID MJ accomplish the goal of erasing the stigma (if that was the goal, as you say)? I think not...
And my opinion is that Michael would have known that an acquittal is not the end of the story, especially for celebrities and for a controversial one at that... Hence my doubt that he would embark on such a risky venture.
If I'd been MJ, I would have chased Jordie Chandler like crazy after 1993 (not literally - just through various channels) trying to obtain a confession that nothing ever happened! I think that's the Holy Grail here, as I said before - and you seemed to agree. I saw BACK's post regarding a correction behind the scenes, but I believe this must be public to have any real value, and to truly turn the tide. God, how I want Jordie to come clean on this!!
Now Jordie did make an indirect statement in 2005, when he chose to flee the U.S. rather than testify for the prosecution... Now if Jordie had really been molested, this would have been the perfect chance to take revenge - but he didn't seem to want it! Certainly casts doubt on his story.
I think defiance, not naivete, made Michael a little vulnerable - at least with respect to the Bashir/Arvizo thing. By defiance I mean a persistence in being himself (staying true to his ideas and values) and even messing with jerks like Bashir. I think Michael could see through some of Bashir's questions (and probably thought, internally, "F*** you dude - I'm gonna give you the answer you want!") and proceeded to offer weird answers! At one point Michael said he wanted to always be on stage, and slept with bright lights on at night.... I thought "hmmmm". <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: --> <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> I think he was messing with Bashir a lot, even with "I don't want to die!". Michael had spoken about death with June Gatlin, Rabbi Schmuley, even Geraldo if I recall... It's not like MJ was detached from reality! But I feel he was often not really engaging with Bashir, not really being himself. Of all the interviews with Michael out there, this is one of the most unusual IMO.
Another thought on the Bashir interview: We're told that Bashir was given access to Michael for 8 MONTHS, and yet watching the tapes (both Bashir's version and MJ's outtakes) reveals only a few outfits worn by Michael - he seemed to really sit down for questioning only 3-4 times. Now there were a few scenes that weren't part of a formal interview (like one where they were shopping), but I don't recall too many of those... The whole production could easily have been done in 1 month, IMO.
Gosh Its her, did I miss a vital TS update where age and gender was discussed?!!
Er... <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
Not exactly. Call it, "extra curricular S.T.U.D.Y." It is allowed.
TS, if he is the same person, before and after changing his screen name to "TS", seemed like a man no older than late thirties, tops. As he spoke so glowingly, enthusiastically about his wedding, his new wife and young son, I ass/u/me (duh, I KNOW) he was late twenties. Older men are more reserved, usually. But he also said he had been in the music business --behind scenes for years, too, before finding Jesus as his savior, so I added 10 years to my estimate. And, he IS male. His name is Timothy. Thinking outside the box, it IS possible Sneddon could have been played by a 30s something guy, OR, gal. My ignorant bad. But, why do you mention "gender"??
I previously didn't...How could you know, anyway, if Tom Sneddon was really a girl disguised as a 50 something old man, unless it was ...YOU??? <!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o --> (JK <!-- s --><!-- s --> )
Actually, I was being quite literal in mentioning the lack of hoax media attention, but now that YOU mention it.........................I guess we are going to find out soon enough if one "can fake criminal charges" using the good doctor.........sorry, but you walked into that one!!
Ah, but was it on purpose or not? <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
I might be wrong, but I thought I read somewhere that there was in fact cctv evidence from the sleepovers that was going to be played as the defense trump card should it have been needed. As it turned out, the incorrigible, Arvizo ingrates did such an overwhelming A grade job of totally discrediting themselves that the camera footage wasn't needed......does that ring a bell? It does sound like an in-control MJ to have made sure any sleepovers were monitored after the shakedown in 1993...............so perhaps you are right, and there was never going to be any TIME done....IDK.
SO unassuming, so self-effacing, so take it or leave it, polite, disengaged. Your manner reminds me of someone...you have studied well, Grasshoppa. But you do indeed know. And, more than you let on, I'll bet. "Shakedown" is a prison term.
BTW .....I would so love to see the Batman face-off with "the <!-- s:?: -->:?:<!-- s:?: --> <!-- s:?: -->:?:<!-- s:?: --> Dimond.......she should PAY him for the exclusive scoop!!
Yeah, with BOXING gloves, maybe <!-- s:!: -->:!:<!-- s:!: --> <!-- s --><!-- s -->
I wouldn't pay to see Michael Jackson--even fake--beat up a girl <!-- s --><!-- s --> even a dirty, stupid one, his age... but... ah, YEAH, <!-- s:!: -->:!:<!-- s:!: --> <!-- s --><!-- s --> I'd LOVE to see ol' 3D(DDD) fake-bodyslammed by someone else, another gal. <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) -->
Your idea, your pick! <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
You're kidding--right? <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> She doesn't deserve to even know she missed out, until after she sees it on CNN and it sinks in.. No one had better let her in on this. Are you trying to cleverly actually motivate someone to email her??
You DO know, eh, that if Michael Jackson comes to her mind again, all that will come out of her mouth is a rehash of the same old sewage, don't you think?
Anyway, she doesn't get to have a "the" in front of her name! She's not a "The", she's just another "a"---a Dirty Diane--UH! <!-- s:evil: -->:evil:<!-- s:evil: -->
If you must give her peer status as one of The Batman's formidable enemies, put her in a dull eggplant colored witch dress, hat and shoes, astride her broom with a big tacky dirty yellowish DB on her chest. Hint, it does NOT stand for "Doll Baby"
Wait a minute. Last time, you mentioned her in a list with two other people, one who I think IS privy to the hoax, and one who may be a player in it, the way you seem to be dancing around him <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> .
Are you trying to suggest that Dirty DD is a player inside, TOO?? Do you know how hated some of these folks from Michael Jackson's past are? Why would he deliberately endanger a woman's life, assigning her a hated part like this, which people don't realize <!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o --> is faked?
And, also, there is this: if all Michael Jackson's perceived enemies are plants and fakes...and he's not real, either (duh, <!-- s:x -->:x<!-- s:x --> don't even try it; he's been too good to be "The Truth" --to quote a song--for a Loong time...)
Why would a minister be interested in MJ? Is there any possibility Tim Simkin to actually be MJ? Because I could imagine MJ as a minister <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> as he is such a religious person.
After all he used to distribute The Watch Tower when he was young , right? Of course I don't know if this is true, I think I've read it somewhere.
Look, it's been said Michael reads the Bible every day. Michael is very religious.
So is TS.
Regardless of who TS is, he seems to know MJ TOO well.
Is Tim Simkin a fan of MJ? How could he know MJ and his career so well and have so many info about his life so well? IDK, it's confusing......
But it could be possible MJ is speaking to us using Tim Simkin because maybe the 2 of them share the same religious views ?
Why would a minister be interested in MJ? Is there any possibility Tim Simkin to actually be MJ? Because I could imagine MJ as a minister <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> as he is such a religious person.
After all he used to distribute The Watch Tower when he was young , right? Of course I don't know if this is true, I think I've read it somewhere.
Well...nothing is 100% sure...there is that pesky element that even ministers can lie. But on his site, he tells who he is, and what he believes and does. He does not mention MJ, there. The tie to MJ could be that they both are/were in the music business for years, at the production level, they are/were both religious, and they both seem to be geniuses who love to toy with gobs & gobs of calculations and numbers, and their ties to events. Perhaps MJ hired him to do some "seeding" for his hoax Adventure? Or, maybe he IS MJ, as people keep saying, anyway, even after he has said he's not.
Tell a couple lies and no one believes anything anyone says any more...go figure?
There was a post somewhere, here, about MJ playing with another alias name: TIM E. Simkin= TIMES I M Kin <!-- s:arrow: -->:arrow:<!-- s:arrow: --> Like, "I know them well..."(meaning History). But, MJ wasn't married with a seven year old son in 2000...WAS he <!-- s:?: -->:?:<!-- s:?: -->
If anyone thinks he is MJ really, just get the DVD of his wedding video and look at him, and see if it is MJ and then come back here and tell us. Simple. <!-- s:idea: -->:idea:<!-- s:idea: -->
I, however believe it when he said he was not MJ. He is simply one of Santa's little helper elves.... <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
I'm quite sure I've read that Tim Simkin-being-TS was debunked although I can't remember the details or how it was disproven.
I went the the s-t-u-d-y.org site out of curiosity and found this by clicking around:
Videos by S.T.U.D.Y.
Speaker - Tim Simkin
To order, please include the series number, the line number and the topic.
Series 9 - S.T.U.D.Y.
Title Time
1. "Am I Really Converted?" 1:01
Do you know what constitutes genuine conversion?
"Doctrinal Unity" (4 Parts, 2 on each DVD):
2. "The Pioneers and the Prophet" 1:58
Do we trust the Pioneers above Ellen White?
3. "Trinity, Arianism, or Neither?" 2:30
A thorough STUDY of the Godhead issues.
4. "Reverence & More Reverence" (2parts) 2:01
Are you really being reverent, as required by God?
5. The Two Times of Trouble - End Events, Judgment Living 2:30
6. The Two Times of Trouble - Tares, Wheat, (in Jacob's...) 2:36
What to expect-and how to prepare-for the little time
of trouble, and the great time of trouble. Are you ready?
7. "The Connection of Daniel 8 & 9" 1:12
A deep STUDY from the Bible alone, proves the truth.
8. "Unsound Arguments" 1:06
Can you defend what you believe from the Bible only?
Will your explanations stand up to close examination?
9. "Time No Longer" 1:53
There are many trying to (re)apply time prophecies
to events after 1844: are these valid, or misapplied?
10. "Sins of Ignorance" 0:59
Must they be overcome? If so, how and when?
11. "The Omega Iceberg" (short version) 1:18
"Be not deceived; many will depart from the faith,
giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils.
We have now before us the alpha of this danger.
The omega will be of a most startling nature."--1SM 197
12. "The Omega Iceberg" Part 1 1:11
13. "The Omega Iceberg" Part 2 1:22
14. "The Omega Iceberg" Part 3 1:11
15. "The Counterfeit Omega" Part 1 1:02
16. "The Counterfeit Omega" Part 2 1:27
17. "The Omega Iceberg" Parts 1-3 3:44
18. "The Counterfeit Omega" Parts 1-2 2:29
19. "The Jesuits in Bible Prophecy" - Revelation 17 in 2 Parts 2:26
20. "The Jesuits in Bible Prophecy" - Daniel 11 in 2 Parts 4:11
An extensive STUDY of Revelation 17 and Daniel 11,
showing reasons why various other interpretations
cannot be correct.
21. "Do You Really Love Jesus?" (3 parts) 4:48
An in depth STUDY of the authority and reliability
of the Spirit of Prophecy.
22. "End Time Fanaticisms" 1:04
The Sacred Name, the Feast Days, and the Godhead.
24. "Rainbow COLORS" 1:31
An interesting STUDY on the use and meaning of colors
in the Bible.
25. "NWO in Prophecy" Rev 17, Part 1 1:54
26. "NWO in Prophecy" Rev 17, Part 2 1:44
27. "NWO in Prophecy" Dan. 11, Part 1 1:58
28. "NWO in Prophecy" Dan. 11, Part 2 1:59
29. "NWO in Prophecy" Dan. 11, Part 3 1:53
30. "NWO in Prophecy" Dan. 11, Part 4 0:45
31. "NWO in Prophecy" Rev 17, Parts 1-2 3:38
32. "NWO in Prophecy" Dan. 11, Parts 1-4 6:35
The above series is an older STUDY dealing with the same
topics as "The New World Order in Bible Prophecy" above.
It is a little older but much longer and has much more
information. Also, the other study has much information
not in this series either.
These DVDs are not sold, but a donation of at least $2 per DVD
is requested to cover our costs. You may copy for free sharing
with your friends (this applies to S.T.U.D.Y. videos only).
On special request, available on video tpaes, SP (standard play 2:40 max,
better quality or EP-extended play 8 hours max). Any study may be ordered individually in SP format.
These videos can be ordered from either The 800-HIS-LOVE Ministry or from:
STUDY
To
Understand
Doctrines
Yourself
S.T.U.D.Y.
Phone: (888) <!-- m -->http://www.S-T-U-D-Y<!-- m --> (888-999-7883)
Website: <!-- m -->http://www.S-T-U-D-Y.org<!-- m -->
(On the web, be sure to use four hyphens between the five letters)
Provided by:
THE 800 HIS-LOVE MINISTRY
P.O. Box 447
Glenoma, WA 98336
1-800-447-5683
1-360-497-3771
I think the list itself is quite interesting, especially the NWO in Prophecy ones since TS has talked a lot about that and Michael's plans to expose their plans. I'm not saying this Tim guy is TS because I don't know who TS is - he could be Michael, a close friend or family member, etc. But whoever he is, he knows too much to just be guessing or messing around.
Apparently, Michael has had this up his sleeve for a couple of decades! Please let me know what you think about all this. Thanks, S.T.U.D.Y. (no, I’m not MJ)
I think the list itself is quite interesting, especially the NWO in Prophecy ones since TS has talked a lot about that and Michael's plans to expose their plans. I'm not saying this Tim guy is TS because I don't know who TS is - he could be Michael, a close friend or family member, etc. But whoever he is, he knows too much to just be guessing or messing around.
Something that I remember is that he said (Tim Simkin) that he had secrets about the Bible that very few people new.... wonder if it is true or not.
Something that I'm finding increasingly astonishing as more time passes, is that the hoax has been running for approx 17 months now and there hasn't been a solid, serious article/tv segment reporting what we beLIEvers see. Is it possible that there are no journos/reporters/investigators, freelance or otherwise that have been following MJ's death and scrutinizing the details as we have done? I wonder what people the likes of Diane Dimond, Tom Sneddon(interesting initials) or even Randy Taraborrelli really THINK about the 'death'. These are people who made it their business to investigate MJ and dig into his life and persona over the years........you would think that they couldn't be blind to things that we know about him that give the 'hoax' game away. Even if they did not pick up on the outright clues that MJ has left for his 'objective, alert' fans, haven't any of these people seen and questioned the inconsistencies surrounding the 'death' itself......911 call, ambo, bodybag to name a few. I am baffled by this.... it seems that our so-called newsmedia doesn't want to even entertain the idea and limit the amount of egg on their faces when the Truth finally comes out and hits them over the head. In another post I think it was Its her who quite rightly remarked that 'it killed the media having to report his "death"in a respectful manner'...... well I think it is going to doubly decimate them to have to report him as being UNDEAD and that he was seriously underestimated and written off..........the FOOLS.........................lol!!!!!!!
Snake Sneddon is rotting in HELL! He will not get away with no punishment coming to him. It is only a matter of time. He will reap what he has sown. He may get the sores that are about to be spilled upon the earth. God's wrath is coming.
Not a news story of Michael (see below) but, she is trying to make an attempt to make herself look like she told the public to be aware that the media lies, lol
When the shit hits the fan she can say "Seeeeee I told you the media lies." I bet she has been here reading but, chooses to stay far away from reporting on Michael's "death hoax", she knows better than that. This is her way of setting herself up to look righteous later when it comes out that indeed the media has been PUNKED! <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) -->
<!-- m -->http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-dim ... 06784.html<!-- m -->
Diane Dimond.
Modern day journalist
Posted: September 6, 2010 07:56 PM
The Media Lies to You -- Beware!
I took some time off my regular schedule to write a book. It's all about how we as a society have abrogated our opinion-making and handed it over to whatever media we follow.
For some people these days it takes too much time and effort to engage in critical thinking. But what if the media is just playing follow the leader -- parroting each other and not really checking out the facts? It happens all the time, and now more than ever we need to use our common sense to help lead us to the truth.
My new book is about the couple the media branded "The White House Gate Crashers," Michaele and Tareq Salahi. The name of it is Cirque du Salahi -- Be Careful Who You Trust, and I don't mention it here as just a shameless plug for my own work. I mention it because Cirque -- or circus -- perfectly describes the information superhighway traveling into our homes every minute of every day. It has become a circus of truths, half-truthful exaggerations and downright lies. Many of us gobble it up without stopping to think what we're digesting.
Let's analyze the nickname the press gave the Salahis just hours after they appeared at President Obama's first state dinner on Nov. 24, 2009: "The White House Gate Crashers." But, whoa! Stop and think about that a minute.
Nobody "crashes" the gate at the White House, for goodness sakes! The place is ringed with armed guards and a massive security net. So why would the media say that -- over and over before any real facts were known? Because it's catchy and it fits into today's terrorist watch mentality. Salahi -- why it even sounds like a suspect Middle Eastern name!
The Salahis decided to open up to one person -- me -- and to tell their whole story. During my investigation I got to dissect all their e-mails with a White House representative who promised to try to get them in to the event. I discovered the Salahis honestly believed they were invited to the welcoming ceremony for the Prime Minister of India. I learned that once they arrived at the White House they presented their passports to not one -- but two -- Secret Service checkpoints and they were waved right in. Once inside the grand reception hall staff ushered them through the official receiving line and then into the lavish dinner tent set up on the South Lawn.
Now, what part of that sounds like a "gate crashing" to you? That's right -- none of it. Yet to this day most media continue to refer to the Salahis as "crashers" and remind the public that federal charges are still a possibility. Ridiculous.
The Salahis immediately cooperated with federal investigators who learned the details I've just outlined for you -- and much more. Yet those investigators apparently didn't pass the word on to the Congressional Homeland Security Committee. Even before the hearing members publicly vilified the Salahis. Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee called them "the perpetrators." Her colleague, Eleanor Holmes Norton declared, "Clearly they were outlaws before they crashed the White House." So when the couple was subpoenaed to appear before the committee there is there any wonder why they exercised their constitutional right to remain silent? With the deck already stacked against them they had no choice but to take their lawyer's advice and plead the fifth. Your lawyer would tell you to do the same.
It was a shameful kangaroo court proceeding conducted by the congressional panel that's supposed to be concentrating on ways to keep the country safe in this post 9-11 atmosphere. Instead, the politicians were more interested in getting face time on TV while the story was still hot.
The Salahis are not like you and me. Months before the White House event they were cast as members on a "reality" TV show. An odd move, in my book, but being odd is not against the law in America. They owe money to multiple creditors, but how many other citizens have gotten caught up in this bad economy? Their worst luck was to become the target in this new era of lock-and-load journalism. The media decides who the focus is and relentlessly zero in.
The Salahis' biggest transgression may have been that they blindly trusted too many people. Their own entertainment lawyer paved the way to the White House state dinner then dropped them like a bag of toxic waste after the scandal broke. They trusted federal investigators would help clear their name. They trusted that the justice system and the federal grand jury hearing their evidence would exonerate them. They trusted that the media would ultimately get the story straight. But here we are almost a year later, and the Salahis are still twisting in the wind.
Too many of today's professional journalists, augmented by mostly inexperienced internet bloggers, are all too eager to jump on the story-du-jour for fear of being left behind. Too bad they don't take the time to research facts before parroting what others have reported before them.
Apparently, Michael has had this up his sleeve for a couple of decades! Please let me know what you think about all this. Thanks, S.T.U.D.Y. (no, I’m not MJ)
This was from one of his old posts on MJHD Gina.
Thank you trustno1.
Well, I know we must think for ourselves but sometimes I am just tired of thinking.....
Is thinking THAT important or should we go by our heart more? By our aspirations and dreams...... sometimes I feel that the longer I think the less I achieve....
Tonight I miss Michael and there's no way thinking about it can help me ...
What's with the light cross in the teaser for Hold My Hand?!
Is that Michael at 00:09?
Why they used MJ scenes only from the Bucharest Dangerous concert?
Michael Jackson Trial: Beatles Catalog Shakedown?
by CONSPIRACY PLANET
(EDITOR'S NOTE: The shakedown of Michael Jackson ended June 13, 2005, as the jury acquitted him of all charges)
Is the Michael Jackson trial just a shakedown to get possession of the Beatles catalog?
According to the New York Times, Jackson publicly expressed concerns in 2002 that Sony would force him to give up his share of Sony/ATV Music Publishing to make good on expenses against his 'Invincible' album. The company, jointly owned by Jackson and Sony, controls the catalogs of such artists as the Beatles, Brooks & Dunn, Leonard Cohen, David Crosby, Miles Davis, Neil Diamond, Bob Dylan, Merle Haggard, Lauryn Hill, Willie Nelson, Stevie Nicks, Pearl Jam and Stephen Stills and just last week purchased the Acuff-Rose catalog, which includes hits like the Everly Brothers' 'Bye Bye Love,' Roy Orbison's "Oh, Pretty Woman" and Hank Williams' 'Your Cheatin' Heart.'
And then the trial of Michael Jackson on charges of child molestation began...
The question remains -- Will Jackson have to sell his $500 million stake in the Beatles' music catalog, which he bought for about $48 million twenty years ago?
The Beatles song catalog is owned by Jackson and Sony through Sony/ATV Music Publishing.
ATV in had purchased Northern Songs, a publishing company established by the Beatles, in 1969. The catalog included about 4,000 songs, including more than 200 Beatles tunes, worth an estimated two-thirds of the catalog's value.
Owned by Australian wheeler-dealer Robert Holmes a Court, ATV struck a deal with Jackson, who then reduced his equity position to 50 percent after merging ATV with Sony.
Jackson has been borrowing against his holdings and has not paid his share of Sony's continuing investment with regards to the release of recent albums like 'Invincible.' An attorney said that Jackson would have to pay off about $200 million in loans securing the catalog.
"Those loans, first provided by Bank of America, were sold in the past month to New York private equity fund, Fortress Investment Group," Reuters reported.
"Fortress was unavailable for comment, but if Jackson defaulted on the loans, the fund would be in a position to seize control of Mijac, the company that controls copyrights to Jackson's songs," according to Reuters.
"One of the things that is going on is that investment bankers are getting more into the field, because music publishing is one of the few assets -- it is an annuity -- that's not going away and only getting more valuable with ringtones and such," said Mike Sigman, president of Major Songs, a music publishing company.
The question remains -- is the Michael Jackson trial a shakedown to recover the Beatles catalog?
After all, not only can this asset (the Beatles song catalog) be used to collateralize future loans by the owner, but it provides a steady annuity through licensing fees, as well as the opportunity to hypothecate loans endlessly around the world.
"Encouraging" a publicity-hungry DA in California to prosecute Michael Jackson is small potatoes compared to that kind of future income stream...
According to this video, Ron Zonen said the 2005 trial was "ultimately a shake down of Michael Jackson."
Dictionary - shake down
noun
1. Slang. Extortion of money, as by blackmail.
2. Slang. A thorough search of a place or person.
_____
Thesaurus: shakedown
noun A thorough search of a place or persons: frisk, search. See investigate.
_____
US Military Dictionary: shakedown
n. informal 1. a radical change or restructuring, particularly in a hierarchical organization or group: after the collapse of the Soviet Union, a shakedown of the Russian press was inevitable.
2. a thorough search of a person or place: harassment and shakedowns by persons in police uniforms.
3. a swindle; a piece of extortion: he wants to eliminate bribery, shakedowns, and bid-rigging in New York City's construction industry.
____
Slang Dictionary: shakedown
n. an act of extortion. (Underworld.) Mary was giving Bruno the shakedown, so he tried to put her out of the way.
Apparently, Michael has had this up his sleeve for a couple of decades! Please let me know what you think about all this. Thanks, S.T.U.D.Y. (no, I’m not MJ)
This was from one of his old posts on MJHD Gina.
Thank you trustno1.
Well, I know we must think for ourselves but sometimes I am just tired of thinking.....
Is thinking THAT important or should we go by our heart more? By our aspirations and dreams...... sometimes I feel that the longer I think the less I achieve....
Tonight I miss Michael and there's no way thinking about it can help me ...
Gina, there are times when you need to stick to one opinion unless irrefutable evidences are provided... Nothing is ever quite what it seems! For each single piece of truth, there is X lies otherwise there would be no mystery and it would be far too easy to find the "holly grail"! Doubt creates mystery, it makes people think!
I remember reading through the FBI files and taking a particular interest in Frank Paul Gambino... when I read his letters I saw irony, I saw Hoax all over it... when I found his Blog and website, I saw humour and art... but I am possibly the only one to see it this way! The majority sees "the gangster"! What is truth, what is lies?
So let your heart speak from time to time! Keep Faith in your beliefs! Remember the LMP blog from the 26th June 2009 " ...watching on the news almost play by play The exact Scenario I saw happen on August 16th, 1977 happening again ..."
Apparently, Michael has had this up his sleeve for a couple of decades! Please let me know what you think about all this. Thanks, S.T.U.D.Y. (no, I’m not MJ)
This was from one of his old posts on MJHD Gina.
Thank you trustno1.
Well, I know we must think for ourselves but sometimes I am just tired of thinking.....
Is thinking THAT important or should we go by our heart more? By our aspirations and dreams...... sometimes I feel that the longer I think the less I achieve....
Tonight I miss Michael and there's no way thinking about it can help me ...
The exact Scenario.... at this point I think we all have to go with our gut, instincts if you will. So many talking heads (we all are) you can only discuss the same information so many times before it becomes twisted and confusing.
I remember when S.T.U.D.Y. wrote the quoted post on the old board because I remember reading it back then and lol'ing thinking "yeah right, thinking you are MJ is the furthest thing from my mind". And if you'll notice, S.T.U.D.Y. doesn't write like TS so much. TS says he is S.T.U.D.Y. but is he really? Maybe he's not. Maybe S.T.U.D.Y. and TS are two different persons as well as persona's. The style certainly changed over the year and a half.The posts have a different feel, it could just be maturation of a person not used to writing on a message board, or it could be because it is different people trying to construct posts in similar fashion.
This could also explain why one username claims to not be MJ while the other claims to know what's in MJ and Elvis's best interest.
I agree, Bec. I have thought for awhile now that there are people on this forum wearing more than one hat. I don't know what good that would do, but hopefully it's for a good reason.
Early in the morning, when I woke up like usual long before the alarm clock, I was thinking of MJ, of his music and I've realised how much WORK he had to do to create all those beautiful songs. How deeply involved he was in his proffesion and I felt sorry for him a bit......he had to "burn" for his art, he had to create, to make music like we have to breath.....
He deserves so much more than he receives and I feel powerless.... I hope God will give him everything that he deserves......
Early in the morning, when I woke up like usual long before the alarm clock, I was thinking of MJ, of his music and I've realised how much WORK he had to do to create all those beautiful songs. How deeply involved he was in his proffesion and I felt sorry for him a bit......he had to "burn" for his art, he had to create, to make music like we have to breath.....
He deserves so much more than he receives and I feel powerless.... I hope God will give him everything that he deserves......
Gina you are so right............I woke up with Michael on my mind (like always ) i have so many things that i would love to tell him but It's not possible.Just like you i feel so powerless and it's breaking my heart , it really does ! I'm more emotional this time of the year, holidays are coming, Christmas is just around the corner and i wonder how is Michael right now, where is he, he will spend time with his children ? .....I would give anything to hold him once <!-- s:( -->:(<!-- s:( -->
Did two thoughts also cross other minds?
That one and the same person may be posting under different names (IPs etc.) and
that several persons may be posting under one and the same name?
We have witnessed change of writing style and we thought to have read some style before, right?
I even was reminded sometimes of male thinking being replaced by female thinking. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
In case of any doubts, the question "what for?" is the essential basic one and delivers already the first answers by only being asked.
Early in the morning, when I woke up like usual long before the alarm clock, I was thinking of MJ, of his music and I've realised how much WORK he had to do to create all those beautiful songs. How deeply involved he was in his proffesion and I felt sorry for him a bit......he had to "burn" for his art, he had to create, to make music like we have to breath.....
He deserves so much more than he receives and I feel powerless.... I hope God will give him everything that he deserves......
Gina you are so right............I woke up with Michael on my mind (like always ) i have so many things that i would love to tell him but It's not possible.Just like you i feel so powerless and it's breaking my heart , it really does ! I'm more emotional this time of the year, holidays are coming, Christmas is just around the corner and i wonder how is Michael right now, where is he, he will spend time with his children ? .....I would give anything to hold him once <!-- s:( -->:(<!-- s:( -->
I totally understand you ...... there was a time when I thought he maybe is dead for real and I felt such an unbearable pain like The Love itself left this earth.....such a sense of emptiness and endless compassion for him and even anger.....I was angry with God because I thought it was so unfair to take him this way, to separate the kids from their father so brutally, so unexpected......to take him before he had the chance to come back on stage .....
I had no explanation for why God would do this to Michael, what has he done to deserve this punishment.......
Like so many of you I couldn't explain to myself why all of a sudden this deep involvement....it was not like I slept with his picture on my pillow for a life time...... not at all...... what happened to me, I still can't explain and I still try to understand what are these feelings I have to deal with, where they come from and what do they mean.....
Did two thoughts also cross other minds?
That one and the same person may be posting under different names (IPs etc.) and
that several persons may be posting under one and the same name?
We have witnessed change of writing style and we thought to have read some style before, right?
I even was reminded sometimes of male thinking being replaced by female thinking. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
In case of any doubts, the question "what for?" is the essential basic one and delivers already the first answers by only being asked.
Oh Grace you might be right but we tend to project on the others our own way of thinking......we think others would act according to our way of thinking.....
That's why I can't even think of people who would do what you suggest - because I could never even consider to have multiple accounts and have 2-3 or many personalities .....
it's hard to deal with the "original" me, what if I have to act like 2 or more different personalities <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: -->
OK, here's the main problem I have with the notion that MJ intentionally created all this controversy and rumors: For a great artist such as MJ, controversy doesn't help, but harms his cause. People who are truly educated on ANY issue are a minority... The majority form opinions based on snippets of information they get from here and there. MJ HAD to know this! This is even more true in this era of short attention spans and instant gratification.
Most people in this world talk much more about Michael's personal life than his art, music, messages, or humanitarian work. Whenever I try to educate people about Michael I pretty much run into the same questions and opinions:
1. So why did he settle in 1993 if he was innocent?
2. He certainly brought all that trouble upon himself, saying he sleeps with kids...
3. He isolated himself, and wasn't in touch with the real world.
4. What's up with the baby dangling?
5. What did he do to his face?!
6. Was the marriage to LMP real?!
7. Are the kids really his?!
I spend so much time trying to debunk the myths and explain stuff, I don't even get to talk about the beauty of MJ and what he stood for!
How many people do you think have read "Dancing the Dream"?! How many people have seen the brilliant "Ghosts" video?!
Most people don't know that Michael had talent in drawing, that he was extremely well-read, that he wrote poetry... Seriously - and I’m not talking about dumb or uneducated people!
Do you think Michael would want this, for his essence and messages to be drowned out in the confusion and dirty allegations? WHY would Michael create so much controversy, when he could simply be known as a BRILLIANT ARTIST & GREAT HUMANITARIAN? Had Michael's image never been tarnished, he could have gotten the Nobel Peace Prize by now... Don’t you think Michael would have loved that? Barrack Obama got it, for God’s sake, and he did nothing to deserve it!
We’re not talking innocuous controversy here, such as “Were Michael and Prince friends or enemies?” We’re talking about a “child molester” label! This is Russian Roulette, guys, and I think Michael’s too smart not to realize that. If he wanted to make a point about courts and justice, he could have gotten in trouble for something else… like stealing a tyre from a car, or being found in possession of marijuana (which would have made a point about treatment of black people AND marijuana - would have been brilliant!).
- Michael lost his credibility as a humanitarian because his image was tarnished.
- Michael’s “Invincible” album flopped, by his standards, because people weren’t paying attention to Michael at the time.
- Michael’s name was covered at that school auditorium (which was named after him - what an honor!) because MJ came to be associated, in people’s minds, with child molestation (what a shame!).
- Michael’s beloved Neverland was besieged and tainted forever, to the point where Michael didn’t even want to go back.
Do you really think Michael would play with a “child molestation” label and its consequences? I, for one, cannot possibly believe it… If you do maintain that view, I would appreciate it if you could explain why you think MJ would take such a huge risk (given what I wrote here).
To answer the BIG question, your last question first, here is why: <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
I keep saying this, but I feel like people are just stepping over me with, "yeah, yeah, yeah, WHAT ELSE you got??" Trust me, THIS IS IT. <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
It is because Michael Jackson is THE GREATEST ENTERTAINER WHO EVER LIVED. Period. That's all I got. It's all I need. <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) -->
I do have comment on what I highlighted above, inside your post. Top to bottom:
Controversy will spread news further, faster, than anything. Billions of people not interested in music or art, WILL lend an ear to some juicy unrelated gossip about sex or oddities or horror. It widens MJ's fame, via massive scattershot. Persons who never played a song of his, KNOW his name and "his" face. He has just made 3 billion potential fans, and paying customers.(It is not meant to sound cold, at all. This is life; this is a fact of life. It is called MAKING a living.)
A first rule of publicity, is Make Them Talk <!-- s:!: -->:!:<!-- s:!: --> You can turn the tide of talk, but if NO one is talking, you are dead in the water. Haven't you noticed how, every day, someone, somewhere, is speaking the name of MICHAEL JACKSON, even though he's been “dead” 18 months?? Heck, Glenn Beck mentions him each and every week! It is by design.
Yes, a "normal" person like you or I would never ruin our own reputation with controversy, but it is a 180 degree different focus, if one has not only contemporary worldwide fame as their goal, but PLANS to be in peoples' minds and hearts for EVER. MJ was never content for Michael Jackson to be low-profile and “normal”. He has always had BIG stars in his eyes.
Hmmm... "SIMPLY" be known as a brilliant artist and great humanitarian? or...
<!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o --> THE GREATEST ENTERTAINER WHO EVER LIVED <!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o -->
NO contest; “simply” is BORING, especially in the overachieving mindset of Michael Jackson.
Why did he choose the nasty crime of “child molestation”?
I can think of three reasons.
One} to draw attention to it. Michael Jackson never does anything small or unnecessary. This creepy business is more often than not swept under the rug, as if, no harm, no foul. <!-- s:x -->:x<!-- s:x --> (I read all the time :"People get introduced to sexual things, sooner or later...what's the harm in it being sooner? ")
<!-- s:arrow: -->:arrow:<!-- s:arrow: --> The Catholic church isn't the only humungous organization sheltering sex offenders. The JWs used to have a huge, 20 some thousands of names, database of members who have confessed to these kinds of acts, unreported. Now, it must be reported by law, so there can be investigation. Perhaps, MJ simply meant to begin the dialogue, so the filthy freaks cannot find a shadow to hide in, or church for asylum.
Two} To discourage all the bogus lies being told in custody courts all over the states, on innocent fathers, simply because they have broken fellowship with the mothers. These women don't realize what they are SAYING, or the damage this causes, especially to the children they claim to love, but are instead simply using as pawns in a ridiculously emotional power trip with the former "LOVE of their life". It wastes the courts' time, and muddies the waters when a genuine pervert parent is accused and the case comes before the Court. MJ was sacrificing himself, stirring the public to educate themselves on child molestation, and MAYbe even rescue some of these victims ALL around us, terrified into keeping secrets.
Three} The same reason he chose to go out doing Propofol. He HAS to outdo everyone who has ever done something. Even the common addict. Heroin, LSD, crack cocaine? Far too common. HE has to die using legal anesthetics, CREATIVELY, illegally! So, why be accused of something like common thievery when it can be The Worst perversion, instead?
It's not Russian Roulette; MJ doesn't gamble. He controls the outcome or he doesn't involve himself. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) --> If it looks like he's in a tailspin, it's because he wants to be hair raising for a moment. <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: --> All this arguing back and forth earlier this year, about his middle name...tsk tsk. It's not Joe OR Joseph. It is a slightly <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) --> Kryptonic name:
It is JO-KER.
In English, it means: “I am nuts! Beware...” <!-- s --><!-- s -->
Many , many people believed that Neverland was so tainted that MJ couldn't bring himself to go back, after the “shakedown” and humiliation. I submit to you that this is another of his magical misdirections. He, himself, probably NEVER lived there at all. <!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o --> He said he had rhinocerous skin. We KNOW he never lets things get to him <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) --> . All of a sudden, he's a wrecked, whiney, basketcase, as anyone else WOULD be, who now, can't live ANYWHERE on his 3,000 acre, King's Palacial Estate. It didn't seem to ring true, even, that he would rather live in Las Vegas, either, but, people change...who knows? I wasn't losing sleep over it.
It's just that… wild horses couldn't drag me away from a Paradise such as that, and my skin isn't nearly as impenetrable <!-- s:oops: -->:oops:<!-- s:oops: --> .
Something bothered me in the November 2009 Architectural Digest piece, too. Two things, really, but one could be just a male thing. It is that since MJ supposedly moved in there, although he brought his stuff in, he never changed a single thing in the décor (as quoted in the article). Never had the walls painted in colors he liked. Never changed any of the uncoordinated curtains or furniture, which was there, and a lot of it didn't seem---to me---to be the style he would have felt “at home” around. It would be like staying in another hotel or someone else's house. I kept putting it out of my mind, because he never seemed to act like these “trappings” mattered. I know men who are comfortable with just a crate by their lazyboy, in front of a tv and NO curtains. And I know men who totally defer those decorating/ furnishing decisions to their wives. It COULD just be a male thing, or it COULD be that one just does not pour their heart and soul into making a “stage”, feel or look like Home.... <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
The other thing, and this is really <!-- s:shock: -->:shock:<!-- s:shock: --> bizarre, is that one of the photographers, whom MJ graciously allowed into his “home”, and who previously said MJ was so natural and normal and generous with him, letting him shoot anything he asked, took a twisted potshot at him, <!-- s:x -->:x<!-- s:x --> in the article!
I thought the only way this false friend, would have had the arrogance and poor taste to cut on MJ like this, after he had been SO kind to him, would be that MJ was dead (he thought), right? But, no, an adult professional with whom MJ was actually friendly wouldn't say anything so ignorant about his client IN PRINT, especially if he had died! So, WHAT is going on, here?
Since being on this Hoax Investigator site, I am starting to see real MJ patterns. The AD article was just informational commentary about Neverland; what kinds of things were inside; that it appeared to be mostly a shrine to Michael Jackson. There was NO controversy there, at ALL, until...The following comment, too personal, too cruel, just months after MJ's death, which, had to be inserted/approved by someone Else...a Master of insinuation and oblique allusion intended to simmer a while...for a moment in time, when it would make sense.
<!-- s:shock: -->:shock:<!-- s:shock: --> This is what was said:
“Disney figures occurred as pictures, as statues, as framed tableaux, as cartoon cels, throughout the house, especially Mickey Mouse, whom, with repeated surgery, Michael began to resemble.” <!-- s:!: -->:!:<!-- s:!: -->
I now think it is a clue from MJ himself, NOT even about his surgeries or appearance, but, just throwing it out in the middle of the room, that the Michael Jackson death was a “mickey-mouse”(FAKE) death, and that the Michael Jackson character who lives there, may be only as as real as Mickey Mouse, a legal fiction worth billions.
<!-- s:shock: -->:shock:<!-- s:shock: -->
Therefore, the REAL one, the man behind the curtain, the puppet master of all, the Author/Producer of this hair raising, tear jerking, inter-active bedtime story lasting 30 some years, now, is also THE GREATEST STORYTELLER WHO EVER LIVED. <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
Comments
So the rationale, from your point of view, boils down to clearing the stigma which never went away.
You said:
"Having his name cleared and removing the stigma from his legacy for his children. It's a monumental task that surely requires a monumental undertaking... if at all even possible to accomplish. But nothing was changing by doing nothing."
I have two things to say:
1. What's preferable, in your view:
One-time allegation (1 kid) which got settled out of court (civil case), with nothing ever proven?
OR
Second-time allegation (2 kids now) that ended in a criminal trial which in turn ended with an acquittal & caveats like "yes, but there was the celebrity factor..." (familiar from OJ Simpson case)?
I personally would take the first, not the latter, option!
And it seems to me that things had died down re: "child molestation" for MJ... I don't feel there was much stigma left by the late 1990s (MJ had married LMP, he'd had kids...), and think there was more stigma (and there was likely to be more) after the second case.
My personal experience, when speaking to people who aren't immersed in "all things MJ", is that they're skeptical of the 2005 verdict (even if they don't say it directly, to my face) or even if they say they believe in the acquittal, they show no sympathy for Michael and say stuff like "Well, he brought it upon himself. Such poor judgment!" So really I doubt Michael fared better, in people's estimation, after June 2005 than in, say, 2000.
2. DID MJ accomplish the goal of erasing the stigma (if that was the goal, as you say)? I think not...
And my opinion is that Michael would have known that an acquittal is not the end of the story, especially for celebrities and for a controversial one at that... Hence my doubt that he would embark on such a risky venture.
Now Jordie did make an indirect statement in 2005, when he chose to flee the U.S. rather than testify for the prosecution... Now if Jordie had really been molested, this would have been the perfect chance to take revenge - but he didn't seem to want it! Certainly casts doubt on his story.
Another thought on the Bashir interview: We're told that Bashir was given access to Michael for 8 MONTHS, and yet watching the tapes (both Bashir's version and MJ's outtakes) reveals only a few outfits worn by Michael - he seemed to really sit down for questioning only 3-4 times. Now there were a few scenes that weren't part of a formal interview (like one where they were shopping), but I don't recall too many of those... The whole production could easily have been done in 1 month, IMO.
Er... <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
Not exactly. Call it, "extra curricular S.T.U.D.Y." It is allowed.
TS, if he is the same person, before and after changing his screen name to "TS", seemed like a man no older than late thirties, tops. As he spoke so glowingly, enthusiastically about his wedding, his new wife and young son, I ass/u/me (duh, I KNOW) he was late twenties. Older men are more reserved, usually. But he also said he had been in the music business --behind scenes for years, too, before finding Jesus as his savior, so I added 10 years to my estimate. And, he IS male. His name is Timothy. Thinking outside the box, it IS possible Sneddon could have been played by a 30s something guy, OR, gal. My ignorant bad. But, why do you mention "gender"??
I previously didn't...How could you know, anyway, if Tom Sneddon was really a girl disguised as a 50 something old man, unless it was ...YOU??? <!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o --> (JK <!-- s
Ah, but was it on purpose or not? <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
SO unassuming, so self-effacing, so take it or leave it, polite, disengaged. Your manner reminds me of someone...you have studied well, Grasshoppa. But you do indeed know. And, more than you let on, I'll bet. "Shakedown" is a prison term.
Yeah, with BOXING gloves, maybe <!-- s:!: -->:!:<!-- s:!: --> <!-- s
I wouldn't pay to see Michael Jackson--even fake--beat up a girl <!-- s
Your idea, your pick! <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
You're kidding--right? <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> She doesn't deserve to even know she missed out, until after she sees it on CNN and it sinks in.. No one had better let her in on this. Are you trying to cleverly actually motivate someone to email her??
You DO know, eh, that if Michael Jackson comes to her mind again, all that will come out of her mouth is a rehash of the same old sewage, don't you think?
Anyway, she doesn't get to have a "the" in front of her name! She's not a "The", she's just another "a"---a Dirty Diane--UH! <!-- s:evil: -->:evil:<!-- s:evil: -->
If you must give her peer status as one of The Batman's formidable enemies, put her in a dull eggplant colored witch dress, hat and shoes, astride her broom with a big tacky dirty yellowish DB on her chest. Hint, it does NOT stand for "Doll Baby"
Wait a minute. Last time, you mentioned her in a list with two other people, one who I think IS privy to the hoax, and one who may be a player in it, the way you seem to be dancing around him <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> .
Are you trying to suggest that Dirty DD is a player inside, TOO?? Do you know how hated some of these folks from Michael Jackson's past are? Why would he deliberately endanger a woman's life, assigning her a hated part like this, which people don't realize <!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o --> is faked?
And, also, there is this: if all Michael Jackson's perceived enemies are plants and fakes...and he's not real, either (duh, <!-- s:x -->:x<!-- s:x --> don't even try it; he's been too good to be "The Truth" --to quote a song--for a Loong time...)
is Batman? <!-- s:| -->:|<!-- s:| -->
I googled it and the first finding was this:
<!-- m -->http://annatomyofahoax.wordpress.com/20 ... lly-about/<!-- m -->
Why would a minister be interested in MJ? Is there any possibility Tim Simkin to actually be MJ? Because I could imagine MJ as a minister <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? --> as he is such a religious person.
After all he used to distribute The Watch Tower when he was young , right? Of course I don't know if this is true, I think I've read it somewhere.
So is TS.
Regardless of who TS is, he seems to know MJ TOO well.
Is Tim Simkin a fan of MJ? How could he know MJ and his career so well and have so many info about his life so well? IDK, it's confusing......
But it could be possible MJ is speaking to us using Tim Simkin because maybe the 2 of them share the same religious views ?
As for me, I used to believe TS is MJ.
Well...nothing is 100% sure...there is that pesky element that even ministers can lie. But on his site, he tells who he is, and what he believes and does. He does not mention MJ, there. The tie to MJ could be that they both are/were in the music business for years, at the production level, they are/were both religious, and they both seem to be geniuses who love to toy with gobs & gobs of calculations and numbers, and their ties to events. Perhaps MJ hired him to do some "seeding" for his hoax Adventure? Or, maybe he IS MJ, as people keep saying, anyway, even after he has said he's not.
Tell a couple lies and no one believes anything anyone says any more...go figure?
There was a post somewhere, here, about MJ playing with another alias name: TIM E. Simkin= TIMES I M Kin <!-- s:arrow: -->:arrow:<!-- s:arrow: --> Like, "I know them well..."(meaning History). But, MJ wasn't married with a seven year old son in 2000...WAS he <!-- s:?: -->:?:<!-- s:?: -->
If anyone thinks he is MJ really, just get the DVD of his wedding video and look at him, and see if it is MJ and then come back here and tell us. Simple. <!-- s:idea: -->:idea:<!-- s:idea: -->
I, however believe it when he said he was not MJ. He is simply one of Santa's little helper elves.... <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
I went the the s-t-u-d-y.org site out of curiosity and found this by clicking around:
<!-- m -->http://home.centurytel.net/georgie7/videos/vidstudy.htm<!-- m -->
I think the list itself is quite interesting, especially the NWO in Prophecy ones since TS has talked a lot about that and Michael's plans to expose their plans. I'm not saying this Tim guy is TS because I don't know who TS is - he could be Michael, a close friend or family member, etc. But whoever he is, he knows too much to just be guessing or messing around.
I can't remember where he said this. I probably missed it.
This was from one of his old posts on MJHD Gina.
Something that I remember is that he said (Tim Simkin) that he had secrets about the Bible that very few people new.... wonder if it is true or not.
Not a news story of Michael (see below) but, she is trying to make an attempt to make herself look like she told the public to be aware that the media lies, lol
When the shit hits the fan she can say "Seeeeee I told you the media lies." I bet she has been here reading but, chooses to stay far away from reporting on Michael's "death hoax", she knows better than that. This is her way of setting herself up to look righteous later when it comes out that indeed the media has been PUNKED! <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) -->
<!-- m -->http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-dim ... 06784.html<!-- m -->
Thank you trustno1.
Well, I know we must think for ourselves but sometimes I am just tired of thinking.....
Is thinking THAT important or should we go by our heart more? By our aspirations and dreams...... sometimes I feel that the longer I think the less I achieve....
Tonight I miss Michael and there's no way thinking about it can help me ...
Is that Michael at 00:09?
Why they used MJ scenes only from the Bucharest Dangerous concert?
Why his shadow behind the cross at 00:14?
<!-- l -->viewtopic.php?f=48&t=14140&start=75#p239085<!-- l -->
Shake down isn't just a prison term. William Wagner's videos he made right after the meeting are now private. See link above.
<!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) -->
Peace
Gina, there are times when you need to stick to one opinion unless irrefutable evidences are provided... Nothing is ever quite what it seems! For each single piece of truth, there is X lies otherwise there would be no mystery and it would be far too easy to find the "holly grail"! Doubt creates mystery, it makes people think!
I remember reading through the FBI files and taking a particular interest in Frank Paul Gambino... when I read his letters I saw irony, I saw Hoax all over it... when I found his Blog and website, I saw humour and art... but I am possibly the only one to see it this way! The majority sees "the gangster"! What is truth, what is lies?
So let your heart speak from time to time! Keep Faith in your beliefs! Remember the LMP blog from the 26th June 2009 " ...watching on the news almost play by play The exact Scenario I saw happen on August 16th, 1977 happening again ..."
With L.O.V.E
The exact Scenario.... at this point I think we all have to go with our gut, instincts if you will. So many talking heads (we all are) you can only discuss the same information so many times before it becomes twisted and confusing.
I remember when S.T.U.D.Y. wrote the quoted post on the old board because I remember reading it back then and lol'ing thinking "yeah right, thinking you are MJ is the furthest thing from my mind". And if you'll notice, S.T.U.D.Y. doesn't write like TS so much. TS says he is S.T.U.D.Y. but is he really? Maybe he's not. Maybe S.T.U.D.Y. and TS are two different persons as well as persona's. The style certainly changed over the year and a half.The posts have a different feel, it could just be maturation of a person not used to writing on a message board, or it could be because it is different people trying to construct posts in similar fashion.
This could also explain why one username claims to not be MJ while the other claims to know what's in MJ and Elvis's best interest.
Early in the morning, when I woke up like usual long before the alarm clock, I was thinking of MJ, of his music and I've realised how much WORK he had to do to create all those beautiful songs. How deeply involved he was in his proffesion and I felt sorry for him a bit......he had to "burn" for his art, he had to create, to make music like we have to breath.....
He deserves so much more than he receives and I feel powerless.... I hope God will give him everything that he deserves......
That one and the same person may be posting under different names (IPs etc.) and
that several persons may be posting under one and the same name?
We have witnessed change of writing style and we thought to have read some style before, right?
I even was reminded sometimes of male thinking being replaced by female thinking. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
In case of any doubts, the question "what for?" is the essential basic one and delivers already the first answers by only being asked.
I had no explanation for why God would do this to Michael, what has he done to deserve this punishment.......
Like so many of you I couldn't explain to myself why all of a sudden this deep involvement....it was not like I slept with his picture on my pillow for a life time...... not at all...... what happened to me, I still can't explain and I still try to understand what are these feelings I have to deal with, where they come from and what do they mean.....
Oh Grace you might be right but we tend to project on the others our own way of thinking......we think others would act according to our way of thinking.....
That's why I can't even think of people who would do what you suggest - because I could never even consider to have multiple accounts and have 2-3 or many personalities .....
it's hard to deal with the "original" me, what if I have to act like 2 or more different personalities <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: -->
In fact I am sure you are right.
In fact TS said in his last post he also has another username here
To answer the BIG question, your last question first, here is why: <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
I keep saying this, but I feel like people are just stepping over me with, "yeah, yeah, yeah, WHAT ELSE you got??" Trust me, THIS IS IT. <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
It is because Michael Jackson is THE GREATEST ENTERTAINER WHO EVER LIVED. Period. That's all I got. It's all I need. <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) -->
I do have comment on what I highlighted above, inside your post. Top to bottom:
Controversy will spread news further, faster, than anything. Billions of people not interested in music or art, WILL lend an ear to some juicy unrelated gossip about sex or oddities or horror. It widens MJ's fame, via massive scattershot. Persons who never played a song of his, KNOW his name and "his" face. He has just made 3 billion potential fans, and paying customers.(It is not meant to sound cold, at all. This is life; this is a fact of life. It is called MAKING a living.)
A first rule of publicity, is Make Them Talk <!-- s:!: -->:!:<!-- s:!: --> You can turn the tide of talk, but if NO one is talking, you are dead in the water. Haven't you noticed how, every day, someone, somewhere, is speaking the name of MICHAEL JACKSON, even though he's been “dead” 18 months?? Heck, Glenn Beck mentions him each and every week! It is by design.
Masterful, diligent, design. <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) -->
Yes, a "normal" person like you or I would never ruin our own reputation with controversy, but it is a 180 degree different focus, if one has not only contemporary worldwide fame as their goal, but PLANS to be in peoples' minds and hearts for EVER. MJ was never content for Michael Jackson to be low-profile and “normal”. He has always had BIG stars in his eyes.
Hmmm... "SIMPLY" be known as a brilliant artist and great humanitarian? or...
<!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o --> THE GREATEST ENTERTAINER WHO EVER LIVED <!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o -->
NO contest; “simply” is BORING, especially in the overachieving mindset of Michael Jackson.
Why did he choose the nasty crime of “child molestation”?
I can think of three reasons.
One} to draw attention to it. Michael Jackson never does anything small or unnecessary. This creepy business is more often than not swept under the rug, as if, no harm, no foul. <!-- s:x -->:x<!-- s:x --> (I read all the time :"People get introduced to sexual things, sooner or later...what's the harm in it being sooner? ")
<!-- s:arrow: -->:arrow:<!-- s:arrow: --> The Catholic church isn't the only humungous organization sheltering sex offenders. The JWs used to have a huge, 20 some thousands of names, database of members who have confessed to these kinds of acts, unreported. Now, it must be reported by law, so there can be investigation. Perhaps, MJ simply meant to begin the dialogue, so the filthy freaks cannot find a shadow to hide in, or church for asylum.
Two} To discourage all the bogus lies being told in custody courts all over the states, on innocent fathers, simply because they have broken fellowship with the mothers. These women don't realize what they are SAYING, or the damage this causes, especially to the children they claim to love, but are instead simply using as pawns in a ridiculously emotional power trip with the former "LOVE of their life". It wastes the courts' time, and muddies the waters when a genuine pervert parent is accused and the case comes before the Court. MJ was sacrificing himself, stirring the public to educate themselves on child molestation, and MAYbe even rescue some of these victims ALL around us, terrified into keeping secrets.
Three} The same reason he chose to go out doing Propofol. He HAS to outdo everyone who has ever done something. Even the common addict. Heroin, LSD, crack cocaine? Far too common. HE has to die using legal anesthetics, CREATIVELY, illegally! So, why be accused of something like common thievery when it can be The Worst perversion, instead?
It's not Russian Roulette; MJ doesn't gamble. He controls the outcome or he doesn't involve himself. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) --> If it looks like he's in a tailspin, it's because he wants to be hair raising for a moment. <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: --> All this arguing back and forth earlier this year, about his middle name...tsk tsk. It's not Joe OR Joseph. It is a slightly <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) --> Kryptonic name:
It is JO-KER.
In English, it means: “I am nuts! Beware...” <!-- s
Many , many people believed that Neverland was so tainted that MJ couldn't bring himself to go back, after the “shakedown” and humiliation. I submit to you that this is another of his magical misdirections. He, himself, probably NEVER lived there at all. <!-- s:o -->:o<!-- s:o --> He said he had rhinocerous skin. We KNOW he never lets things get to him <!-- s8-) -->8-)<!-- s8-) --> . All of a sudden, he's a wrecked, whiney, basketcase, as anyone else WOULD be, who now, can't live ANYWHERE on his 3,000 acre, King's Palacial Estate. It didn't seem to ring true, even, that he would rather live in Las Vegas, either, but, people change...who knows? I wasn't losing sleep over it.
It's just that… wild horses couldn't drag me away from a Paradise such as that, and my skin isn't nearly as impenetrable <!-- s:oops: -->:oops:<!-- s:oops: --> .
Something bothered me in the November 2009 Architectural Digest piece, too. Two things, really, but one could be just a male thing. It is that since MJ supposedly moved in there, although he brought his stuff in, he never changed a single thing in the décor (as quoted in the article). Never had the walls painted in colors he liked. Never changed any of the uncoordinated curtains or furniture, which was there, and a lot of it didn't seem---to me---to be the style he would have felt “at home” around. It would be like staying in another hotel or someone else's house. I kept putting it out of my mind, because he never seemed to act like these “trappings” mattered. I know men who are comfortable with just a crate by their lazyboy, in front of a tv and NO curtains. And I know men who totally defer those decorating/ furnishing decisions to their wives. It COULD just be a male thing, or it COULD be that one just does not pour their heart and soul into making a “stage”, feel or look like Home.... <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->
The other thing, and this is really <!-- s:shock: -->:shock:<!-- s:shock: --> bizarre, is that one of the photographers, whom MJ graciously allowed into his “home”, and who previously said MJ was so natural and normal and generous with him, letting him shoot anything he asked, took a twisted potshot at him, <!-- s:x -->:x<!-- s:x --> in the article!
I thought the only way this false friend, would have had the arrogance and poor taste to cut on MJ like this, after he had been SO kind to him, would be that MJ was dead (he thought), right? But, no, an adult professional with whom MJ was actually friendly wouldn't say anything so ignorant about his client IN PRINT, especially if he had died! So, WHAT is going on, here?
Since being on this Hoax Investigator site, I am starting to see real MJ patterns. The AD article was just informational commentary about Neverland; what kinds of things were inside; that it appeared to be mostly a shrine to Michael Jackson. There was NO controversy there, at ALL, until...The following comment, too personal, too cruel, just months after MJ's death, which, had to be inserted/approved by someone Else...a Master of insinuation and oblique allusion intended to simmer a while...for a moment in time, when it would make sense.
<!-- s:shock: -->:shock:<!-- s:shock: --> This is what was said:
“Disney figures occurred as pictures, as statues, as framed tableaux, as cartoon cels, throughout the house, especially Mickey Mouse, whom, with repeated surgery, Michael began to resemble. ” <!-- s:!: -->:!:<!-- s:!: -->
I now think it is a clue from MJ himself, NOT even about his surgeries or appearance, but, just throwing it out in the middle of the room, that the Michael Jackson death was a “mickey-mouse”(FAKE) death, and that the Michael Jackson character who lives there, may be only as as real as Mickey Mouse, a legal fiction worth billions.
<!-- s:shock: -->:shock:<!-- s:shock: -->
Therefore, the REAL one, the man behind the curtain, the puppet master of all, the Author/Producer of this hair raising, tear jerking, inter-active bedtime story lasting 30 some years, now, is also THE GREATEST STORYTELLER WHO EVER LIVED. <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D -->
See, now? <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->