IMO Oprah Interview Proves Michael is Alive

mjkate

I have thought long and hard about this post and have written it several times in the past when I have seen the children in public speaking or being photo graphed. I am the mother of 2 girls 11 and 13. We are a private family and my girls are sheltered and protected. They are a little naive and innocent because of that but we are around to protect them until we feel it's time and they are ready to be exposed to the "real" world where things aren't maybe as rosy. But we want to take our time before we gently ease them into some of the more harsher sides of life. When I see Michael's children in public situations (the funeral, the grammy awards, pictures at restaurants, and now Oprah) I think about the laws that would be in place to protect minor children. If MJ was not around, I don't believe social services or professional psychologists or his family would believe that these situations would be good for orphaned children who have been without the love and protection of their doting father for the last year. I don't care if it's Hollywood or scmollywood. Young children's emotions are not to be messed with whether the young children think they are ready for Oprah or not. Children's brains are not fully developed until they are in their early 20's and they are not capable of making sound decisions. A tramatic event like losing a cherished father at that young age is a child's nightmare and what they need is love, support, snuggling, protection and most of all shelter from prying eyes and the media. Little Blanket is 8 for goodness sake and clearly did not want to be on Oprah. Prince didn't look like he was comfortable either. While Paris looked and sounded mature, there was a nervousness to her and there have got to be laws that would protect these children from media circuses like this. I know that Michael has to be alive these children would not be seen out at all. He showed them to us in June of 09 and that must have been his turning point in allowing them out with his blessing as long as he is with them (for the hoax or it was just time) Am I making sense? Basically a long story short. If Michael is not alive there is no way Debbie Rowe or Katherine would be able to condone letting the children awkwardly answer the questions of a stranger in a media circus. There was nothing said by any of the children that was all that necessary. We all saw them at the memorial and to me that was enough. Paris's testimonial said it all and they should have left it at that unless MJ thought more needed to be said.

dominque

That may be true however I disagree with you when say children cannot think for themselves until about 20, you are wrong.

As far your young children all parents want to shelter and protect their children, however you need to let reins go on your children because if you look at half of the children whom was sheltered fromt eh world they did not or do no come out all the great.

mjkate

I didn't say children can't think for themselves. Why did you say I said that? I said (and it is has been scientifically proven as fact) that our brains are not fully developed until our early 20's. Therefore scientists say that we have to be careful when it comes to important decisions during those early ages. To me (and I said imo) I think these are some important decisions at a young age for Michaels kids. I don't know what you are getting at with your second point. Michaels kids were sheltered and protected and out of harms way. Why would that mean that wouldn't turn out well? And why would that mean mine won't. Mine are thriving thank you very much.

Sanity

Loosing a parent is terrible, but in no way should a child be hidden from the world. I'm not a psychologist, but I think experiencing new things and going to new places is a positive thing, it would be much worse if those kids stayed home and stared into empty space all day long.

tonydub

I've been lurking here for a while but felt this was the perfect thread to make my first post. So, hello everybody!

Personally I think that the less you shelter kids, the better.
I don't have any kids, so what do I know?
Well, I do know that I was not sheltered growing up. I had 2 great parents that were very straight with me about everything. They told me the right and wrong and the consequences for certain actions and situations, then let me learn from my mistakes. I've never been in trouble with the law, I never joined a gang, and I didn't knock any girls up. Also, I never OD'd on drugs, though I have been known to have a good time every once in a while. I just know my limits.
And that brings me to my point.
I had several friends growing up who were sheltered and did have very controlling parents. As soon as they were of the age of adolescents they lashed out and rebelled. A couple of them did several stints in Juvi, and eventually spent some time in jail. All of them have some sort of drug problem, and a couple of them had kids right out of high school. One actually became a parent her junior year.
All I'm saying is, if you give a kid reason to rebel- they will. But if there is no need to rebel, it will be less appealing. Not saying some people aren't predisposed to making bad decisions, but if they are raised knowing that every action comes with a reaction or consequence they will generally be a lot smarter in their life decision making.

All that being said, and I could have said a lot more:
Think about it, if he is dead, and Kathering and Joe are now in charge. MJ and his brothers were in the public spotlight from a very young age. Mostly because Joe allowed it, but Katherine didn't put up much of a fight against it. So what's to stop Joe and Katherine from putting his kids through the same thing?
Joe has already expressed a few times that he wants to make stars out of Michael's kids. If anything I'd say that the kids are being forced to be in the public eye at this point. Even though it's something they may want in the future, you're right they did seem uncomfortable with it at the moment.

And I'm not saying that your opinions of parenting are wrong, and I hope it works out for you. I'm just saying that not all parents are like you, and its very obvious that the Jackson family has no concerns about keeping too much of their private business private.

trublu

I think there are pros and cons to each approach. Personally, I had an extremely liberal upbringing. So liberal in fact that some people find it difficult to understand. I was allowed to go out at quite a young age and hang around with older people. I smoked my first ciggarette, and even my first joint with my mother. Some people could say this is irreponsible on my mothers behalf and they may be right. The point is my mother taught me the most important thing and that is LOVE and something I can never forget. I turned out just fine. (IMO lol) <!-- s --><!-- s -->

Now let's compare my upbringing to the upbringing of a close friend. She was not allowed drinking or to nightclubs until she had left home at 18. (bearing in mind drinking here in France just isn't as much as a big deal as places like America). She felt left out and embarassed by her parents as she was not able to do the things that all her peers were doing. She went to university at 18 and kind of went a bit wild with drugs and alcohol for a couple of years. After she had got it out of her system and now no longer takes drugs, does still drink from time to time but knows her limits. She has told me she 'hated' her parents when she was growing up, but now she has a great respect for them trying to not let her get into trouble and and for caring about her so much.

We concluded that somewhere between is probably the right mix.

mjboogie

I have often wondered why MJ started revealing the kids faces right before he died! I believe that we agreed that it was because he may have felt the kids were getting older and it is time to show them but..........for some reason it was the timing you know? I mean almost as if MJ "knew" what was to be. <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->

suspicious mind

I have thought long and hard about this post and have written it several times in the past when I have seen the children in public speaking or being photo graphed. I am the mother of 2 girls 11 and 13. We are a private family and my girls are sheltered and protected. They are a little naive and innocent because of that but we are around to protect them until we feel it's time and they are ready to be exposed to the "real" world where things aren't maybe as rosy. But we want to take our time before we gently ease them into some of the more harsher sides of life. When I see Michael's children in public situations (the funeral, the grammy awards, pictures at restaurants, and now Oprah) I think about the laws that would be in place to protect minor children. If MJ was not around, I don't believe social services or professional psychologists or his family would believe that these situations would be good for orphaned children who have been without the love and protection of their doting father for the last year. I don't care if it's Hollywood or scmollywood. Young children's emotions are not to be messed with whether the young children think they are ready for Oprah or not. Children's brains are not fully developed until they are in their early 20's and they are not capable of making sound decisions. A tramatic event like losing a cherished father at that young age is a child's nightmare and what they need is love, support, snuggling, protection and most of all shelter from prying eyes and the media. Little Blanket is 8 for goodness sake and clearly did not want to be on Oprah. Prince didn't look like he was comfortable either. While Paris looked and sounded mature, there was a nervousness to her and there have got to be laws that would protect these children from media circuses like this. I know that Michael has to be alive these children would not be seen out at all. He showed them to us in June of 09 and that must have been his turning point in allowing them out with his blessing as long as he is with them (for the hoax or it was just time) Am I making sense? Basically a long story short. If Michael is not alive there is no way Debbie Rowe or Katherine would be able to condone letting the children awkwardly answer the questions of a stranger in a media circus. There was nothing said by any of the children that was all that necessary. We all saw them at the memorial and to me that was enough. Paris's testimonial said it all and they should have left it at that unless MJ thought more needed to be said.

i think michael also understood the profoundly negative effect of societies seeming insistance on requiring children to grow up too fast <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->

voiceforthesilent

I have often wondered why MJ started revealing the kids faces right before he died! I believe that we agreed that it was because he may have felt the kids were getting older and it is time to show them but..........for some reason it was the timing you know? I mean almost as if MJ "knew" what was to be. <!-- s:? -->:?<!-- s:? -->

It's my belief that showing the kids before June 25th was intentional even though we've been told otherwise. I don't think it had anything to do with them being at an age to decide to be seen. I think it was because of the hoax and the part they'd play. The world needed a glimpse beforehand of what the children looked like. If we didn't see them before the tabloids would have been even more ruthless trying to get that first shot of them. However, this is just my opinion.

mjkate

Yes I believe it was for the hoax too however I also don't think he would have done so if they weren't ready for that. He didn't bring Blanket along that day. He had a very strong opinion about how he felt he should parent. Meals with children, looking into their eyes every day and telling the children he loved them, reading them a lot of books, all snuggling in one bed watching movies, bringing them with him wherever he went, instillng important life lessons, only letting them watch certain tv channels, drinking alcohol out of a pop can so the kids didn't see him drinking, not parading them around in public or letting them be raised by nannies. That is what I mean by "shelter". Certain Hollywood kids who shall remain nameless, who were not sheltered like this by their parents, have not had a good time of it because they had to grow up to fast and saw too much. Anyone who parents like MJ, would never allow their children to be interviewed by Oprah Winfrey, unless they were alive to supervise. There would be no way UNLESS THIS IS A HOAX, that Katherine would disrespect MJ's wishes about that, or any way that their psychologist (that the court supposedly appointed) would allow it or Debbie Rowe if she has any say, or Grace if she is still around, or 3T who say they are carrying out Michael's wishes. They would all know Michael's wishes and they would be able to see that it would be of no benefit to the children who are 8, 12 and 13, to answer some stupid questions from a curious stranger. Unless of course it is a hoax.

purplerain_84

The kids faces were seen waaaay before 2009, I think as far back as 2007 there were pictures of the kids on the internet with or without Michael. I just think he didn't see a reason to make them keep wearing the masks anymore. I don't think it has anything to do with the hoax.

mjkate

the masks issue is a sub point. Oh well. I tried to make a heartfelt post as this issue was important to me. The most important thing in this whole (hopefully hoax) thing for me has been the children. It broke my heart when I thought Michael died because I knew how much he loved and needed and cherished those kids. It made me sick to think that they were going to potentially in ways he would be dread. He was trying to raise them exactly the opposite of how he was raised. It also broke my heart that 3 little sweet children lost their beloved dad. I really wish that there were some parents like me out there who would comment. If this is not a hoax then there is a big problem with how those kids are going to be raised. One case in point is allowing them to be on that stupid Oprah show to expose and exploit them. The only way it is ok is if Michael is behind the scenes supervising. Otherwise, even if the kids wanted to do, they should have been disuaded.

truthprevails

The kids faces were seen waaaay before 2009, I think as far back as 2007 there were pictures of the kids on the internet with or without Michael. I just think he didn't see a reason to make them keep wearing the masks anymore. I don't think it has anything to do with the hoax.

I agree. The veils had to go at some point, sooner or later... And as the children got older, they might have gotten more embarrassed or self-conscious about the veils, and told MJ "Come on, dad! This isn't cool anymore". Who knows.

IF MJ is dead, then certain things don't apply anymore... such as the distance from Debbie. (Katherine seemed to re-introduce Debbie into the kids' life.) So I'm really not sure that Katherine wouldn't "disrespect" any of Michael's wishes... She allowed the kids to attend public school, she said she never liked the veils & she didn't approve of Michael's plastic surgery (or at least not all of it) etc. And I actually think MJ would be FURIOUS to know that his mom spoke of his plastic surgery, and claimed that he got more than 2 surgeries! That actually made me go Hmm... and not in a good way. (Same with the skin whitening, which Katherine seemed somewhat ignorant about.)

As much as I want everything to fit the hoax idea, it seems to me that some things do and some things don't. I hope time will bring clarity.

truthprevails

the masks issue is a sub point. Oh well. I tried to make a heartfelt post as this issue was important to me. The most important thing in this whole (hopefully hoax) thing for me has been the children. It broke my heart when I thought Michael died because I knew how much he loved and needed and cherished those kids. It made me sick to think that they were going to potentially in ways he would be dread. He was trying to raise them exactly the opposite of how he was raised. It also broke my heart that 3 little sweet children lost their beloved dad. I really wish that there were some parents like me out there who would comment. If this is not a hoax then there is a big problem with how those kids are going to be raised. One case in point is allowing them to be on that stupid Oprah show to expose and exploit them. The only way it is ok is if Michael is behind the scenes supervising. Otherwise, even if the kids wanted to do, they should have been disuaded.

You have a good point, mjkate. The children looked uncomfortable and didn't seem to want to speak with Oprah! (They let her know too, in not-so-subtle ways.) This Oprah interview with Katherine and the children bothers me... If MJ is behind it, what is/was the point?! I didn't see any remarkable statements being made. I can see why LMP would go on Oprah, but not why Katherine or MJ's children would go... especially in light of Oprah's past treatment of Michael. I would think that MJ has other - and possibly better - channels to put out messages, if he wants to. He's got connections! And the timing of those molestation shows of Oprah's angers me...

mjkate

I know I feel that way too. Just to tell the world that he was a good dad again? I felt that Paris did a great job of that at the memorial and the way they conducted themselves at the funeral the grammy awards was enough for me. All they really added was that he cooked breakfast and went for walks and special outings which wouldn't convince me of anything if was a detractor. I am only just thinking this now but what if the family is worried about what may come out at the trial and they wanted to proactively have a few things out there to head off any potential stories that might be derogatory. LMP helped a little bit because she said he was normal and he tried really hard to make the married work and he had qualities about him that were intoxicating.The Katherine spoke of the plastic surgery (maybe it will come out that he had a lot and she wanted to take the edge off that and explain why he may have skirted the truth) and the skin whitening. You could imagine all of that will get dragged up. She also addressed the drugs and the beatings. The the kids said he was the best dad ever. So possibly those are the 5 things the family wanted the chance to speak about before they all become great big issues again when the trial gets started. Not a bad approach if you look at that way.

truthprevails

mjkate:

It could be, but if this is a hoax does it really come complete with a trial where unsavory things get revealed about Michael?! Would MJ want that? The idea makes me doubt the hoax itself... And if it is a hoax, why is there a man (Murray) involved? [I don't believe Murray to be non-existent or MJ in disguise whenever we see him; there IS a person other than Michael who's involved.] Wouldn't it have been simpler for Michael to use a simple "overdose"? If this is a hoax, then there has to be a point for Murray...

Anyhow, I can see how surgeries can help explain painkillers and insomnia can explain sleeping medication... But propofol is neither - it's an anesthetic, and I can't for the life of me understand WHY, and HOW, one would get addicted to that. There's no other known case of "propofol addiction"!

I think some things are just confusing and we'll have to wait for various developments to play out to understand... The O2 conference seemed confusing as hell at the time, but in retrospect it makes sense. Likewise, I'm hoping that time will provide answers to our current questions and confusion.

suspicious mind

did i hear somewhere that in 2008 debbie had gone in and opened back up a custody case and that is was yet unfinished at the time of the death? if this is a fact is there a possibility that it was done for a purpose ? does that sound too far fetched?

mjkate

Yes you are right there....I have just seen so many tweets and articles about what could potentially come out if there is a trial so I thought maybe they were trying to get a few things straightened out and headed off before that happened.

Good point suspicious mind! I wonder about that. I never really did understand how everything got closed and then re-opened again but then nothing really changed. I wonder what the status is right now. Did Debbie really every give things up for good or could she re-open or keep it open forever??? Does anyone have any thoughts? If she is going to play some kind of role in their life and they now know she is their mother I wonder how that will play out. Again, you know I am going to have to play the hoax card. The only way this works for me (but it's just me) is if it is a hoax. I just can't imagine that once Debbie is in their lives and they become attached and a bond forms and they are mother and daughter and sons etc. that they wouldn't want to be together a lot and maybe even end up all formally together. Since that isn't happening that we know of then I fall back on the hoax. I just can't see anything else working otherwise. If the kids grew to love Debbie even if they are happy with the Jackson's wouldn't that be nice for them? And even though Debbie acts all tough, I think there could be a real soft spot in there too. Anyway since none of that seems to be happening at least publicly then I guess I will have to believe that there is no need to make a change where Debbie is concerned because the kids are still with their dad.

Datroot

mjkate:

It could be, but if this is a hoax does it really come complete with a trial where unsavory things get revealed about Michael?! Would MJ want that? The idea makes me doubt the hoax itself... And if it is a hoax, why is there a man (Murray) involved? [I don't believe Murray to be non-existent or MJ in disguise whenever we see him; there IS a person other than Michael who's involved.] Wouldn't it have been simpler for Michael to use a simple "overdose"? If this is a hoax, then there has to be a point for Murray...

Anyhow, I can see how surgeries can help explain painkillers and insomnia can explain sleeping medication... But propofol is neither - it's an anesthetic, and I can't for the life of me understand WHY, and HOW, one would get addicted to that. There's no other known case of "propofol addiction"!

I think some things are just confusing and we'll have to wait for various developments to play out to understand... The O2 conference seemed confusing as hell at the time, but in retrospect it makes sense. Likewise, I'm hoping that time will provide answers to our current questions and confusion.

I have been thinking for a while that Murray is an agent who helped MJ escape and is probably still looking after him in some way.

truthprevails

Datroot:

To the world out there, Murray is a doctor charged with involuntary manslaughter of the King of Pop. (And there's talk of him possibly losing his license.) If CM helped MJ, why would Michael want him to look guilty to so many people?! I know we tend to fall down the rabbit hole, but we should keep in mind how things look to the regular guy on the street, who's not obsessed with everything MJ-related and doesn't follow and dissect every little thing.

Datroot

Datroot:

To the world out there, Murray is a doctor charged with involuntary manslaughter of the King of Pop. (And there's talk of him possibly losing his license.) If CM helped MJ, why would Michael want him to look guilty to so many people?! I know we tend to fall down the rabbit hole, but we should keep in mind how things look to the regular guy on the street, who's not obsessed with everything MJ-related and doesn't follow and dissect every little thing.

That's just my opinion and I stick to it. Of course the ordinary person on the street thinks he's a doctor - doesn't mean he is though does it?

truthprevails

Our beliefs/opinions are just that. We don't possess the truth about a lot of things. And I don't think it's irrelevant how things look to "the world", especially if the hoax is about teaching people a lesson. Now I can see how CM may have helped Michael, but I still don't know (and am trying to understand) why Murray has to go through the charges-trial thing... I believe the current facts don't allow us to draw conclusions with respect to that, so I'm just hoping that there's a point to it, and that it will come out.

Datroot

Our beliefs/opinions are just that. We don't possess the truth about a lot of things. And I don't think it's irrelevant how things look to "the world", especially if the hoax is about teaching people a lesson. Now I can see how CM may have helped Michael, but I still don't know (and am trying to understand) why Murray has to go through the charges-trial thing... I believe the current facts don't allow us to draw conclusions with respect to that, so I'm just hoping that there's a point to it, and that it will come out.

It surely will in the end - Murray has his place in the scheme of things.

MJonmind

I actually think the only thing that really makes sense is that Michael is lovingly behind the scenes encouraging them in their career training publicly, bit by bit, still enjoying home life pleasures with them (in some disguise). I still think he was the blond lady and Mr. Magoo, sitting in the audience, as any parent would, giving them that thumbs up and smile that says, "I knew you could do it, way to go!" If MJ truly had died that day, it would have been very cruel on the part of organizers to put them up on stage speaking during the memorial, MVA, and now this Oprah interview. It just simply wouldn't have happened IMO. So I agree with the you, MJkate.

2MuchMJLuv

....And quite honestly if he were to disappear (as in suicide), the ordinary person wouldn't question that either. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->

Murray is obviously a very important part of this HOAX, and eventually he won't be needed anymore.

Datroot:

To the world out there, Murray is a doctor charged with involuntary manslaughter of the King of Pop. (And there's talk of him possibly losing his license.) If CM helped MJ, why would Michael want him to look guilty to so many people?! I know we tend to fall down the rabbit hole, but we should keep in mind how things look to the regular guy on the street, who's not obsessed with everything MJ-related and doesn't follow and dissect every little thing.

That's just my opinion and I stick to it. Of course the ordinary person on the street thinks he's a doctor - doesn't mean he is though does it?

mjkate

Thank you for your comments MJonmind...I wish had said it like you did! That perfectly sums up how I feel! <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->