abso-michael-lutely :icon_e_wink: :icon_e_wink: :icon_e_wink:<br /><br />I'm ok with being wrong abt Live MJ or Dummy theory in future if it turns out that way. But for now sticking to it. Solidly.<br /><br />But yes love, agree to disagree :smiley_abuv:<br /><br />
I fully respect everyone's opinions and thoughts here who do not agree that people with a terminal illness should end their own lives with dignity. It is an extremely confronting issue for many, either ethically, morally, spiritually or religiously...or all of these.<br /><br />However, I do not have a problem with it and if I were in that same situation with a terminal illness and we had the same law here in Australia I would choose it - especially after watching my mother die an agonising death from cancer when she was only 65. We don't know what Michael's beliefs are in regards to this and he is possibly a very liberal thinker...more so than alot of people might believe. People can still be very spiritual and religious and still be very liberal in their beliefs/ideas and thinking...I have a very good friend just like this. <br /><br />IDK...but I think we are too far down the track that TS is deliberately throwing us red herrings......maybe a year/2years or more ago perhaps...but I have the feeling now that we are at the pointy end and we are beyond the red herring stage...anyway that is just my gut feeling/opinion.<br /><br />Anyway - all you guys here are awesome and I love you all dearly...even though I have never met any of you! :icon_mrgreen:
<br /><br />[size=12pt]IDK...but I think we are too far down the track that TS is deliberately throwing us red herrings......maybe a year/2years or more ago perhaps...but I have the feeling now that we are at the pointy end and we are beyond the red herring stage...anyway that is just my gut feeling/opinion.[/size]
<br />Telepathic thinking!<br />I was just writing a private message with the same thought! :icon_e_wink:<br />I highly doubt TS has any time now of just 'playing" with us!<br />This is the end of the hoax!<br />And he didn't seem he was joking!! oh no!<br /><br />And I agree with everything you said in your post Adi!
Adi I am sorry to hear you had to watch your mother go through this. I really am. It is for reasons such as yours that I actually completely understand euthenasia / assisted suicide as a choice.<br /><br /><br /><br />Yes at pointy end. Trust me, I GET that. However just less than 24 hrs ago TS still is making posts such as "he may play devils advocate" and a day or two before that also said that even post BAM ppl still not know all of the hows. I guess my point is that although he may have seemed serious, and serving the silver platter of answers, he has left himself a loophole to lead us astray with theories. <br /><br /><br />Re: Ethical debate on DWD that's a no win argument that is bound to go no where. I didn't directly mean to raise an ethics debate. But I guess I indirectly did when I asked out of curiosity if MJ is ok with it. I remind, that I *wasn't* judging nor even *revealing* my own opinion on the subject. <br /><br />I'd actually like to move right away from such a debate, because it won't be conducive to the thread and will go in circles nor was it my intention. So please forget I asked the off the cuff ill thought out Q.<br /><br />Meanwhile, any comment on this:<br /><br />
<br /><br />In addition, re: FBI and Entrapment. If FBI involvement is present, is there any need to protect against and avoid entrapment via MJDHI? :suspect:<br /><br />If there is FBI involvement and 'project hoax' (if it constitutes a sting) is discussed here on the forum, doesn't that compromise the security of the sting / project. :suspect:<br /><br />
@Aussie ; :bearhug:<br /><br />as for the entrapment issue - I guess us hoaxers (including all the forums) figuring out the hoax, when everyone else in the entire world had the same info as us, guards against entrapment for "team hoax". As to your question re: the sting - maybe it happened way earlier than when we started to think there was a sting........perhaps it even started before Michael "died"... maybe years before.....perhaps by the time the Dr M trial had started, the ground work had been laid for whatever was to happen. All we have been able to ascertain is that there is most likely a serious sting component in place (and not everyone here agrees - which is probably a good thing in terms of entrapment), but what that sting is against we don't know......maybe that is where the red herrings in the past came into play...so we could not compromise a sting. On top of this, we are thought of as loonies believing that MJ is alive so also that might have served as a kind of diversion too.<br /><br />Other than that I have no friggin' idea :icon_lol: :icon_lol: :icon_lol:
If all of this is merely the result of MJ trying to create an illusion, that it was a DWD patient—when in reality it was a dummy or live MJ—what would be the purpose? Can someone with an active imagination come up with a far-fetched explanation, for this slight possibility? No doubt. However, can anyone come up with solid evidence to support this idea—which is based neither upon imagination, nor upon far-fetched explanations? Not likely.
<br />Oooh I've got far-fetched explanations.
<br />Well, why don’t we go there? Go ahead Andrea! :icon_lol:<br /><br /><br />
<br /><br /><br />Ok, since you asked. :icon_geek: :icon_lol: <br /><br />I have two “far-fetched” explanations that could either be separate or together. They'll probably blend together as I write this. The only “problem” is I don’t have “solid evidence” or “proof” and there are a lot of “what ifs”. Although, the way I see it, there are a lot of “what ifs” with the DWD patient that don’t exactly have “proof” either. Just to be clear, the use of a DWD patient for the hoax is something that I can and will accept if MJ were to explain WHY it was necessary and I do feel for anyone who has to make that heart breaking decision to end their life while they still have the strength to do it. There’s no doubt that TS has given us a lot of truths over the years but he did say that he would sometimes support a false theory and whether that’s the case with the DWD patient theory is yet to be fully determined, imo.<br /><br /><br />There does seem to be evidence supporting the FBI’s involvement, the numerology with the 333 pages released, intended for 12/21/09 and their use of Michael Joseph Jackson ONLY when referring to MJ being dead and confirmed evidence they heavily investigated Michael over the years. I think over the years that Michael’s life has been threatened, it’s almost to be expected of someone so famous…and look at all the famous figures before him who were assassinated. Not to mention that obviously someone(s) was out to destroy him, both in 1993 and 2005.<br /><br /><br />TS had said a while ago that if someone “in” on the hoax spilled the beans and MJ’s plans for that day were revealed, it would be unwise for MJ to go to UCLA because “they” could get (kill) him then, and no one would be the wiser since it was being reported that MJ died. But if someone “in” spilled the beans, wouldn’t that also reveal any potential getaway plans – like flying out the night before or morning of?? “They” (TPTB, or whoever) would have the resources to intercept MJ before he got to the airport or once in air, or at his destination. In that case, why would the “enemy” go after MJ at UCLA when they know he’s not going to be there? So TS’ logic there could go either way. Perhaps MJ’s ORIGINAL official plans to fly away was a decoy plan, to throw “them” off. <br /><br /><br />A point TS made when rebutalling bec's list against the DWD theory about the locked doors at UCLA. TS: "Sure, you can lock doors; but some of the staff have top security clearances, and keys to all the doors. There would probably be at least three shifts of people in this category—and what if one of them happened to be at the hospital during their unscheduled hours (perhaps they forgot something from the previous shift, and came by to get it, or whatever). If they learned about MJ arriving, they would probably want to dive in and “help out”. If that person discovered a dummy, or a perfectly healthy live MJ, they could blow the whistle and spoil everything." What about MJ's bodyguards standing outside the locked door to ensure what you said doesn't happen? There were at least 2 SUVs that followed the ambulance to UCLA, presumably the rest of MJ's team which included some bodyguards. Nobody's getting past them, their job description for that day would be very specific - no one gets near MJ.<br /><br /><br />I don’t believe a real dead body was meant to fool the people who handled it based on what I know of that day, the evidence we have on hand. The “coincidences” that TS listed supporting the DWD theory could’ve been done intentionally to confuse us, the death hoax investigators. This hoax has so far lasted well over 3 years and we’ve had updates, levels and Signs from TS, among re-directs and other discussions. So it seems we're following the hoax investigation plan or agenda, meant to last a long time and not be figured out right away and if it was, then we’d need to be thrown off our game, constantly questioning what we think we know (which is good). It creates drama and controversy. :icon_e_wink:<br /><br /><br />I found this interesting. It's a breakdown of good story-telling.<br /><br />http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HomePage<br /><br />
What is this about? This wiki is a catalog of the tricks of the trade for writing fiction.<br />Tropes are devices and conventions that a writer can reasonably rely on as being present in the audience members' minds and expectations.
<br /><br />
Merriam-Webster gives a definition of "trope" as a "figure of speech." In storytelling, a trope is just that — a conceptual figure of speech, a storytelling shorthand for a concept that the audience will recognize and understand instantly.
This is a specific variation of the Heroic Sacrifice where because of a MacGuffin someone has to volunteer to die so that everyone else can live. This is taking one for the team ramped up to the ultimate sacrifice. The reason may involve Life Energy released upon their death.<br /><br />In contrast to Taking the Bullet this is not a spur of the moment decision but one where the person making the sacrifice has time to think through a decision and usually give his Final Speech before making his sacrifice. Typically the speech includes the hero expressing that he knows exactly what he is doing and is willing to pay the price. Sometimes the hero even has to fight his own team for the right to die.<br /><br />One of the most important aspects of this trope, it only works if the person volunteers. If anyone is ordered to be the sacrifice, then either someone's a villain or you're watching a dark comedy. Occasionally, a hero will volunteer and someone more expendable will stop them.<br /><br />May, occasionally, diverge from a Heroic Sacrifice by way of Fridge Logic, in one specific situation: Everyone is doomed unless one character makes the sacrifice. However, only one character is capable of making the sacrifice, and unless he does, everybody (including him) is doomed. Usually, the story plays it as a Heroic Sacrifice anyway. Only later does the audience realize that, wait a minute—he didn't make a Heroic Sacrifice after all; he just decided he wasn't going to take everybody else with him when he inevitably kicked the bucket.<br /><br />Closely related to You Shall Not Pass, but distinct in that there is no fight scene and death is certain. Sometimes it's justified by the person making the sacrifice having a Convenient Terminal Illness.<br /><br />This is Older Than Feudalism, as it is the reason why Christ had to die in Christianity.
<br /><br /><br />Something to think about anyways. I know some of you might :computer-losy-smiley: after this post, sorry! :icon_lol: I will remain open to all possibilities including the DWD one until we know for sure from MJ himself. Hopefully he will tell us. :errrr:
It is sad to think about a corpse but I think we have to look at the big picture. First of all, we don't know the whole story. It probably was done for many good purposes. Think about all the injustice,corruption,dying,suffering,starvation,manipulation, and evil in the world. Think about all the wars and suffering that doesn't have to happen. What if this is going to wake people up in order to solve some of the problems of this world ? <br /><br />
There does seem to be evidence supporting the FBI’s involvement, the numerology with the 333 pages released, intended for 12/21/09 and their use of Michael Joseph Jackson ONLY when referring to MJ being dead and confirmed evidence they heavily investigated Michael over the years. I think over the years that Michael’s life has been threatened, it’s almost to be expected of someone so famous…and look at all the famous figures before him who were assassinated. Not to mention that obviously someone(s) was out to destroy him, both in 1993 and 2005.
<br /><br />Of course there are evidences of a FBI's involvement in Michael's hoax, that's clear from the moment that Michael said it in TII: "We have 4 years to get it right" referring to Obama's term with who without his help this FBI investigation wouldn't never taken place.<br />Remember what Front I mean Michael wrote:<br />WRONGS <
> TO GET RIGHTED<br /><br /><br /><br />Talking about how BAM could look like:<br /><br />Aussie:<br />
To add to that a pre-recorded message from MJ to be aired to the world, in which he explains he is alive and reason for hoax whilst holding a copy of a current dated newspaper as proof to shut up the nay-sayers!
<br /><br />And a copy of a current DNA test on his hands because it's very possible that people will think he is an impersonator.
There does seem to be evidence supporting the FBI’s involvement, the numerology with the 333 pages released, intended for 12/21/09 and their use of Michael Joseph Jackson ONLY when referring to MJ being dead and confirmed evidence they heavily investigated Michael over the years. I think over the years that Michael’s life has been threatened, it’s almost to be expected of someone so famous…and look at all the famous figures before him who were assassinated. Not to mention that obviously someone(s) was out to destroy him, both in 1993 and 2005.
<br /><br />Of course there are evidences of a FBI's involvement in Michael's hoax, that's clear from the moment that Michael said in TII: "We have 4 years to get it right" referring to Obama's term with who without his help this FBI investigation wouldn't never taken place.<br />Remember what Front I mean Michael wrote:<br />WRONGS <
> TO GET RIGHTED<br /><br /><br /><br />Talking about how BAM could look like:<br /><br />Aussie:<br />
To add to that a pre-recorded message from MJ to be aired to the world, in which he explains he is alive and reason for hoax whilst holding a copy of a current dated newspaper as proof to shut up the nay-sayers!
<br /><br />[b]And a copy of a current DNA test on his hands because it's very possible that people will think he is an impersonator. [/b]<br />
<br /><br />And what if we don't recognize him? What if we think he's an impersonator?? Bam is not going to be easy!! At the very beginning of the hoax many people we doubting the legetimity of TS!! Could happen to real Michael too!
<br /><br />I have two “far-fetched” explanations that could either be separate or together. They'll probably blend together as I write this. The only “problem” is I don’t have “solid evidence” or “proof” and there are a lot of “what ifs”. <br />
<br /><br />Doesn't matter. TS_comments didn't have any proof or solid evidence either. His whole post was debunking my "what if"s with his own "what if"s. Even IF he is playing DA, he isn't going to admit it no matter how sound the logic or reasoning, that's clear. Apparently, us guessing the right answer is not the point of the game. There are people here who supported the dead body theory or the DWD theory, why didn't he ask them to lay out their reasons? Chew on that for awhile.<br /><br />Ps. thank you again, everyone, for your well wishes and positive comments, but I don't want to turn this into the poor crippled bec thread. It's all good, it could always be worse! I could be dead. I'm thankful that I still get to be here with everyone.
@UYI...thanks! I also greatly enjoy your posts and our thinking is similar in many cases :icon_razz:<br /><br />As for the 'danger' in TS 'confirming' what happened that day...how is there any danger when many don't even believe that it's what happened? lol It's actually funny to see the progression of things here....human nature at its finest. People have constantly asked TS to 'help' us figure stuff out, which he has repeatedly done. So, he helps by giving us supporting evidence in favor of the corpse theory, while showing some points against other theories....ALL of which everyone was free to then research on their own, without taking his word for it. Reaction: People don't believe him. He then asks for a list to be compiled of the strongest points against the DWD theory, as well as all strong points in favor of Live MJ and/or dummy (which, btw, just based on his request, I'm not sure how people didn't/couldn't see where he was going with it....i.e. I'm surprised people were surprised by his answers lol). Most were very confident in the lists compiled...and showed their support for the points listed. The 'legal' aspects were also a 'problem' for many and I agreed with that as well (i.e. that, to me, was the biggest question and possibly the strongest point potentially against a DWD patient dying in CA). TS then replied by showing concrete proof that it is NOT illegal...as well as answering each and every point on both lists, as well as providing 12 points in favor of the corpse theory. Reaction: People don't believe him lol. Why bother asking the question if you're not going to believe the answer?<br /><br />It doesn't matter one bit what our personal views are about a DWD patient having been used....nor does it matter if we believe this is what happened or not. And that's all that keeps getting posted by those who don't believe TS....page after page of personal opinions and NO solid evidence against anything TS said. As with ANY theory...it's not just a matter of trying to debunk it, any good investigation also includes trying to support it...in order to see if it is makes any sense. Those who are against the corpse theory and/or don't believe TS, IMO have not even attempted to support it and/or see the 'logic' of it (at least I haven't seen any posts showing this)....which is a clear indication of 'emotion' or 'bias' being used. In matters of investigation, 'emotion' and 'bias' are stumbling blocks and should be avoided....TS has always told us that....but maybe he was 'throwing us off' with that too.<br /><br />All I know is that IF, in the end, we find out that no corpse was used....I'll be perfectly fine with any alternative. I just hope that those who are so adamant that NO corpse was used will be 'okay' IF/when we find out one WAS used. An army is only as strong as it's weakest member....and Mike will need all of us to have his back, no matter what happened 'that day'.<br /><br />With L.O.V.E. always.
If all of this is merely the result of MJ trying to create an illusion, that it was a DWD patient—when in reality it was a dummy or live MJ—what would be the purpose? Can someone with an active imagination come up with a far-fetched explanation, for this slight possibility? No doubt. However, can anyone come up with solid evidence to support this idea—which is based neither upon imagination, nor upon far-fetched explanations? Not likely.
<br /><br />As far as I'm aware MJ has never tried to create an illusion of a DWD patient. That would be all TS's doing methinks!<br /><br />And I can't get past this also from TS (my bolding):<br /><br /> "And please pay attention to the difference between the reasons for the FBI choosing to use a DWD patient (which we may not fully understand), and the evidences that a real DWD patient was actually used (which we should all be able to understand)."<br /><br />I know I keep banging on about this, but it doesn't sit easy 'blindly' accepting a theory when I can't ascertain a motive for it. It seems that the old 'have-everybody-in-on-it' cop out clause has been replaced by an 'it-was-FBI-so-we'll-never-understand' excuse, when facing the unexplainable. I'm not trying to be awkward here, I really am stuck. I'll shut up now!<br /><br /><br />
If all of this is merely the result of MJ trying to create an illusion, that it was a DWD patient—when in reality it was a dummy or live MJ—what would be the purpose? Can someone with an active imagination come up with a far-fetched explanation, for this slight possibility? No doubt. However, can anyone come up with solid evidence to support this idea—which is based neither upon imagination, nor upon far-fetched explanations? Not likely.
<br /><br />As far as I'm aware MJ has never tried to create an illusion of a DWD patient. That would be all TS's doing methinks!<br />
<br /><br />Suppose he means the story line Murray told about leaving the room and coming back to find MJ dead/MJ committed suicide by self administering. But yeah, there was also the warm room story that supports the corpse theory and the original "MJ collapsed in front of Prince who thought he was just playing a prank" that supports the LiveMJ theory. But then, only the Murray leaving the room story made it to court so I suppose we are to give that more credence.<br /><br />
on 1354395465:
And I can't get past this also from TS (my bolding):<br /><br /> "And please pay attention to the difference between the reasons for the FBI choosing to use a DWD patient (which we may not fully understand), and the evidences that a real DWD patient was actually used (which we should all be able to understand)."<br /><br />I know I keep banging on about this, but it doesn't sit easy 'blindly' accepting a theory when I can't ascertain a motive for it. [size=14pt]It seems that the old 'have-everybody-in-on-it' cop out clause has been replaced by an 'it-was-FBI-so-we'll-never-understand' excuse, when facing the unexplainable.[/size] I'm not trying to be awkward here, I really am stuck. I'll shut up now!<br /><br />
<br /><br />Don't shut up. I agree. We got scolded repeatedly for using that clause last year.<br /><br />Couple things I posted about before and am curious if anyone else has thoughts on (bolding mine as well):<br /><br />
on 1353700985:
<br /> And in the very unlikely chance that both patients backed out simultaneously, when there was not enough time left to bring in a third DWD patient, a dummy could still be used with no greater risk than what many on this thread already think is a very low risk method.
<br /><br />If a dummy could be used with no greater risk, why not use one? I don't understand. If TS_comments doesn't agree with "many on this thread", then why did he use this 3rd option as support for the DWD patient? So then he does agree with "many on this thread" that using a dummy carries no greater risk then using a DWD patient; if the DWD patients back out they'll just use a dummy, no problem?<br /><br />
on 1353700985:
<br />And these laws provide a very clear explanation for the word “alleged” in the verdict. It would be inaccurate, if not illegal, to state that the DWD patient was a “victim” of manslaughter (which is a type of homicide); but the wording “alleged victim” made it perfectly accurate and legal. On a side note: a dummy would not have any date of death, much less any need for an “alleged date” of death.
<br /><br />A DWD patient doesn't need an alleged date of death either. The person would have died on 6/25/09. Why even include the side note? It suggests that a DWD patient is NOT being described by the verdict.<br /><br />Besides, by TS_comment's evidence, the victimization would not even be alleged by the California court, since he is arguing that the DWD scenario would not be illegal in CA. So I'm confused there too.
<br /><br />I vote NO to Body, NO to DWD / HOSPICE and YES to both or either Dummy / MJ. I also vote YES to Devils Advocate! :icon_razz: :icon_razz: :icon_razz:<br /><br />.....Don't fret TS may have the ol' joker card of devils advocate... The list is NOT BS!<br />
Why does FBI involvement automatically mean MJ was/is in danger and they were there for his protection, as some are saying here?<br />1. There are recordings posted on Youtube with Michael saying he was afraid for his life, in various occasions.<br /><br />2. There are videos on Youtube with members of Michael's family saying countless times that there was a conspiracy against him, that "they were trying to murder him".<br /><br />If you don't believe Michael and his family, then WHO do you believe?<br /><br />3. TS stressed on the Illuminati theory for a reason! That means those people were infiltrated in his entourage from the music industry, trying to get his catalog/fortune/Neverland by all means!!<br /><br />4. Michael was framed for those 2 trials!! If "they" were capable of doing that, do you guys seriously doubt that 'they" would hesitate to murder him ??<br /><br />5. Do you think the FBI just sat on those false allegations and did NOTHING? Do you think they had so many files on Michael just for nothing?? It was said in those files his life was in danger!! It is said on those files that they had found nothing to incriminate Michael!!<br /><br />How on Earth you can doubt that his life was in danger??<br />Do you think the FBI would get involved in Michael's hoax, just to have some fun!?? of course there was a SERIOUS MOTIVE!! Life threatening IS a serious motive!! + Financial fraud!! which most of the music industry sharks did to Michael!<br /><br />6. And then...don't forget about ELVIS !!! Michael wasn't the only one to have received help from the FBI to fake his death to save his life!! Elvis and his family have received numerous death threats too prior to 1977!!
<br /><br /><br />I agree, and why a congresswoman takes the trouble to mention that there was or there is an investigation of the FBI<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
on 1354132948:
<br />yes there are or there was an investigation of the FBI<br /><br />
Hi folks,<br />I remarked on this video several months ago and it just came to me to find it again and re-view it. It is the video of the Congressional Black Caucus Tribute to Michael Jackson and features beautifully eloquent speakers. <br /><br />I would encourage people who haven't seen it to watch both parts.<br /><br /><br />However, what I want to draw particular attention to are the comments of Congresswoman Watson, who, in part I, @ 35:30 says the following( bold are my emphasis):<br /><br />"I want you to know that the Los Angeles community, the state of California, and the nation, we're all concerned about Michael Jackson's death.<br />[size=12pt]And uh, I'm in contact with the family, and the people who handle his career involvement, and I assured them that come out into the open becaanything untoward about Michael will use, the Federal Bureau of Investigation is involved in this lengthly investigation. [/size]So just know, you might be sitting there and saying why is it taking so long, that they are studying every intricate detail of his life, and his death, and what happened afterwards. So just know, that within a short while, justice will out, and justice will be done. Have faith."
Bec, yes I get what you're saying about those slipped-in dummy support comments.<br /><br />TS:<br />
#7 Nobody was allowed upstairs in the Carolwood home. A dummy could be kept in a locked case, until the “emergency” began; aside from a few seconds to take the dummy out of the case, and place it on the bed, there would never be any problem if someone not in the hoax went upstairs. The live MJ theory would also need little if any secrecy upstairs.
<br /><br /><br />Nobody was allowed upstairs, ok, but doesn’t MJ always have an area of his house that is off-limits to his staff? To ensure his own privacy and his children’s. This would not be an uncommon practice in Michael’s home. And the easiness of a dummy was included there nicely, lol.<br /><br /><br />TS:<br />
#8 Reports from MJ fans that there was a lot of extra security at Carolwood on the night of June 24/25, 2009. This would be when the DWD patient was brought into the home (and also explains a reason for the missing CCTV). Like #7 above, a locked up dummy or live MJ would not need all that extra security.
<br /><br /><br />The team was assembling together for the next day’s events. Pumping each other up, going over everything one last time, praying together.<br /><br /><br />TS ended his post on 12 DWD evidences list with “I rest my case.” But then adds one more post afterwards to say “Finally, just like last time, I may play “DA” (devil's advocate)—and try to debunk things that are true, just to keep you on your toes!”<br /><br /><br /><br />@BTC - I totally agree that TS has repeatedly helped us figure some stuff out. There is no doubt that the forum would be vastly different without him and maybe even wouldn't still be here without him. But TS also applies a Socratic method to his teachings and sometimes he's there to debate with us to stimulate our critical thinking and sometimes he leaves it to us to hash out the opposing opinions. So I don't see how questioning TS is undermining him or anyone supporting a different viewpoint, I find that much is learned from debate, for both 'sides'.
Quote from: TS_comments on November 24, 2012, 05:03:05 AM<br />And these laws provide a very clear explanation for the word “alleged” in the verdict. It would be inaccurate, if not illegal, to state that the DWD patient was a “victim” of manslaughter (which is a type of homicide); but the wording “alleged victim” made it perfectly accurate and legal. On a side note: a dummy would not have any date of death, much less any need for an “alleged date” of death.<br /><br />A DWD patient doesn't need an alleged date of death either. The person would have died on 6/25/09. Why even include the side note? It suggests that a DWD patient is NOT being described by the verdict.<br /><br />Besides, by TS_comment's evidence, the victimization would not even be alleged by the California court, since he is arguing that the DWD scenario would not be illegal in CA. So I'm confused there too.
<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Well, I guess it was the trial for the alleged murder of MJ, that alleged died on 25 June 2009, i believe that there are to be placed in this context, the patient DWD was the instrument,the medium which served to achieve an end,... I don't know if explained well. :icon_geek:<br />
<br /><br />... One date I noticed TS is the date you have for the burial in the quote below. I presume this is not a mistake or a typo and you have intentionally given us the date the burial was really filmed and then later beamed to the world on 9-3-09?:<br /><br />
#2. Direction could also be run on the scene by the FBI. In fact, 6-25-09 was the day that FBI had primary say over how things would be run; MJ picked the day, and time, and most of the rest was arranged by the FBI. The memorial (7-7-09) and [size=12pt]burial (8-3-09)[/size] were events that MJ was the primary director (these were also the events with the Liberian Girl pictures). And even on 6-25-09, MJ could give remote directions, if needed, via encrypted e-mail {www.hushmail.com}.
<br />@BTC .... So I don't see how questioning TS is undermining him or anyone supporting a different viewpoint, I find that much is learned from debate, for both 'sides'. <br />
<br /><br />I never said that questioning TS is undermining him....he, himself, has always told us to do so. We should question everything...my point was that we should not only question if info is false, but also if it's true. Sure, there's always the possibility that he's 'misleading' us...but if that's the only reason to doubt the theory, then the doubt is NOT based on the info but instead on the one providing it. It's the info that should be questioned, IMO, not the messenger....and not with personal opinions but rather with evidence that contradicts the info provided.<br /><br />Perhaps I just see things differently because to me this was never about a 'debate' or about being on one 'side' or another....I saw it as working together, as a team, to try to figure out as best we could, all we could. <br /><br />With L.O.V.E. always.
Comments
> TO GET RIGHTED<br /><br /><br /><br />Talking about how BAM could look like:<br /><br />Aussie:<br /> <br /><br />And a copy of a current DNA test on his hands because it's very possible that people will think he is an impersonator.