[quote author=curls link=topic=24082.msg446860#msg446860 d<br /><br />Joseph instead of Joe etc etc<br />A simple understandable mistake, people are usually given the long version of a name.<br /><br /><br /><br />[/b]<br />[/quote]<br /><br />@curls Can you plz explain what you mean?You're right: "People are useally given the long version of a name" But Both La toya and Jermaine has confirmed that MJ middle name is Joe. What makes me suspicious if Mj's middle name really is Joe is: that this information was given to us after june 25 2009.<br />
@Billie J, I mean that for people filling out forms it'd be an easy mistake to make, to write Joseph instead of Joe, because people do usually have the longer version of a name as their legal name. I know that from a hoax point of view, if Joe is MJ's middle name, the use of Joseph voids all these 'official' documents, but from the devil's advocate stance I was coming from, I was explaining it could be a simple mistake, nothing more.
<br />Oh i love this post. Finally one saying Sony may be part of it.<br />
<br /><br />Whatyourheartsays, others have written about this possibility before on this forum, one of them MJonmind. But it was mostly ignored or rejected. There is a blog with a lot of information about (the possibility) of Sony's role in this. If you are interested, let me know!<br /><br />
but don't you guys think anything could've been manipulated after june 25 by sony if they really wanted to, given that they have all the wherewithal needed for such manipulation?
I'm thinking, it can be to reveal some 'fake' MJ, someone who looks exactly like him, but is not in reality, and then make some bucks. Make that 'fake' MJ anti-christ or that kind of figure. <br /><br />I mean to pull of something like this needs huge influence on people from various areas/fields. If MJ is behind this hoax, then I think he is teamed up with Sony.<br /><br />But if it's not MJ's hoax, then it's the above scenario I'm thinking of.<br /><br />I don't have proofs to back it up of-course. Just letting my imagination run wild.
<br />There has to be a motive for anyone to do anything. I haven't seen anyone come up with a convincing motive for Sony to be behind the hoax.<br />
<br /><br />An excellent point.<br /><br />Not to mention, does anyone one when Sony bought the rights to TII? Prior to that this was an AEG gig.<br />
<br /> <br />Sony submitted the highest bid for the rehearsal footage somewhere around the week of July 20, 2009, according to a Los Angeles Times article.
<br />There has to be a motive for anyone to do anything. I haven't seen anyone come up with a convincing motive for Sony to be behind the hoax.<br />
<br /><br />Just what is the motive for all evil in the world? Money.<br />Whether Sony is behind it or not, they have made MUCH more money on a 'dead' Michael, than they would EVER have made on 'alive' Michael.
It's something I don't want to think about to much, but I'm sure you all remember Latoya saying that CM is just the fall guy and that there are other players in the background? She said she knew who they are.<br />Who did she talk about? Why isn't she telling who they are?<br />Do you ever ask yourself why the family is working with the people who damaged their son, like Sony, AEG, Oprah?<br />Because those are the hands that feed them. I absolutely don't mean this in a disrespectful way, I really believe, IF there is no hoax, that the family feels forced, maybe threatened to cooperate because otherwise there will be consequenses, moneywise. They are still surrounded by people Michael didn't trust. The estate-executors made a LOT of money for Michael's heirs (and for themselves) but the other companies made a LOT of money on Michael too.<br />So now one man CM is taking the blame, the family is struggling for justice (hoaxwise or not) and the backgroundplayers are the laughing third.
<br />There has to be a motive for anyone to do anything. I haven't seen anyone come up with a convincing motive for Sony to be behind the hoax.<br />
<br /><br />Just what is the motive for all evil in the world? Money.<br />Whether Sony is behind it or not, they have made MUCH more money on a 'dead' Michael, than they would EVER have made on 'alive' Michael.<br />
<br /><br />Yes - 'dead' Michael, not dead Michael hoax, has made them money. There is no financial gain for them to be behind a hoaxed death.
<br />There has to be a motive for anyone to do anything. I haven't seen anyone come up with a convincing motive for Sony to be behind the hoax.<br />
<br /><br />Just what is the motive for all evil in the world? Money.<br />Whether Sony is behind it or not, they have made MUCH more money on a 'dead' Michael, than they would EVER have made on 'alive' Michael.<br />
<br /><br />Yes - 'dead' Michael, not dead Michael hoax, has made them money. There is no financial gain for them to be behind a hoaxed death.<br />
<br /> <br /><br />I feel that a vindication process becomes an essential element, if a comeback should happen. <br /><br />So in the near future, if there will be vindication then I don't find any reasons why Michael Jackson would not be behind this hoax. <br /><br />Sony is already making a hell lot of money through MJ merchandise, which each and every fan buys. But if they need more money, that too through a death hoax,, they will have to create a positive impact on the brand Michael Jackson in the eyes of potential customers. For that to become possible, this vindication process is one step, if not the only.<br /><br />So if Sony has to benefit from death hoax, which includes a comeback, they will have to establish the necessary foundations. If Sony is not behind death hoax, then they won't try to vindicate him. They'd keep releasing these new materials and the fans would buy them.
<br />There has to be a motive for anyone to do anything. I haven't seen anyone come up with a convincing motive for Sony to be behind the hoax.<br />
<br /><br />Just what is the motive for all evil in the world? Money.<br />Whether Sony is behind it or not, they have made MUCH more money on a 'dead' Michael, than they would EVER have made on 'alive' Michael.<br />
<br /><br />Yes - 'dead' Michael, not dead Michael hoax, has made them money. There is no financial gain for them to be behind a hoaxed death.<br />
<br /><br />Curls, unless they have something else in store for us........you're right, dead is dead, eventually it fades out, but this keeps on lingering..... this hoax, which keeps us on the edge of our seates for four years now, preparing us for.....something....someone (Michael, Fake Michael)....which will generate another outburst of gaining money.<br />They can't come up with a 'dead' guy after four years of silence.....they have to excite the public, giving clues, keep them guessing....hoping...<br />I'm just trying to look into all possibilities, ofcourse hoping I'm wrong on this...
<br />I feel that a vindication process becomes an essential element, if a comeback should happen. <br /><br />So in the near future, if there will be vindication then I don't find any reasons why Michael Jackson would not be behind this hoax. <br /><br />Sony is already making a hell lot of money through MJ merchandise, which each and every fan buys. But if they need more money, that too through a death hoax,, they will have to create a positive impact on the brand Michael Jackson in the eyes of potential customers. For that to become possible, this vindication process is one step, if not the only.<br /><br />So if Sony has to benefit from death hoax, which includes a comeback, they will have to establish the necessary foundations. If Sony is not behind death hoax, then they won't try to vindicate him. They'd keep releasing these new materials and the fans would buy them.<br />
<br /><br />Thriller, I don't see a reason for Sony to vindicate Michael and I don't think they are intending to. If we look back at his depart from Sony:<br /><br />
Jackson was waiting for licenses to the masters of his albums to revert to him, thus allowing him to promote his old material and preventing Sony from getting a cut of the profit. Jackson expected this to occur early in the new millennium, however, due to the fine print and various clauses in the contract, the revert date is still many years away. Jackson began an investigation, and it emerged that the attorney who represented the singer in the deal was also representing Sony, creating a conflict of interest. Jackson was also concerned about another conflict of interest. For a number of years, Sony had been negotiating to buy Jackson's music catalog. If Jackson's career or financial situation were to deteriorate, it would be in Jackson's financial interest to sell his catalog. Thus, Sony had something to gain from Jackson's career failing. Jackson was able to use these conflicts as leverage to exit his contract early.<br /><br />Just before the release of Invincible, Jackson informed the head of Sony Music Entertainment, Tommy Mottola he was leaving the record label. As a result, all singles releases, video shootings and promotions concerning the Invincible album were cancelled. Jackson made allegations in July 2002 that Mottola was a "devil" and a "racist" who did not support his African-American artists, using them merely for his own personal gain. He charged that Mottola had called his colleague Irv Gotti a "fat black nigger". Sony disputed claims that they had failed to promote Invincible with sufficient energy, maintaining that Jackson refused to tour in the United States.The singer accused Sony and the record industry of racism, deliberately not promoting or actively working against promotion of his album.
<br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invincible_(Michael_Jackson_album)<br /><br />They haven't created a positive impact on the brand Michael Jackson yet, John Branca has betrayed him, and look how much money they already made. For Michael's real fans and supporters, it doesn't matter, they still buy his music and go to the shows, they don't believe in those lies about him anyway. And about the shows, aren't many people attending those, hoping Michael (the real one) will secretly participate in it? So the hoax IS moneymaking.<br /><br />And if Michael (real or fake) comes back finally, people are in awe and elated and believe the second coming has materialized (which would be nice if that is the case) and I don't think anyone is thinking about vindication anymore.<br />Moreover, if Sony was to gain from Michael's failing career, one could wonder who was behind the accusations against Michael in the first place.<br />
@Do that is exactly what I'm trying to convey.<br /><br />Fans would love MJ no matter what, they believe in him and not media bull$hit. And they will also buy any MJ memorabilia.<br /><br />But because I believe this death hoax would be incomplete without a comeback, and as I believe vindication is a prerequisite, Sony can not benefit from this death hoax as they aren't even trying for such vindication. It is a huge corporation, they would not waste their efforts in vindicating a celebrity, they care about their profits.<br /><br />So I believe this is not Sony's death hoax.<br />was i successful in making myself clear? :fresse:
<br />But if they need more money, that too through a death hoax,, they will have to create a positive impact on the brand Michael Jackson in the eyes of potential customers. For that to become possible, this vindication process is one step, if not the only.<br /><br />So if Sony has to benefit from death hoax, which includes a comeback, they will have to establish the necessary foundations.
<br /><br />
Sony can not benefit from this death hoax as they aren't even trying for such vindication.
<br /><br />Hey Thriller, no you were not succesful :smiley-vault-misc-150: I'm sorry if I misunderstand you!<br /><br />What I understood from your post was that you were saying that Sony CAN NOT make money from the hoax UNLESS they try to vindicate Michael. And I was trying to say that they WILL make money, vindication or no vindication. <br /><br />So why can this NOT be Sony's hoax?
<br />I understand that i'm most likely unwelcome here now :smiley-vault-misc-150:<br /><br />But I wanted to interject some thoughts. <br /><br />I believe the main thing Non-believers really find it hard to believe it's a hoax is because of all the legal things. <br /><br />1. The Coroner signing off on the death certificate<br />2. The amount of police that were there for crowd control the day of the memorial<br />3. The Autopsy report, signed to say it was true/declaration.<br />4. The documentation that's filed with the supreme court and the case number being on their website.<br />5. Conrad Murrays Licenses being found on the medical board websites<br />6. The swat team searching Murrays medical offices<br />7. Elissa Fleaks reports <br />8. The real Judge, Baliffs and court room<br />9. The legally filed appeals of Conrad Murray<br />10. The Katherine Jackson Vs Aeg legally filed documents. <br /><br />The list goes on. <br /><br />Who has the connections to gain this kind of cooperation? Either there is federal involvement or someone owes someone a favor, someone who knows people in those higher places that that organize it.<br /><br />Has background profiles been done on the 'players' that Michael Jackson was around/involved with before and on juen 2009? Their histories, who they know, where they worked? It might yeild some answers to the hows on the legal aspect of it. <br /><br />the strangeness of everything else leads to his alive, but the hurdle is How did they manage to pull up all the legal stop signs that ordinarily could not be done? <br /><br />Thanks for taking the time in reading.<br />
<br /><br /> :th_bravo: Deactivated, you successfully activated legit points that have been consistently ignored.<br /><br /> not listening to me does not change the fact that California is highly litigated state. MJ well aware of this therefore would not do things that would have led to lifetime inevitable lawsuits against him and kids turning their life into bankrupt and miserable condition. So does Sony. Hoaxing star's death to gain money.... Wow...........Then lose all and more gained. No way. Well, and of course fake court/ judge is not an option not for me nor in reality.
<br />I understand that i'm most likely unwelcome here now :smiley-vault-misc-150:<br /><br />But I wanted to interject some thoughts. <br /><br />I believe the main thing Non-believers really find it hard to believe it's a hoax is because of all the legal things. <br /><br />1. The Coroner signing off on the death certificate Did he? It's redacted. So really, this is more accuratly described as "allegedly signed".<br />2. The amount of police that were there for crowd control the day of the memorial Paid for by the estate, including boxed lunches http://articles.latimes.com/2009/sep/03/local/me-jackson-burial3<br />3. The Autopsy report, signed to say it was true/declaration. Even though it sounds like a lame excuse, stuff like this gets faked all the time; faked documents, forged signatures, etc. That's the purpose of notarization for documents filed with the state. Funnily enough, the state seal on both the AR and the DC are not consistent with the "real" seal. In addition, on the DC, it clearly states, "this is a true certified copy of the record filed in the County of Los Angeles" which, in direct translation says: "this is not a true certified copy of the record filed in the County of Los Angeles". Take a look for yourself if you don't believe me: http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Celebs/jackson, michael_report.pdf<br />4. The documentation that's filed with the supreme court and the case number being on their website. Admittedly above my pay grade, however, I will say, it's just an entry on a website. That doesn't make it any more or less reality. Or legally binding.<br />5. Conrad Murrays Licenses being found on the medical board websites Murray being a real doctor doesn't mean MJ is dead nor does it mean he is alive. It means nothing except he may well be real a doctor.<br />6. The swat team searching Murrays medical offices I'm glad this was brought up. The search warrant listed the wrong address for Murray's office. Which in the real world would make the product of any search invalid as evidence in court and might even result in the entire case being thrown out. In this world, however, no one has seemed to notice this except a few of us very early hoaxers. I tripled, quadruple, and quintuple checked and no matter how many times I tried to verify it, the address on the search warrant is straight up incorrect. Not to mention, did the SWAT team search Murray's office? I genuinely don't recall if there were any pics of this alleged incident. I do know there was a (n inaccurate) search warrant for it. I also know they searched Applied Pharmacy and if that wasn't a fake pharmacy I don't know what is http://www.odt.co.nz/files/story/2009/08/las_vegas_metro_police_officers_and_the_dea_stand__1347021474.jpg<br />7. Elissa Fleaks reports Do you mean the gal that moved all the things at the crime scene while taking pics? She's very fishy. She performed some seriously unprofessional conduct on a very high profile case that no one seemed to notice, again, except for us hoaxers.<br />8. The real Judge, Baliffs and court room Not to be cheeky but real people sometimes act too. Gary Stevens is a real jockey who starred in the movie "Seabiscuit" as a jockey. That didn't make him any less real of a jockey, nor did it mean the movie, or the role he was playing, were real.<br />9. The legally filed appeals of Conrad MurrayAdmittedly above my pay grade again, but again, it's just a listing on a website.<br />10. The Katherine Jackson Vs Aeg legally filed documents. Same as above. In lieu of understanding the 'how' for these parts where I have no knowledge or experience, I concede that there are smarter, more experienced people then I working on this hoax, because I'm confident MJ didn't break the law. I'm also confident, because it only makes sense and MJ isn't an idiot, that he had the best lawyers he could find vet this hoax before he launched it. How could he not?<br /><br />The list goes on. <br /><br />Who has the connections to gain this kind of cooperation? Either there is federal involvement or someone owes someone a favor, someone who knows people in those higher places that that organize it.<br /><br />Has background profiles been done on the 'players' that Michael Jackson was around/involved with before and on juen 2009? Their histories, who they know, where they worked? It might yeild some answers to the hows on the legal aspect of it. <br /><br />the strangeness of everything else leads to his alive, but the hurdle is How did they manage to pull up all the legal stop signs that ordinarily could not be done? <br /><br />Thanks for taking the time in reading.<br />
<br /><br /> :th_bravo: Deactivated, you successfully activated legit points that have been consistently ignored.<br /><br /> not listening to me, did not change the fact that California is highly litigated state. MJ well aware of this would not do things that will lead to life time lawsuits against him and kids turning his life up to total bankrupt and miserable condition. Well, and of course fake court/ judge is not an option not for me nor in reality.<br />
<br /><br />They're not ignored, they're just easily debunked and I was hoping someone else would do it since I'm supposed to be playing Devil's advocate here. <br /><br />Regarding lawsuits, as if we didn't know it before, these past 4 years have proved there will always be someone suing MJ for something. If he lived his life trying to avoid litigation, he'd never leave the house, and that's a fact.
<br />I understand that i'm most likely unwelcome here now :smiley-vault-misc-150:<br /><br />But I wanted to interject some thoughts. <br /><br />I believe the main thing Non-believers really find it hard to believe it's a hoax is because of all the legal things. <br /><br />1. The Coroner signing off on the death certificate Did he? It's redacted. So really, this is more accuratly described as "allegedly signed".<br />2. The amount of police that were there for crowd control the day of the memorial Paid for by the estate, including boxed lunches http://articles.latimes.com/2009/sep/03/local/me-jackson-burial3<br />3. The Autopsy report, signed to say it was true/declaration. Even though it sounds like a lame excuse, stuff like this gets faked all the time; faked documents, forged signatures, etc. That's the purpose of notarization for documents filed with the state. Funnily enough, the state seal on both the AR and the DC are not consistent with the "real" seal. In addition, on the DC, it clearly states, "this is a true certified copy of the record filed in the County of Los Angeles" which, in direct translation says: "this is not a true certified copy of the record filed in the County of Los Angeles". Take a look for yourself if you don't believe me: http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Celebs/jackson, michael_report.pdf<br />4. The documentation that's filed with the supreme court and the case number being on their website. Admittedly above my pay grade, however, I will say, it's just an entry on a website. That doesn't make it any more or less reality. Or legally binding.<br />5. Conrad Murrays Licenses being found on the medical board websites Murray being a real doctor doesn't mean MJ is dead nor does it mean he is alive. It means nothing except he may well be real a doctor.<br />6. The swat team searching Murrays medical offices I'm glad this was brought up. The search warrant listed the wrong address for Murray's office. Which in the real world would make the product of any search invalid as evidence in court and might even result in the entire case being thrown out. In this world, however, no one has seemed to notice this except a few of us very early hoaxers. I tripled, quadruple, and quintuple checked and no matter how many times I tried to verify it, the address on the search warrant is straight up incorrect. Not to mention, did the SWAT team search Murray's office? I genuinely don't recall if there were any pics of this alleged incident. I do know there was a (n inaccurate) search warrant for it. I also know they searched Applied Pharmacy and if that wasn't a fake pharmacy I don't know what is http://www.odt.co.nz/files/story/2009/08/las_vegas_metro_police_officers_and_the_dea_stand__1347021474.jpg<br />7. Elissa Fleaks reports Do you mean the gal that moved all the things at the crime scene while taking pics? She's very fishy. She performed some seriously unprofessional conduct on a very high profile case that no one seemed to notice, again, except for us hoaxers.<br />8. The real Judge, Baliffs and court room Not to be cheeky but real people sometimes act too. Gary Stevens is a real jockey who starred in the movie "Seabiscuit" as a jockey. That didn't make him any less real of a jockey, nor did it mean the movie, or the role he was playing, were real.<br />9. The legally filed appeals of Conrad MurrayAdmittedly above my pay grade again, but again, it's just a listing on a website.<br />10. The Katherine Jackson Vs Aeg legally filed documents. Same as above. In lieu of understanding the 'how' for these parts where I have no knowledge or experience, I concede that there are smarter, more experienced people then I working on this hoax, because I'm confident MJ didn't break the law. I'm also confident, because it only makes sense and MJ isn't an idiot, that he had the best lawyers he could find vet this hoax before he launched it. How could he not?<br /><br />The list goes on. <br /><br />Who has the connections to gain this kind of cooperation? Either there is federal involvement or someone owes someone a favor, someone who knows people in those higher places that that organize it.<br /><br />Has background profiles been done on the 'players' that Michael Jackson was around/involved with before and on juen 2009? Their histories, who they know, where they worked? It might yeild some answers to the hows on the legal aspect of it. <br /><br />the strangeness of everything else leads to his alive, but the hurdle is How did they manage to pull up all the legal stop signs that ordinarily could not be done? <br /><br />Thanks for taking the time in reading.<br />
<br /><br /> :th_bravo: Deactivated, you successfully activated legit points that have been consistently ignored.<br /><br /> not listening to me, did not change the fact that California is highly litigated state. MJ well aware of this would not do things that will lead to life time lawsuits against him and kids turning his life up to total bankrupt and miserable condition. Well, and of course fake court/ judge is not an option not for me nor in reality.<br />
<br /><br />They're not ignored, they're just easily debunked and I was hoping someone else would do it since I'm supposed to be playing Devil's advocate here. <br /><br />Regarding lawsuits, as if we didn't know it before, these past 4 years have proved there will always be someone suing MJ for something. If he lived his life trying to avoid litigation, he'd never leave the house, and that's a fact.<br />
<br /><br />Thanks, bec. :michael-jackson: I was one of those sitting back waiting for the debunk. :icon_redface: :icon_e_wink:
The AEG/KJ trial has pushed MJ's supposed drug use even deeper down non believers throats. Add the new molestation allegations and what do you have?<br />You have the same choice as you did in 1998 and 2005. It is as though MJ has put this all out in the forefront so that we can once and for all decide what we TRULY believe. I have been a fan of MJ since I was very young and admit that when the allegations hit in 2005 I had my doubts about who MJ really is. Discovering the hoax and it's message put any doubts about him to rest for me. Sony has nothing to prove. MJ does and has to those who have paid attention. Listen to Will You Be There and it becomes quite obvious whose hoax this is.
<br /><br />Now, you could also apply that logic to MJ himself - if he needed to make money he only had 'to die' - he didn't need a crazy hoax.<br /><br />That's why I didn't ever think he would return. He needed to die to save his own life (if shady peeps were after him) and keep the public interested in him for the future. He did need a hoax to be able to carry on his work.
Comments