2 MJ's

135

Comments

  • on 1380361081:
    <br />....Almost five more years elapsed before I gave birth to Janet, on August 16, 1966. ......<br /><br /><br />I've been trying to find out when Garnett Elementary school was constructed - but no luck so far, and I really must do some work now!<br />
    <br /><br /><br />Janet was born in May I thought?  :icon_e_confused:
  • flory24flory24 Posts: 129
    on 1380375321:
    <br />
    on 1380361081:
    <br />....Almost five more years elapsed before I gave birth to Janet, on August 16, 1966. ......<br /><br /><br />I've been trying to find out when Garnett Elementary school was constructed - but no luck so far, and I really must do some work now!<br />
    <br /><br /><br />Janet was born in May I thought?  :icon_e_confused:<br />
    <br /><br /><br />Janet Damita Jo Jackson (born May 16, 1966) is an American pop recording artist and actress. Known for a series of sonically innovative, socially conscious and sexually provocative records, as well as elaborate stage shows, television appearances, and film roles, she has been a prominent figure in popular culture since the early 1970s  <br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Jackson
  • RKRK Posts: 3,019
    524ff7f3-6856-4097-b404-f2fc5241c833_zpsac7fb8d4.jpg
  • I don't know what you all are pretending to say, all those photos belong to the same man---> MJ, the ears, mouth, eyes, etc... seem to be different depending on perspective, I have pics where I look totally different depending on the light, position, etc.. and however I am the same person.
  • Not pretending anything. Ears and bum chins can't shapeshift lol!  :icon_mrgreen: :icon_mrgreen: :icon_mrgreen:<br /><br />Has nothing to do with angles, lighting or position and has everything to do with two different persons ears.<br /><br />Not saying its a truth. Just my belief, or my premise which I choose for me is true.<br /><br />
  • becbec Posts: 6,387
    It has everything to do with lighting and camera angles. <br /><br />Not that it matters but they look like the same ear to me as well.<br /><br />I have done huge projects on this myself, over the years, examining hundreds of photos, and I have yet to see anything that gets my heart racing as definitive proof of more then one MJ. The teeth are always the same too.<br /><br />Besides, if one was going to have plastic surgery to more closely resemble the other, why would they stop at noses. <br /><br />It's never going to be proven. Not from pictures found on the internet anyway.
  • Not that it matters, but just to clarify, I def think we have been seeing two MJ's since bad era. Don't know if I believe that this other person is his also 'crazy talented' adopted out brother, as per the theory outlined at the start of this thread. <br /><br />Def believe at a minimum a second one was bought in at at the very 'latest' the start of bad era, but not so that 2 people can simply create the one character as theorised earlier, but rather so that hoax preparations can start. (i.e: throwing us off, creating confusion about looks, in an attempt to make the audience not question that there are two because after all the surgeries which were made prominent around this time are a pacifying explanation and hence these two MJs would be helpful later down the track with PR events, tours, paparazzi, TII etc) I don't know if I can believe the notion that the idea for two ppl playing the same character MJ was etched when he was a child. (lol, although I have known to have been swayed)<br /><br />However.... Then, just to confuse myself and play devils advocate with myself, I see photos such as this one (referring to the black and white child shots)<br /> <br />aaaabdp.jpg<br /><br />And I actually *don't* like saying what I see and that is that I see two different children. Which is weird because I don't really buy, the brothers both playing MJ from day dot, premise.<br /><br />However in this pic of child MJ, I see different brows one kids is more rounded and meets in the middle closer than the other, clear different noses, a fuller face in one child compared to cheekbones in the other, different lips, different eyes, heart shaped jaw and a square shaped jaw, etc etc.<br /><br />But then again, to play devil's advocate on this photo, psychology studies prove that you will subconsciously seek evidence, and WILL find it for a presupposition you choose to believe is true. We form a belief and seek evidence of that. Just like when you buy a car and think you are the only one to have that car, when you start driving it you see them all over the road because on a subconscious level you are looking for the car.  <br /><br />In a nutshell, you will see what you want to believe...<br /> <br />(BTW not trying to explain psychology to you bec, know you get it and are more than aware of what I am talkign about, more trying to figure this out for me  :icon_e_wink:)  <br /><br />It's what I believe, that is the biggest issue. Because if you believe truth you will seek the right evidence, if you believe a fallacy then you will seek evidence of the wrong thing, lol)<br /><br /><br />Well done MJ! Yep its 2013 and we are STILL talking about it.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />******EDITED
  • becbec Posts: 6,387
    on 1380500818:
    <br /> But then again, to play devil's advocate on this photo, psychology studies prove that you will subconsciously seek evidence, and WILL find it for a presupposition you choose to believe is true. We form a belief and seek evidence of that. Just like when you buy a car and think you are the only one to have that car, when you start driving it you see them all over the road because on a subconscious level you are looking for the car.  <br /><br />In a nutshell, you will see what you want to believe...<br /><br />
    <br /><br />Yes that is true except that when I tried to prove the O2 guy wasn't MJ I ended up proving, to myself, that he was. A similar thing happened when I worked on the general doubles theory. My harddrive is full of pic comparisons of "different" MJs. Like I said earlier, I think the Bashir tapes are the best argument for multiple MJs.
  • oh, without a doubt, bashir tapes are a goldmine. and in fact will say, if you can't see it there, never will
  • on 1380191814:
    <br />I just came across this on Arnold Klein's Facebook page 2hrs ago.  Arnold Klein is on a roll with confirming it WAS<br />NOT Michael at the London announcement, but rather an impersonator.......<br /><br />Arnold W. Klein<br />the problem with AEG....during the London interview this was not Michael ...look at the chin!<br /><br />https://www.facebook.com/#!/arnold.klein?hc_location=stream<br /><br />Arnold W. Klein<br />the impersonator had a cleft in the bottom of his chin like a tooth. [size=18pt]When /i rebuilt Michael's face there was no cleft!!! [/size]look at the width of the impersonator's mouth.Like ·  · Share · 3 hours ago · 10 people like this..<br /><br />Lesley Anthony http://michaeljacksonnotdead.wordpress.com/tag/imposter/<br /><br />Lesley Anthony... latex MJ moulded mask  Ines Parrain.. What do mean Arnold ? I mean, Michael had a chin's cleft for ages.... Look at the 2005' pictures... Anyway, there was an impersonator in TII, I agree with that.<br /><br />Lesley Anthony ..Arnold W. Klein can you please comment on this blog / article that claims, that you were reonstructing his face so he could get away unrecognized? http://michaeljacksonnotdead.wordpress.com/.../<br />
    <br /><br />does he ever mention a period of time over which he rebuilt his face? did every michael we saw in tii have that cleft or at least the ones we got a good look at ? and tell me why it has taken him so long to come out with this?
  • http://michaeljacksonnotdead.wordpress.com/tag/reconstructive-surgery/<br /><br /><br />Klein has come out a number of times and made these claims. This is nothing new. Just Klein talking about it again and it's been picked up again by hoaxers.<br /><br />The alleged reconstructive surgery was in 09 getting him ready for TII - see link
  • curlscurls Posts: 3,111
    Enjoying your posts guys, but nothing you've shown me says it wasn't MJ messing about all the time.<br /><br />Aussie's idea that 2 MJ's was about sowing seeds for a future death hoax, has been the only attempt at an answer to my 'Why?' question. (Thanks Aussie!) Seriously there needs to be a motive, and I can't see one, especially for it having started in childhood.<br /> <br />I've had an open mind and have almost been wanting someone to come up with something indisputable - imagine the world's reaction when not only does he come back from the dead, but there's 2 of 'em! But I haven't been convinced.<br /><br />Katherine's book appears to have date of birth errors (Janet and Randy, but maybe it's Wiki that's wrong!), 'The Jacksons: An American Dream' as a drama can't be taken as factual, pictures can be interpreted however you want (light and perspective matter hugely, as does professional v casual pics, though they are dismissed by many). Intelius has it's limitations too for reasons I outlined before. <br /><br />Michael Jackson showed changes - we all do. We can all look different 'in the flesh' because of natural changes in age, weight, health, mood, expression, or cosmetic changes in hairstyles, make-up, surgery, botox etc. Then add the confusion of what may be a low quality off-the-cuff snap/vid or a professionally directed and posed photo/film, which is all we have to work with! No 'in the flesh' for us!<br /><br />So the question remains whether the more extreme differences people have seen were MJ himself (intentional or otherwise), or a second person, twin/brother/unrelated brought-in-for-a-job guy, or indeed just imagination on the part of the observer, brought about by the clever suggestions of a master illusionist!<br /><br />I suspect, like most everything else MJ related, we're simply never going to find a definitive answer to this are we?!<br />
  • DatrootDatroot Posts: 1,314
    Can't think of a scientific answer to this.  The O2 MJ looked like he was wearing a latex mask.  Complexion seemed too rubbery to me but otherwise it just seemed like the MJ we don't normally see or hear - probably due to the fact that he was slightly out of it and had to be sobered up beforehand.
  • on 1380522395:
    <br />http://michaeljacksonnotdead.wordpress.com/tag/reconstructive-surgery/<br /><br /><br />Klein has come out a number of times and made these claims. This is nothing new. Just Klein talking about it again and it's been picked up again by hoaxers.<br /><br />The alleged reconstructive surgery was in 09 getting him ready for TII - see link<br />
    <br /><br />thanks for info aussie.<br /><br />did i see in some trial testimony about the propofol use that one of these doctors said murray brought michael in for a repeat visit about some little part around the eyes i think that he wasn't satisfied with and he acted as though he had never been there before. could it be that the person was not michael or that someone else had been there in his place? otherwise you have to wonder if there is truth to all the use and that it had effected his memory. the whole propofol testimony has messed with me badly , it was my main argument against death so i am pretty rattled. :(
  • curlscurls Posts: 3,111
    on 1380547565:
    <br />...... probably due to the fact that he was slightly out of it and had to be sobered up beforehand.<br />
    <br /><br />Of course I don't know MJ and cannot say what he would or wouldn't do but I think I'm on pretty safe ground saying that getting yourself drunk just before you kick off the biggest production of your life and present it to the world ("... and when I say this is it, it really means this is it, because, umm ..." deep knowing laugh!), is not the behaviour one would expect from a self-proclaimed perfectionist.
  • becbec Posts: 6,387
    on 1380551049:
    <br />
    on 1380547565:
    <br />...... probably due to the fact that he was slightly out of it and had to be sobered up beforehand.<br />
    <br /><br />Of course I don't know MJ and cannot say what he would or wouldn't do but I think I'm on pretty safe ground saying that getting yourself drunk just before you kick off the biggest production of your life and present it to the world ("... and when I say this is it, it really means this is it, because, umm ..." deep knowing laugh!), is not the behaviour one would expect from a self-proclaimed perfectionist.<br />
    <br /><br />Nor like any behavior he ever exhibited prior so I'd say that's pretty much a salacious fabrication that I'm shocked to read here.
  • gwynnedgwynned Posts: 1,361
    on 1380537838:
    <br />Enjoying your posts guys, but nothing you've shown me says it wasn't MJ messing about all the time.<br /><br />Aussie's idea that 2 MJ's was about sowing seeds for a future death hoax, has been the only attempt at an answer to my 'Why?' question. (Thanks Aussie!) Seriously there needs to be a motive, and I can't see one, especially for it having started in childhood.<br /> <br />I've had an open mind and have almost been wanting someone to come up with something indisputable - imagine the world's reaction when not only does he come back from the dead, but there's 2 of 'em! But I haven't been convinced.<br /><br />Katherine's book appears to have date of birth errors (Janet and Randy, but maybe it's Wiki that's wrong!), 'The Jacksons: An American Dream' as a drama can't be taken as factual, pictures can be interpreted however you want (light and perspective matter hugely, as does professional v casual pics, though they are dismissed by many). Intelius has it's limitations too for reasons I outlined before. <br /><br />Michael Jackson showed changes - we all do. We can all look different 'in the flesh' because of natural changes in age, weight, health, mood, expression, or cosmetic changes in hairstyles, make-up, surgery, botox etc. Then add the confusion of what may be a low quality off-the-cuff snap/vid or a professionally directed and posed photo/film, which is all we have to work with! No 'in the flesh' for us!<br /><br />So the question remains whether the more extreme differences people have seen were MJ himself (intentional or otherwise), or a second person, twin/brother/unrelated brought-in-for-a-job guy, or indeed just imagination on the part of the observer, brought about by the clever suggestions of a master illusionist!<br /><br />I suspect, like most everything else MJ related, we're simply never going to find a definitive answer to this are we?!<br />
    <br />ou<br />I think you are right.  I have been on this forum for now 4 years.  I thought I knew something about 3 years ago, but I've merely gotten increasingly confused since then.  Who really IS Michael Jackson?  Can one person truly encompass all of Michael's amazing attributes:  genius artist, singer, dancer, director, humanitarian, doting father, astute businessman, etc., all the while contriving the most amazing and complex hoax of all time, going through trials and legal battles,  romances, etc.  I think for me sometimes my love and appreciation for 'Michael' prevents me from looking at things honestly, like a child, without preconceptions.  For me, he is everything I would want to be and want to see in another person.  But somedays, I don't want to get out of bed, snap at people, and cry over nothing.  I'm only human.  I imagine Michael, the person(s) and not the persona(s), has those days too, whoever and wherever he may be.  <br /><br />Wasn't it Arnold Klein who 'slipped' and said that MJ was the greatest 'actor' of all times?  I think this is the closest to the truth as has been spoken.  Whether there is one Michael, a twin, or a thousand doubles.  It doesn't matter.  It's the story that counts and it doesn't matter which Michael, black or white, plays the part.  It makes more sense to me that Michael Jackson plays a central role in a script that was written FOR him and not BY him.  <br /><br />Oddly, the idea that Michael may merely be a fictional character played by a series of actors, only makes him feel more real to me!  Haven't we all been moved to tears by great acting even when we know for certain the story is fiction?  Aren't we as well moved to tears by a heartfelt song?  I can recall 4 years ago watching Smooth Criminal for the first time.  I was awestruck in the truest sense.  Great art truly can uplift because great artists convey, as Michael said, the divine, in their work.  I certainly felt the divine being conveyed in those first two weeks of hoax obsession when I couldn't get enough Michael and wept shamelessly at the beauty of it all. 
  • DatrootDatroot Posts: 1,314
    on 1380558008:
    <br /><br />
    ...... probably due to the fact that he was slightly out of it and had to be sobered up beforehand.<br />
    <br /><br />Nor like any behavior he ever exhibited prior so I'd say that's pretty much a salacious fabrication that I'm shocked to read here.<br />
    <br /><br />Do you mean MJ 'allegedly' being drunk before the Press Conference being a salacious fabrication or me mentioning it?  I, of course, was referring to Randy Phillips' account of what was going on directly before the Press Conference and the reasons why he was supposedly 3 hrs late, being a possible reason for his different persona.  As opposed to it not actually being MJ and a double.
  • paula-cpaula-c Posts: 7,221
    on 1380466916:
    <br />I don't know what you all are pretending to say, all those photos belong to the same man---> MJ, the ears, mouth, eyes, etc... seem to be different depending on perspective, I have pics where I look totally different depending on the light, position, etc.. and however I am the same person.<br />
    <br /><br /><br /><br />I can see differences in the ears, are a little more elongated, not much but yes I see
  • becbec Posts: 6,387
    on 1380561076:
    <br />
    on 1380558008:
    <br /><br />
    ...... probably due to the fact that he was slightly out of it and had to be sobered up beforehand.<br />
    <br /><br />Nor like any behavior he ever exhibited prior so I'd say that's pretty much a salacious fabrication that I'm shocked to read here.<br />
    <br /><br />Do you mean MJ 'allegedly' being drunk before the Press Conference being a salacious fabrication or me mentioning it?  I, of course, was referring to Randy Phillips' account of what was going on directly before the Press Conference and the reasons why he was supposedly 3 hrs late, being a possible reason for his different persona.  As opposed to it not actually being MJ and a double.<br />
    <br /><br />Both. It's malicious slander at worst, a storyline scripted statement at best. What could make you believe that it is within the rhelm of potentially realistic possibility that MJ would show up drunk to a public appearance?
  • gwynnedgwynned Posts: 1,361
    on 1380566789:
    <br />
    on 1380561076:
    <br />
    on 1380558008:
    <br /><br />
    ...... probably due to the fact that he was slightly out of it and had to be sobered up beforehand.<br />
    <br /><br />Nor like any behavior he ever exhibited prior so I'd say that's pretty much a salacious fabrication that I'm shocked to read here.<br />
    <br /><br />Do you mean MJ 'allegedly' being drunk before the Press Conference being a salacious fabrication or me mentioning it?  I, of course, was referring to Randy Phillips' account of what was going on directly before the Press Conference and the reasons why he was supposedly 3 hrs late, being a possible reason for his different persona.  As opposed to it not actually being MJ and a double.<br />
    <br /><br />Both. It's malicious slander at worst, a storyline scripted statement at best. What could make you believe that it is within the rhelm of potentially realistic possibility that MJ would show up drunk to a public appearance?<br />
    <br /><br />Really?  Is he not human?  Not saying he did or didn't.  I wasn't there.  For all we know Jesus might have been a bit tipsy when he turned that water into wine.  Reminds me of the time early on in the hoax when I noticed a bunch of misspellings in the hoax videos.  I thought to point this out once and was reprimanded....'Life isn't perfect.'  Dare I say it?  Neither is Michael whoever he might be. 
  • becbec Posts: 6,387
    Of course he's human but there's no pattern of behavior or past performance to suggest that might be true, it's just wild, slanderous speculation based on nothing and I'm surprised to see it referred to as a potential truth. That is all.
  • I have no idea if there is more than one Michael.<br />BUT---  Ever since i have been reading and hearing about Michael it has been shown that he is Very shy and Reserved. Or at least that is what i have picked up in a few of his interviews.<br />When his video came out with Lisa Marie ( You are not Alone) having only a sheet over him at times i found this interesting for a shy person, just not something i would think Michael would do.<br />Could this have been someone else doing the video?<br /><br />I love this video always makes me smile, thinking of how happy they both looked.<br /><br /><br /> :) :) :) :) :) :) :)<br /><br />
  • How happy they 'acted'  :icon_lol:<br /><br />#sham (for the greater good)<br /><br /> :smiley_abuv: LMP
Sign In or Register to comment.