Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
Persons Of Interest => Everyone Else => Oprah Winfrey => Topic started by: MJmakesmespeechless on January 22, 2011, 08:07:57 AM
-
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE70L0AR20110122 (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE70L0AR20110122)
LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Oprah Winfrey will be giving her daytime talk show fans something to talk about next week.
She is staging a family reunion on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" on Monday and said she plans to reveal something she's recently learned that only a few people close to her know.
"I thought I'd seen it all. But this, my friends, is the miracle of all miracles," Winfrey said in a promotional clip.
"I was given some news that literally shook me to my core. This time, I'm the one being reunited. I was keeping a family secret for months, and on Monday you're going to hear it straight from me," she added.
Her production company, Harpo, declined to provide further details on Friday.
Winfrey was born to unwed teens and was raised at various times by her grandmother, mother and father and stepmother in Mississippi, Wisconsin and Tennessee.
She got pregnant at age 14, but her baby died a short time later. Earlier this week on Piers Morgan's CNN show, she said she wouldn't be where she is today if she had had the baby.
Would it not be great if this was THE big secret we all know and want it to be. I know wishful thinking of course but i thought it would be interesting to post this.
-
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE70L0AR20110122
LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Oprah Winfrey will be giving her daytime talk show fans something to talk about next week.
She is staging a family reunion on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" on Monday and said she plans to reveal something she's recently learned that only a few people close to her know.
"I thought I'd seen it all. But this, my friends, is the miracle of all miracles," Winfrey said in a promotional clip.
"I was given some news that literally shook me to my core. This time, I'm the one being reunited. I was keeping a family secret for months, and on Monday you're going to hear it straight from me," she added.
Her production company, Harpo, declined to provide further details on Friday.
Winfrey was born to unwed teens and was raised at various times by her grandmother, mother and father and stepmother in Mississippi, Wisconsin and Tennessee.
She got pregnant at age 14, but her baby died a short time later. Earlier this week on Piers Morgan's CNN show, she said she wouldn't be where she is today if she had had the baby.
Would it not be great if this was THE big secret we all know and want it to be. I know wishful thinking of course but i thought it would be interesting to post this.
-
NO, THAT NEWS NOT ABOUT MICHAEL .
Personal Oprah secret is related to Her Own family on femail side - as far as I understood.
But interesting do - plz, inform us if u able to see it.
thanx a lot !
-
Oprah Winfrey has a secret sister
Oprah Winfrey revealed on her television show Monday morning that she has a half sister she knew nothing about.
The sister, Patricia, had been kept a secret by Oprah's mother who put her up for adoption at birth.
"For the most part my life has been an open book," Oprah said. "I thought nothing could surprise me but I was wrong."
Winfrey said she chose to make the announcement herself so the media would not exploit it. Her sister, Patricia, spoke about being put up for adoption at birth, spent time in foster care and longed to be reunited with her foster mother.
By 17 she was a single mother, Patricia said, and six years later she had another child. When she was 20, she sought out information about her birth mother and then let it go until years later, Patricia said.
The agency contacted Patricia in 2007 with the news that her birth mother did not want to meet her on the same day she saw a local news story that had an interview with Oprah's mother which gave her information that matched up with what Patricia knew about her birth family.
"We realized that Oprah could be my sister," Patricia said.
Winfrey told her audience that it was true that Patricia was her sister. Patricia said she kept her family connection a secret after unsuccessfully trying to reach Oprah's mother, Vernita Lee.
Patricia tracked down Winfrey's niece who is the daughter of Oprah's other half-sister. The pair did a DNA test and it was revealed that they were indeed aunt and niece. That started the ball rolling with family members reaching out to Winfrey who eventually confirmed with her mother that the story was true.
Winfrey shared with the audience home video of her first meeting with her sister this past Thanksgiving Day when Winfrey and her partner Stedman Graham drove to Milwaukee to finally meet her sister.
Winfrey broke down a bit when expressing why she admires her half-sister so much. The talk show host said she has had so many people betray her since she became a celebrity and she was moved by the fact that Patricia kept the story secret.
"She never once thought to go to the press," Winfrey said. "She never once thought to sell this story."
Ironically, Winfrey also had another half-sister named Patricia who died in 2003. That sister was unable to overcome drug abuse and her resemblance to her new half-sister was noted often. Winfrey said she had placed that sister twice into rehab.
"For me, you are Pat on her very best day,” Winfrey said to her new half-sister. “You are who she wanted to be without the drugs.”
The pair sat down with their mother, Vernita Lee, and Oprah asked about her feelings learning about and being reunited with Patricia.
"I was so shocked to know that she was trying to get in touch with me," Lee said. "When I first heard about her, I wasn't afraid but I was a little leery."
http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/24 ... ouncement/ (http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2011/01/24/oprahs-big-announcement/)
-
Well, all I could see and hear as I read this was HALF-SIBLINGS, DNA TESTS and finding out you're related to SOMEONE FAMOUS! (Sound familiar?!)
Does ANYONE think this is jaw-dropping 'news'?! I don't want to sound harsh but I couldn't care less about Oprah and her family 'secrets'! (Strange how Patricia was happy to keep quiet about it but Oprah has to tell the world!)
-
That story is eerily similar to Eliza's story. Just change the names...
:?:
-
Well, IMO, that was a big waist of time. :roll:
-
http://www.wargs.com/other/winfrey.html (http://www.wargs.com/other/winfrey.html)
Oprah is related to the Presley's as well..
-
OK, I never was interested in Oprah and I am not going to be, I'm afraid, but let me please sort this out:
there is Oprah and Patricia, the half sister who dies of drug overdose.
And then there's Patricia the other half sister coming into life all of a sudden and claims she was hidden.
Was the first Patricia mom's child and second Patricia dad's child or would mom name her two children with the same first name Patricia?
And doesn't that sound somewhat like Michael Joseph dying of drug overdose and Michael Joe coming back to life as the hidden half-brother and do I need to go into hiding under my pillows now because IF then Oprah is preparing for Michael's "return" or should we better say now "coming into recognized life for the first time ever"?
:shock:
Is THAT the best birthday ever?
Roe-eyed vs. handsome Michael as witnessed were two persons indeed? So we were right?
Oprah, TS, Michael, whoever, this deserves some clarification now. 8-)
-
That story is eerily similar to Eliza's story. Just change the names...
:?:
This parallel is quite eerie indeed. And it all seems to be connected somehow. I wonder if Oprah's "acceptance" of a half-sister is foreshadowing what's going to happen with LMP and Eliza...
-
Oh My God they have to put me to sleep in my padded cell :lol: :lol: :lol:
-
http://www.wargs.com/other/winfrey.html
Oprah is related to the Presley's as well..
5 Random and Ridiculous Rock Star Myths
3. Oprah And Elvis
Next up is a rock myth that can be considered unique in that it’s actually true. Several years ago, several genealogists came out with DNA testing suggesting that talk-show host Oprah Winfrey and Elvis Presley are related. They also suggested that it’s a good thing Elvis didn’t live to see Oprah’s show, as listening to her warble about how men like Elvis are trashy cheating liars who done women wrong for too long would probably cause him to drive his pink Cadillac clean off a high cliff.
This myth is not technically a “myth” because it’s true. By most accounts, Elvis and Oprah do in fact share an ancestor from the slave days of 1800’s Mississippi. Oprah has alluded to this on her show by referring to Lisa Marie, Elvis’ daughter, as her “cousin.” Although it would be far more accurate to refer to her as Oprah’s cousin’s brother’s father’s nephew’s mother’s sister’s aunt’s great-niece’s uncle’s former roommate. :lol:
And then Oprah could have a big party because she’s surrounded by hundreds of family members and it’s a big reunion. Just like it is every day, really. And that’s the problem with this story being anything resembling a story. Technically, we are in fact all related. Every last one of us. According to a theory known as Pedigree Collapse, when two people mate and just happen to be related in some way, it reduces the chance of future offspring having distinct ancestors. Basically, after a few dozen millennia of humans reproducing, oftentimes in the same general area they grew up in with the same people they grew up with, we’ve gotten to the point where some scientists believe we’re all at least 50th cousins to everybody else on the planet.
It’s really no big deal to be related to somebody via and fourteenth cousin, thrice removed. And the sooner somebody can relate this fact to the news, the sooner we no longer have to deal with news stories about how Politician A is a nineteenth cousin of Politician B, which is so weird because they totally hate each other. So yes Oprah, you are related to Elvis. So are all of us.
http://www.weirdworm.com/5-random-and-ridiculous-rock-star-myths/
-
OK, I never was interested in Oprah and I am not going to be, I'm afraid, but let me please sort this out:
And doesn't that sound somewhat like Michael Joseph dying of drug overdose and Michael Joe coming back to life as the hidden half-brother
I had the same thought, but with the brother "Brandon". May be Brandon did not die on the 1st place.
-
Off topic, but what I always found an interesting statement, is that everyone is connected in some way through just 6 people. That means I know someone, that knows someone, that knows someone, that knows someone, that knows someone, that knows someone who knows Michael Jackson or any on you here on the board. Really not of any relevance here, but I just thought of that. :lol:
-
OK, I never was interested in Oprah and I am not going to be, I'm afraid, but let me please sort this out:
And doesn't that sound somewhat like Michael Joseph dying of drug overdose and Michael Joe coming back to life as the hidden half-brother
I had the same thought, but with the brother "Brandon". May be Brandon did not die on the 1st place.
And why would the Jackson family hide any twin, of any of their children, from birth?
Why would they lie about the death of Brandon?
What would that have accomplished?
When the children were being born, the family was poor and they didn't know that they would eventually be as famous as they became.
I am sorry but for me, this doesn't make any sense at all.
-
OK, I never was interested in Oprah and I am not going to be, I'm afraid, but let me please sort this out:
And doesn't that sound somewhat like Michael Joseph dying of drug overdose and Michael Joe coming back to life as the hidden half-brother
I had the same thought, but with the brother "Brandon". May be Brandon did not die on the 1st place.
And why would the Jackson family hide any twin, of any of their children, from birth?
Why would they lie about the death of Brandon?
What would that have accomplished?
When the children were being born, the family was poor and they didn't know that they would eventually be as famous as they became.
I am sorry but for me, this doesn't make any sense at all.
Why would O's mom hide it? It's something we don't know because we simply don't know the Jacksons. Not saying that Brandon never died, just pointing out that by now we should know that there is no use that 'they would never do that' or 'that doesn't make sense'. IF Brandon was still alive, I assume there is a reason they hid that. And if I am honest, their reason would be their reason and none of my business.
-
Everybody’s got some skeletons in the closet. Why is this such a big deal to her? She’s not God for heaven’s sake. :roll:
-
OK, I never was interested in Oprah and I am not going to be, I'm afraid, but let me please sort this out:
And doesn't that sound somewhat like Michael Joseph dying of drug overdose and Michael Joe coming back to life as the hidden half-brother
I had the same thought, but with the brother "Brandon". May be Brandon did not die on the 1st place.
And why would the Jackson family hide any twin, of any of their children, from birth?
Why would they lie about the death of Brandon?
What would that have accomplished?
When the children were being born, the family was poor and they didn't know that they would eventually be as famous as they became.
I am sorry but for me, this doesn't make any sense at all.
Why would O's mom hide it? It's something we don't know because we simply don't know the Jacksons. Not saying that Brandon never died, just pointing out that by now we should know that there is no use that 'they would never do that' or 'that doesn't make sense'. IF Brandon was still alive, I assume there is a reason they hid that. And if I am honest, their reason would be their reason and none of my business.
There is a difference between Oprah's mother hiding the fact that she put a child for up adoption and the Jackson's hiding a twin from the day it was born or claiming a child died that didn't. These are not the same thing nor are they actually comparable (apples & oranges).
In Oprah's mother's case...
Oprah's Big Secret: She Has a Half-Sister!
By Hilary Shenfeld Monday January 24, 2011
Forty-seven years ago, when Oprah Winfrey was 9 years old and living with her father in Tennessee, her mother, Vernita Lee, became pregnant with a daughter who was given up for adoption. Winfrey had known nothing about it.
During an interview taped last week with Patricia and their mother, Lee said she had denied the truth for so long because she was ashamed that she had given up a child for adoption. "I thought it was a terrible thing that I had done," Lee said, adding that she felt she wouldn't be able to take care of another child and get off welfare if she had kept her. Still, she said, "I did think about the baby. I went back looking for her and they told me she had left."
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20460114,00.html
Marlon and Brandon would be the 6th & 7th children out of 10.
Michael was born after Marlon and then there was Randy and Janet.
Whether you like it or not is irrelevant, these are facts.
It simply doesn't make any sense that the entire Jackson family would have hidden a twin away since birth or lied about Brandon's passing. There has been no evidence posted that there is anything factual as the basis to this "theory". Nor have those proposing this theory, ever provided any credible reasons as to why the family would have hidden a twin or lied about Brandon's death. Without substantiating evidence, this theory has no support, no basis in fact, nothing to stand on.
If a theory can not stand up to scrutiny than that theory must be revised. If a theory has no factual basis, than it is a factual error. If the theory is based on an error of reasoning, than it is a fallacy. Either way, it is not supported and therefore must be either revised or discarded.
An argument consists of one or more premises and one conclusion. A premise is a statement (a sentence that is either true or false) that is offered in support of the claim being made, which is the conclusion (which is also a sentence that is either true or false).
There are two main types of arguments: deductive and inductive. A deductive argument is an argument such that the premises provide (or appear to provide) complete support for the conclusion. An inductive argument is an argument such that the premises provide (or appear to provide) some degree of support (but less than complete support) for the conclusion. If the premises actually provide the required degree of support for the conclusion, then the argument is a good one. A good deductive argument is known as a valid argument and is such that if all its premises are true, then its conclusion must be true. If all the argument is valid and actually has all true premises, then it is known as a sound argument. If it is invalid or has one or more false premises, it will be unsound. A good inductive argument is known as a strong (or "cogent") inductive argument. It is such that if the premises are true, the conclusion is likely to be true.
A fallacy is, very generally, an error in reasoning. This differs from a factual error, which is simply being wrong about the facts. To be more specific, a fallacy is an "argument" in which the premises given for the conclusion do not provide the needed degree of support. A deductive fallacy is a deductive argument that is invalid (it is such that it could have all true premises and still have a false conclusion). An inductive fallacy is less formal than a deductive fallacy. They are simply "arguments" which appear to be inductive arguments, but the premises do not provided enough support for the conclusion. In such cases, even if the premises were true, the conclusion would not be more likely to be true.
http://www.drkenhunt.com/papers/everyday.html
-
i am not saying there was a twin but i am not saying there wasn`t either. I think this is a perfect example of things that go on that people manage to keep hidden for years if they want to badly enough. There could be many reasons for the hiding - maybe one was so shy he could never dance and sing but maybe he could draw and write poetry and songs. or ...Maybe due to child labour laws, the Jackson`s needed an extra kid to be able to pull off all the performance`s they did....or it could be anything else...and I agree with Souza it`s not my business. But it could happen...hidden in plain site....no one was ever looking for it so it didn`t come up and it was never spoken about and it could explain many things like why the family was so private, didn`t have that many friends growing up, etc. etc.I don`t think we could say for certain there wasn`t
-
Everybody’s got some skeletons in the closet. Why is this such a big deal to her? She’s not God for heaven’s sake. :roll:
I must be in an off mood tonight and probably shouldn't post. Sorry if I offend anyone with this...
But, to me, this has nothing to do with Michael. I think she used that as clincher to get people to watch the show. It makes me wonder how many of MJ's supporters have continued to watch every one of her shows just to see if she has something to say about MJ. She knows her ratings have gone up and she knows why (IMO). She's keeping the suspense alive.
I will apologize if, in the end, I am wrong. I keep going back and forth on her involvement with the hoax, but this particular instance of "OMG - I have a secret to share and it's going to knock you off your feet!!!!" was a tactic to get people to watch, and nothing more.
I sincerely wish her and her new-found family the best. Family is awesome and she is blessed but it's not earth-shattering news.
PS - Souza...I think we could be related :)
-
Marlon and Brandon would be the 6th & 7th children out of 10.
Michael was born after Marlon and then there was Randy and Janet.
Whether you like it or not is irrelevant, these are facts.
It simply doesn't make any sense that the entire Jackson family would have hidden a twin away since birth or lied about Brandon's passing. There has been no evidence posted that there is anything factual as the basis to this "theory". Nor have those proposing this theory, ever provided any credible reasons as to why the family would have hidden a twin or lied about Brandon's death. Without substantiating evidence, this theory has no support, no basis in fact, nothing to stand on.
If a theory can not stand up to scrutiny than that theory must be revised. If a theory has no factual basis, than it is a factual error. If the theory is based on an error of reasoning, than it is a fallacy. Either way, it is not supported and therefore must be either revised or discarded.
An argument consists of one or more premises and one conclusion. A premise is a statement (a sentence that is either true or false) that is offered in support of the claim being made, which is the conclusion (which is also a sentence that is either true or false).
There are two main types of arguments: deductive and inductive. A deductive argument is an argument such that the premises provide (or appear to provide) complete support for the conclusion. An inductive argument is an argument such that the premises provide (or appear to provide) some degree of support (but less than complete support) for the conclusion. If the premises actually provide the required degree of support for the conclusion, then the argument is a good one. A good deductive argument is known as a valid argument and is such that if all its premises are true, then its conclusion must be true. If all the argument is valid and actually has all true premises, then it is known as a sound argument. If it is invalid or has one or more false premises, it will be unsound. A good inductive argument is known as a strong (or "cogent") inductive argument. It is such that if the premises are true, the conclusion is likely to be true.
A fallacy is, very generally, an error in reasoning. This differs from a factual error, which is simply being wrong about the facts. To be more specific, a fallacy is an "argument" in which the premises given for the conclusion do not provide the needed degree of support. A deductive fallacy is a deductive argument that is invalid (it is such that it could have all true premises and still have a false conclusion). An inductive fallacy is less formal than a deductive fallacy. They are simply "arguments" which appear to be inductive arguments, but the premises do not provided enough support for the conclusion. In such cases, even if the premises were true, the conclusion would not be more likely to be true.
http://www.drkenhunt.com/papers/everyday.html
You did not get the point. My point is that there are no valid arguments or proof against it as well. No one has birth certificates, no one was there when the twins were born, and this whole death of MJ is a lie, so who says other things are not? My point is that we simply do not know and therefore can not debunk that theory, nor confirm it.
I am off the actual twin of MJ/twin of Marlon theory for months already, so I am not trying to defend that theory, but the possibility is still there, since there is simply no way to prove or disprove. That was my point and nothing else.
I know you are always jumping into your defence suit whenever I reply to one of your posts which often make me hesitate to reply at all, hell knows why, but maybe you need to take some things a little less serious every single time and read what I write, or ask what I mean next time because I always get the feeling I have to explain myself to you.
-
i am not saying there was a twin but i am not saying there wasn`t either. I think this is a perfect example of things that go on that people manage to keep hidden for years if they want to badly enough. There could be many reasons for the hiding - maybe one was so shy he could never dance and sing but maybe he could draw and write poetry and songs. or ...Maybe due to child labour laws, the Jackson`s needed an extra kid to be able to pull off all the performance`s they did....or it could be anything else...and I agree with Souza it`s not my business. But it could happen...hidden in plain site....no one was ever looking for it so it didn`t come up and it was never spoken about and it could explain many things like why the family was so private, didn`t have that many friends growing up, etc. etc.I don`t think we could say for certain there wasn`t
People have been known to shelter family members with disabilities from public scrutiny. They can be very protective of those members. I'm not saying this is so, I'm just saying there may be justification if indeed Brandon did not die as we were led to believe and I would understand that.
-
I know you are always jumping into your defence suit whenever I reply to one of your posts which often make me hesitate to reply at all, hell knows why, but maybe you need to take some things a little less serious every single time and read what I write, or ask what I mean next time because I always get the feeling I have to explain myself to you.
[/color]
I am answering your posts that commented on my post and nothing more. Stop suggesting I am "defensive", it is annoying and not correct. If you are unable to discuss anything with me without making it personal and/or you don't expect me to respond then refrain from starting a discussion with me. This solves both your misinterpretations of my emotional state and me having to explain myself to you repeatedly that I am not. If you comment on something I say, than there is an expectation that I may possibly reply, if you interpret that as being defensive, that is your issue and not mine. Such remarks are often made in an effort to invalidate another person's opinion, ideas, remarks, comments or are generally a misunderstanding, made by the reader, about what has been written.
I am not trying to argue with you or anyone else, I see things differently on the whole twin/doubles theory and no evidence has been provided to change my mind. If there is irrefutable evidence that supports such claims than I will accept that but so far, that isn't and hasn't been the case.
-
I know you are always jumping into your defence suit whenever I reply to one of your posts which often make me hesitate to reply at all, hell knows why, but maybe you need to take some things a little less serious every single time and read what I write, or ask what I mean next time because I always get the feeling I have to explain myself to you.
[/color]
I am answering your posts that commented on my post and nothing more. Stop suggesting I am "defensive", it is annoying and not correct. If you are unable to discuss anything with me without making it personal and/or you don't expect me to respond then refrain from starting a discussion with me. This solves both your misinterpretations of my emotional state and me having to explain myself to you repeatedly that I am not. If you comment on something I say, than there is an expectation that I may possibly reply, if you interpret that as being defensive, that is your issue and not mine. Such remarks are often made in an effort to invalidate another person's opinion, ideas, remarks, comments or are generally a misunderstanding, made by the reader, about what has been written.
I am not trying to argue with you or anyone else, I see things differently on the whole twin/doubles theory and no evidence has been provided to change my mind. If there is irrefutable evidence that supports such claims than I will accept that but so far, that isn't and hasn't been the case.
You misinterpretate my comments all the time, making something else of it and when I comment on that to explain my actual point it gets even worse. We disagree on many things and I for one don't care, you apparently do. Just don't try to prove me wrong with facts of which we don't know they are actual facts or just hearsay and therefore still an option, whether you agree with the theory or not. You yourself say you have to argument the theory, same goes for debunking one. And with that I don't mean giving names to the style of someone's writing or arguments, or calling someone BS, but with actual arguments that disprove the theory. If you can't then that is fine, but it means all possibilities are still open. I am not going to dismiss stuff simply because you think that is not an option.
Again, not defending the twin theory because I couldn't care less, just talking in general. If You comment like that on me, you can expect my responce as well. Well you could actually, because it will never happen again. I am sorry if I again offended you, but I never do good in your eyes, so I better just zip in in the future, it gives me a headache.
-
OK, I never was interested in Oprah and I am not going to be, I'm afraid, but let me please sort this out:
And doesn't that sound somewhat like Michael Joseph dying of drug overdose and Michael Joe coming back to life as the hidden half-brother
I had the same thought, but with the brother "Brandon". May be Brandon did not die on the 1st place.
And why would the Jackson family hide any twin, of any of their children, from birth?
Why would they lie about the death of Brandon?
What would that have accomplished?
When the children were being born, the family was poor and they didn't know that they would eventually be as famous as they became.
I am sorry but for me, this doesn't make any sense at all.
I don´t know their reasons to do something like that.
My view on this is that, according to the info, Brandon Jackson was still born during childbirth. Katherine Jackson had an emergency Caesarian operation to give birth to her twins. The Jackson twins were several weeks premature but had to be delivered due to some complication in their mother’s pregnancy.
In the 50´s C-sections were starting to get fashionable, but stats shows that less than 30% were used. Also, C-sections happens mostly with women who are new mothers. Katherine had 6 kids before and I did not find any info if the previous kids were born via cesarea.
Something went wrong during pregnancy for her to have an emergency c-section, but Marlon is totally fine.
Another issue is Katherine´s religious beliefs as a JW. During c-sections, and more during those years, blood loss was a common factor with the consequent treatment of blood plasma.
Then we got the baby, Brandon, who we don´t know where or if he was burried/ cremated.
We are talking about a religious family. Having the baby not burried or cremated (even if was just a fetus) with the appropriate prayers won´t fit the picture either.
Brandon could have been born with a handicap and kept safe for wathever reason.
Katherine got more kids after and all of them were bron under normal circumstances.
Most of the people got to know about Brandon´s existance from 2007, and a vast mayority during the memorial in 2009.
We know just that much about Brandon, either way ;)
-
It's something we don't know because we simply don't know the Jacksons
Agree 100%
if I am honest, their reason would be their reason and none of my business.
Same here.
-
Marlon and Brandon would be the 6th & 7th children out of 10.
Michael was born after Marlon and then there was Randy and Janet.
Whether you like it or not is irrelevant, these are facts
Yes, and?
Still, Brandon is something new.
It simply doesn't make any sense that the entire Jackson family would have hidden a twin away since birth or lied about Brandon's passing.
Makes no sense to you, but your prisma view is just yours Pauline.
There has been no evidence posted that there is anything factual as the basis to this "theory". Nor have those proposing this theory, ever provided any credible reasons as to why the family would have hidden a twin or lied about Brandon's death. Without substantiating evidence, this theory has no support, no basis in fact, nothing to stand on.
Credible reason for who? you?
What about your research on MJ=Messiah? Credible reasons? A theory supported? on what basis then?
That Michael wanted to protay himself as "something" does not mean he is that "something". Just as an example.
If a theory can not stand up to scrutiny than that theory must be revised. If a theory has no factual basis, than it is a factual error. If the theory is based on an error of reasoning, than it is a fallacy. Either way, it is not supported and therefore must be either revised or discarded.
People are having views and opinions, wow, you are taking this too serious :?
An argument consists of one or more premises and one conclusion. A premise is a statement (a sentence that is either true or false) that is offered in support of the claim being made, which is the conclusion (which is also a sentence that is either true or false).
There are two main types of arguments
The lesson is appreciated :roll: , however, I don´t think that people are here to be teach about how to build up or approach or use an argument academically.
Opinions are opinions based on perception and experience as well, and there are no rules on what glasses people should wear to have just an opinion.
A fallacy
Could be, but really, who cares!?
Freedom of expression is the key and as far as I could see, no one is being disrespectful. Why so defensive on this matter? :shock:
-
i am not saying there was a twin but i am not saying there wasn`t either. I think this is a perfect example of things that go on that people manage to keep hidden for years if they want to badly enough
Well, that thought is going around for many of us ;)
-
My point is that there are no valid arguments or proof against it as well. No one has birth certificates, no one was there when the twins were born, and this whole death of MJ is a lie, so who says other things are not? My point is that we simply do not know and therefore can not debunk that theory, nor confirm it.
I agree, but also I got a question. Would a stillborn have a birth certificate on the 1st place? We are talking about the 50´s.
Also a religious family within a particular cult were life is higly respected from the conception. When Brandon was born, he should have had a proper burrial/ cremation and prayers in accordance with their beliefs, even if was a fetus.
-
People have been known to shelter family members with disabilities from public scrutiny. They can be very protective of those members. I'm not saying this is so, I'm just saying there may be justification if indeed Brandon did not die as we were led to believe and I would understand that.
Agree as well.
-
I am not trying to argue with you or anyone else, I see things differently on the whole twin/doubles theory and no evidence has been provided to change my mind. If there is irrefutable evidence that supports such claims than I will accept that but so far, that isn't and hasn't been the case.
I don´t see it as anyone wanting to change your mind :) The theories are there and is up to you to go for them or not. Even if would be a 100% proof, still the responsability in believing whatever is on you, and I am totally ok with it concerning you or any others :)
I could not predict that you would get this upset for the comment about Brandon :lol:, and I just want to let you know that was not my intention to raise your blood pressure about this subject :P
and.....
I stand my ground regarding Brandon ;)
-
I liked that Oprah became very emotional in talking about her new-found sister and the way Patricia conducted herself. Oprah said she's always dealt with people who ultimately betrayed her until Patricia. I hope Patricia stays strong.
Now you know how Michael feels, Oprah!
-
Patricia was very sure that Oprah was her half sister. What i don´t have clear is if Oprah agreed openly to take a test or how the process went. I just saw the video posted in TMZ and is very short.
-
There has been no evidence posted that there is anything factual as the basis to this "theory". Nor have those proposing this theory, ever provided any credible reasons as to why the family would have hidden a twin or lied about Brandon's death. Without substantiating evidence, this theory has no support, no basis in fact, nothing to stand on.
Credible reason for who? you?
What about your research on MJ=Messiah? Credible reasons? A theory supported? on what basis then?
That Michael wanted to protay himself as "something" does not mean he is that "something". Just as an example.
I never said that Michael IS the messiah. I have not stated whether I believe that or not.
I said that the message, I received, was that Michael said he was the messiah.
This means that he believes he is and I investigated whether there was evidence to support that he believed such a thing and there was lots including Shmuley's statements, artwork, lyrics, symbolism etc.
So I have shown that he has portrayed himself as the messiah not that he is the messiah. That is something that can not be proven by me or anyone else and it is supported by credible, factual, evidence.
If a theory can not stand up to scrutiny than that theory must be revised. If a theory has no factual basis, than it is a factual error. If the theory is based on an error of reasoning, than it is a fallacy. Either way, it is not supported and therefore must be either revised or discarded.
People are having views and opinions, wow, you are taking this too serious :?
No, I simply showing how the twin/doubles theory has no basis in fact.
An argument consists of one or more premises and one conclusion. A premise is a statement (a sentence that is either true or false) that is offered in support of the claim being made, which is the conclusion (which is also a sentence that is either true or false). There are two main types of arguments
The lesson is appreciated :roll: , however, I don´t think that people are here to be teach about how to build up or approach or use an argument academically.
Opinions are opinions based on perception and experience as well, and there are no rules on what glasses people should wear to have just an opinion.
This was again about the theory itself being a fallacy and not about personal opinions. It has nothing to do with anything personal or opinions, it is the twin/doubles theory which is flawed and can't stand up to scrutiny.
A fallacy
Could be, but really, who cares!?
Freedom of expression is the key and as far as I could see, no one is being disrespectful. Why so defensive on this matter? :shock:
Of course everyone is free to express themselves but so am I. When a theory has no basis in fact, when it can not be supported by evidence than it is not a valid theory. If people want to believe in a theory that is full of holes and more fantasy than fact, that is fine but I am free to point out the flaws in such theories.
-
I agree, but also I got a question. Would a stillborn have a birth certificate on the 1st place? We are talking about the 50´s.
Birth & Death Certificates were not issued for stillborn babies in the 1950's in the US. Around the year 2000, new legislation was introduced in some states and they started issuing certificates for the stillborn child, if parents requested them.
A Move for Birth Certificates for Stillborn Babies
By TAMAR LEWIN Published: May 22, 2007
...joined with others who had experienced stillbirth to push California legislators to pass a bill allowing parents to receive a certificate of birth resulting in stillbirth.
In the last six years, 19 states, including New Jersey, have enacted laws allowing parents who have had stillbirths to get such certificates. Similar legislation is under consideration in several more, among them New York. More than 25,000 pregnancies a year end in stillbirth, generally defined as a naturally occurring, unintentional intrauterine death after more than 20 weeks of gestation. A cause for the death is usually not determined.
To thousands of parents who have experienced stillbirth, getting a birth certificate is passionately important, albeit symbolic.
But politically, the birth-certificate laws, often referred to as “Missing Angels” bills, occupy uncertain territory, skirting the abortion debate while implicitly raising the question of fetal personhood.
Many antiabortion groups say the laws fill a need for parents. But some abortion rights supporters see the push for these laws as a barely disguised political move to undermine abortion rights.
In some states, local chapters of abortion rights groups have opposed the legislation. But at the national level, some abortion rights groups are comfortable with the laws, if they are drafted carefully to cover naturally occurring fetal death and not late-term abortion.
Last month, Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico vetoed legislation that would have granted stillborn birth certificates. Mr. Richardson, a Democrat who is running for president, did not mention abortion, but said “confusion and potential fraud” could result from creating two documents — the fetal death certificate and the birth certificate resulting in stillbirth — for the same event.
Those who support the stillbirth certificates say fraud would be impossible because the certificates make clear that there is no living child.
Generally, the bills are retroactive, so parents can get a certificate even for long-ago stillbirths. Parents who request certificates must pay a small fee, and can record a name or leave the name line blank.
Some counselors who work with grieving parents say the legislation would be unnecessary if hospitals did more to recognize the loss, through informal “memory certificates.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/22/us/22stillbirth.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
US Vital Statistics did not keep records of stillbirths either because they were not live births and birth certificates were only issued for "live births".
-
No, I simply showing how the twin/doubles theory has no basis in fact.
But you jump to the theories posted on the forum when the argument is about an open opinion regarding "Brandon", not a theory.
This was again about the theory itself being a fallacy and not about personal opinions. It has nothing to do with anything personal or opinions, it is the twin/doubles theory which is flawed and can't stand up to scrutiny.
My comment about Brandon was not pointing towards any double to start with.
The theories regarding doubles in TII can be flawed in your opinion but to the eye, those "michaels" look very different to each other and there is a possibility that doubles were used, as Joe also pointed to.
Of course everyone is free to express themselves but so am I
And you do it quite often Pauline, but I don´t see you as tolerant when others express theirs. I find your approach quite aggressive at times to be honest.
When a theory has no basis in fact, when it can not be supported by evidence than it is not a valid theory. If people want to believe in a theory that is full of holes and more fantasy that fact, that is fine but I am free to point out the flaws in such theories.
Of course, I appreciate that and I am not telling you to do the opposite. It is good and positive to point out at flaws to reach the goal, is a team work and every single person has an imput I believe, every one can bring something to the table, but doing it in a constructive manner would be more appreciated :lol:
-
I agree, but also I got a question. Would a stillborn have a birth certificate on the 1st place? We are talking about the 50´s.
Birth & Death Certificates were not issued for stillborn babies in the 1950's in the US. Around the year 2000, new legislation was introduced in some states and they started issuing certificates for the stillborn child, if parents requested them.
Thanks!
-
No, I simply showing how the twin/doubles theory has no basis in fact.
But you jump to the theories posted on the forum when the argument is about an open opinion regarding "Brandon", not a theory.
This was again about the theory itself being a fallacy and not about personal opinions. It has nothing to do with anything personal or opinions, it is the twin/doubles theory which is flawed and can't stand up to scrutiny.
My comment about Brandon was not pointing towards any double to start with.
The theories regarding doubles in TII can be flawed in your opinion but to the eye, those "michaels" look very different to each other and there is a possibility that doubles were used, as Joe also pointed to.
Of course everyone is free to express themselves but so am I
And you do it quite often Pauline, but I don´t see you as tolerant when others express theirs. I find your approach quite aggressive at times to be honest.
When a theory has no basis in fact, when it can not be supported by evidence than it is not a valid theory. If people want to believe in a theory that is full of holes and more fantasy that fact, that is fine but I am free to point out the flaws in such theories.
Of course, I appreciate that and I am not telling you to do the opposite. It is good and positive to point out at flaws to reach the goal, is a team work and every single person has an imput I believe, every one can bring something to the table, but doing it in a constructive manner would be more appreciated :lol:
Please show me where I have been disrespectful to you in my original response to YOU. I asked questions only and stated my opinion. My next posts where in reply to Souza, who had made a comment in regards to my posts. How have I not been constructive? I am who I am and I express myself as I do. If you feel my posts are not constructive or whatever put me on ignore and you won't have to read them.
OK, I never was interested in Oprah and I am not going to be, I'm afraid, but let me please sort this out:
And doesn't that sound somewhat like Michael Joseph dying of drug overdose and Michael Joe coming back to life as the hidden half-brother
I had the same thought, but with the brother "Brandon". May be Brandon did not die on the 1st place.
And why would the Jackson family hide any twin, of any of their children, from birth?
Why would they lie about the death of Brandon?
What would that have accomplished?
When the children were being born, the family was poor and they didn't know that they would eventually be as famous as they became.
I am sorry but for me, this doesn't make any sense at all.
-
Please show me where I have been disrespectful to you
I did not talk about respect, I talked about your aggressive approach lately, and the post under confirms it.
How have I not been constructive? I am who I am and I express myself as I do.If you feel my posts are not constructive or whatever put me on ignore and you won't have to read them
I have nothing more to say on this respect Pauline :|
-
Please show me where I have been disrespectful to you
I did not talk about respect, I talked about your aggressive approach lately, and the post under confirms it.
How have I not been constructive? I am who I am and I express myself as I do.If you feel my posts are not constructive or whatever put me on ignore and you won't have to read them
I have nothing more to say on this respect Pauline :|
it is simply a fact that if you find my posts aggressive than have the ability to put me on ignore and not read them.
-
This is certainly another twist in the whole saga. So many details. Her parents Vernita and Vern, and Eliza's and Elvis' father Vernon. ( "You know what I mean Vern?" Jim Varney :lol: ) Two Patricia's named of sisters :shock:
Oprah related to the Presley's way back, possibly. It is an interesting mix of black and white to me, back last century in the south relationships between black and white would have been frowned upon. This Hattie Mae Pressley born in 1900 may have been mulatto born to white Nelson Alexander Pressley born 1872 and some poor black girl in a not so nice situation possibly (if you read the Roots book).
Whether Brandon truly died or has been somehow involved as a Michael double, I'm sure that details are slowly being revealed to us. We are being hand-fed here by Michael in this "adventure". I personally lean towards an illusion of a twin that he has projected to us, to keep us pulling out our hair and banging our heads. "Greatest show on earth." "Michael lives for controversy!" But I don't rule out the twin theory simply because there's something going on that we haven't nailed down yet. I want to keep both eyes open and not miss a thing. 8-)
Personal story-- my husband thought he was an only child until he was 42 and was contacted by his half-sister looking for her birth mother who had died the year before. Apparantly his mother had a one-night stand/possibly rape with someone from a dance club, and gave the baby away at birth, not telling anyone but her 2 brothers who all kept it secret even to her grave. Even in her dying times she could have told my husband but didn't, and we just can't understand why. Maybe shame, maybe fear that her son would hate her for it. Strange how people think...
-
Whether Brandon truly died or has been somehow involved as a Michael double, I'm sure that details are slowly being revealed to us
I feel the same
But I don't rule out the twin theory simply because there's something going on that we haven't nailed down yet. I want to keep both eyes open and not miss a thing. 8-)
Same here. Is Michael Jackson we are talking about :lol:
-
I find it interesting that no body has really spoken about the past of the Jackson`s but themselves. I haven`t seen relatives or friends from back in the day say anything much about how poor they were or how many kids they had. There might be the odd few but then they could have been put up to it. Also I and I know a few other people have doubts about who is actually a brother or sister or mother and father. This could be a little concoction from here and there by Motown for all we know. There is so much that has been kept a secret. Why would the birth records be sealed (has anyone done research on when a birth record would be allowed to be sealed) if there wasn`t a secret of some sort to protect. It would make sense in terms of why they don`t seem close or to have much communication with each other. Michael had a baby and Janet didn`t even meet him for months, Encino is about to be foreclosed (maybe) and Janet doesn`t fork over money for her parents to save it, Marlon doesn`t seem to have much to do with the family, LaToya went all nuts there for a while and went for years withoug seeing her parents and siblings. Things they say about their family seems rehearsed and scripted and some things are said verbatim over and over and most of the family stories are from a long time ago. I`m not saying I believe all or any of this...but I do know that things are not what they seem...I am not passing judgement either...If there are major secrets then imagine how hard it has been for this family all these years. I remember back to the tweet from Janet to Randy...something like she thought it was time the public knew the truth and she had his back and thinks it`s time to tell. I will be happy for them when it`s all out and they can get some peace from the craziness.
-
Well you know what they say, if you tell one lie, you have to tell a few more to cover for the first lie, and pretty soon others are involved in maintaining the lie. I look back even to my own extended families (besides the one I shared about the husband's mom) there was lots of things I heard about this and that including dark secrets etc. The Jacksons are a big family; they got involved with a big money-making record company and sometimes things are done for expediency sake. Joe was abusive and cheating and so there was fear involved. Then there's the media who like to stretch stories so they sell better. Then Michael has got his big dream hoax on top of all this. Everybody's got some secrets!
Looking back to SD post about BC for stillborn, that does seem strange that they didn't used to keep a record of it, since we are traditionally a Christian continent where life from conception is considered a child. My sister-in-law had twins stillborn and they make a casket and buried them on top of my mother's grave with another marker. I'm pretty sure they don't have BCs for them. Maybe it's only for those who request one, so abortions aren't requiring one.