0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "GirlInTheMirror"
Wow, great post. Good information.

Just a little story from myself... two weeks ago I had to have surgery. The anaesthetic they gave me was Propofol (indeed looks like milk).
Although I of course have to recover from surgery itself, I still feel tired; although I know the anaesthetic only stays in the system for a few hours, I guess if someone used it frequently, he/she would be dizzy/tired all the time.
..

When I had my knee surgery they gave me propofol as well. I woke up very quick and I was clear and energetic immediately, I was also very hungry. I do remember being very tired at night though.
Oops, instead of quote i went on "edit"...

I was hungry as well!
I get tired quickly right now, but maybe that´s from surgery itself.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"You know, I´m serious, dude!" (Akon) LOL

Quote from: "curls"
Quote from: "hesouttamylife"
......  There is no way his family had gone to his house to tidy up and left a bevy of ill gotten drugs for the drug enforcement team to find and blame on Michael.  Just didn't happen.

Totally agree with you! Unless it was all part of the script!

Unless... they wanted it to be believable that Mike really did die, to make the hoax believable, which would protect Michael if he's in hiding. I know it seems strange, why would they want people to think he was a drug addict if he wasn't? But if his life is truly in danger and he successfully went into hiding, then they would probably do anything and everything to ensure his safety.

Also, if it really was a double or someone else who died that day and that person had a bunch of different drugs in his system, it would make the whole thing more believable that it was MJ if those drugs were found in his home... Who knows, maybe the double was a addicted to prescription drugs. Maybe the double had lots of surgery (and maybe Mike hardly had any like he said) and that's how all the rumors started. I don't know.

Just looking at all possibilities!
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
What you have just witnessed could be the end of a particularly terrifying nightmare. It isn’t. It’s the beginning.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

*

Dancer

Maybe this helps, too?
It's from the Ebony magazine from December 2007.

RUMOR: Michael Jackson is hooked on alcohol and painkillers, and required an "intervention" from his family. (People magazine)

FACT: False. In an open letter, Jackson's mother Katherine and brothers Tito, Jermaine, Marlon and Jackie, issued the following statement: "We categorically deny ever planning, participating in, or having knowledge of any kind of intervention, whatsoever. We strongly believe that these 'sources' and others, no matter who they are, are making these defamatory, inaccurate and untrue claims for monetary reasons."


You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


So many people, like Tom Mesereau, said they never witnessed any drug type behaviour. The TII-dancers and others said he was brillant and had so many great ideas. People who numb themselves  by taking prescription drugs usually don't have brillant ideas.
I don't believe he was an addict.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Akon on MJ, May 2009]The way he thinks....some artists think regional, some think national, I was thinking international. He thinks planets. It\'s on another level...[/size][/color]

*

paula-c

Well I read a little faster Souza's post (I'm at work), and my attention all the undesirable effects of these drugs such as diazepam, lorazepam, temazepam, clonazepam, trazadone, tizanidine, which I have appointed over me draw the attention and the final say because, incontinence, urinary retention, suicidal tendencies, amnesic effect, drowsiness, dizziness, fatigue, impaired memory and learning, impaired motor functions, decreased physical performance, muscle weakness, blurred vision, irritability and aggressiveness, impaired coordination, impaired balance, personality changes, behavioral disturbances, loss of short-term memory, confusion, uncontrollable laughter, confusion, migraine, muscle stiffness, slurred speech, and tizanidine should not be used at a time when muscle tone is needed to assure safe balance and movement in certain activities ,........... increase sexual desire. 8-)  :lol:
How the hell Michael planing all this hoax with all those drugs in your body?
How the hell during the filming of the movie dance, skip and jump and I wrote and what we saw in the movie .. :?:
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I think the rumors of his addiction to drugs were slowly filtered out over the years and MJs camp was mainly responsible for those rumors.  The fact that he didn't sue anyone who printed these stories or ever come out and publicly deny them would be taken by many as a sign that they were true.  Which is what he wanted people to think.  Then when he eventually "dies" of an overdose there will be less surprise as people would be half-expecting it.  I remember after he was cleared in 2005 Randy Taraborrelli said he looked into MJs eyes and said to him he must be so relieved it was over but that MJs eyes were so vacant that he knew he wasn't really "there", that he was essentially so drugged that he wasn't aware of his surroundings.  I reckon Randy being a long-term friend (or at least most of the time he was) he was helping to feed the myth that MJ was an addict even then.  At the famous press conference where Michael denounced Sony and Tommy Mottola there was a lot of talk about his slurred speech and long pauses and spaced-out appearance.  Just another great acting job from Mike I'd wager.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
In a world filled with despair, we must still dare to dream.  And in a world filled with distrust, we must still dare to believe.

Biology was never my strongest subject at school, I was much better in Maths!  ;)
So...I looked at the list, totally ignoring what I did not understand and focussing on numbers, here is where I got to:

1. Number of different drugs on Mike's night table
Diazepam
Tamsulosin
Lorazepram
Temazepam
Clonazepam
Trozodone
Tizanidine
Number of drugs on Mike's night table: 7

2. Dosage of Drugs administered:
1:30am ---> Diazepam ---> 10mg
2:00am ---> Lorazepram ---> 2mg
3:00am ---> Midazolam ---> 2mg
5:00am ---> Lorazepram ---> 2mg
7:30am ---> Midazolam ---> 2mg
10:40am--> Propofol ---> 25mg

Total = 43mg ----> Reduces to 7

I was hoping to get more out of the time sequence or drug administered sequence, but nothing conclusive there, still 2 more 7 to add to the list!

With L.O.V.E
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions


"Let us dream of tomorrow where
we can truly love from the soul, and
know love as the ultimate truth at
the heart of all creation."

*

Elsa

Haven't checked into the drugs much myself.  I do remember Brian Oxman pushing the drugs line in his interview 25-06-2009.  He planted the idea on day 1.

The Search Warrant You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login.

p.11 line 24  This shows none of the medications found were labelled with a patient name.  

p.12 line 12 Warrant states that the family and news reports 'have documented' the various aliases used by Doctors when prescribing medication. Since when does a police investigation accept news reports as documenting facts.

p13 line 22 Shows that only one prescription in the name of Omar Arnold was found at the scene. What was it for?  

I think it would be hard to make a case about who owned or was using the drugs found at the house. The death certificate shows Michael Jackson's residence was 4641 Hayvenhurst  Avenue, Encino, not the rented house in Carolwood Drive.  Therefore evidence that the drugs or anything else found belonged to Michael Jackson seems circumstantial.  That the house was not sealed for a few days before the Search Warrant might mean any evidence is unreliable because it could have been planted.

Dr Murray's interview with police paints him as the hero trying to wean his patient off the propofol that had been supplied by others.  If this goes as far as a court case I guess all the details in the Search Warrant, Coroner's Report and autopsy or any other offical documentation will be under the microscope.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

2 Bad

Thank you Souza. I'm glad we are re-visiting this topic.
I get so irritated with some for going on and on about Michael being an addict. There is just no way that could be fact. I'm sure we are a majority on this as we have taken the time to think outside the box.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

~Souza~Topic starter


I was asking if this was an informative post before and I would like to explain why.

Mo and I posted the "dog theory" a year ago. Many people were ridiculing us and a lot of people still try to discredit us by using this theory against us. I know now that the majority of the people clearly never read it, because this IS the "dog theory"... It's part 2, because part 1 was too obvious because the meds were explained in veterinary use. What I want to say with this is that, even if a theory is far fetched (and I am still convinced it's not that far-fetched at all), there can be lots of good and useful information in it. Yet sadly people decide to take someone else's word that it was all BS and ridiculous, without reading it themselves. I wanted to know if this theory was even read before it was bashed, and I have proven my point, since no one recognizes it. The dog theory is nothing more than an explanation of all the medications and it sums up the side effects, the dog is just a small part of the posts and not even present in part 2.

In short: read before you judge.

**note: I am not saying the people who replied in this thread all ridiculed the "dog theory", I am merely pointing out that it is very easy these days to discredit people and distract them by claiming something, hence no one took the effort reading part 2 amd a lot of people skipped part 1 as well because someone said it was all crap. Just food for thought...
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

MissG

Quote from: "~Souza~"

I was asking if this was an informative post before and I would like to explain why.

Mo and I posted the "dog theory" a year ago. Many people were ridiculing us and a lot of people still try to discredit us by using this theory against us. I know now that the majority of the people clearly never read it, because this IS the "dog theory"... It's part 2, because part 1 was too obvious because the meds were explained in veterinary use. What I want to say with this is that, even if a theory is far fetched (and I am still convinced it's not that far-fetched at all), there can be lots of good and useful information in it. Yet sadly people decide to take someone else's word that it was all BS and ridiculous, without reading it themselves. I wanted to know if this theory was even read before it was bashed, and I have proven my point, since no one recognizes it. The dog theory is nothing more than an explanation of all the medications and it sums up the side effects, the dog is just a small part of the posts and not even present in part 2.

In short: read before you judge.

**note: I am not saying the people who replied in this thread all ridiculed the "dog theory", I am merely pointing out that it is very easy these days to discredit people and distract them by claiming something, hence no one took the effort reading part 2 amd a lot of people skipped part 1 as well because someone said it was all crap. Just food for thought...

Did you read my reply to you about the use of drugs during Euthanasia?? I even asked you if you knew what I was meaning  :)
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
("Minkin güerveeeee")
Michael pls come back


"Why a four-year-old child could understand this hoax. Run out and find me a four-year-old child. I can't make head nor tail out of it"

*

~Souza~Topic starter

Quote from: "Gema"
Quote from: "~Souza~"

I was asking if this was an informative post before and I would like to explain why.

Mo and I posted the "dog theory" a year ago. Many people were ridiculing us and a lot of people still try to discredit us by using this theory against us. I know now that the majority of the people clearly never read it, because this IS the "dog theory"... It's part 2, because part 1 was too obvious because the meds were explained in veterinary use. What I want to say with this is that, even if a theory is far fetched (and I am still convinced it's not that far-fetched at all), there can be lots of good and useful information in it. Yet sadly people decide to take someone else's word that it was all BS and ridiculous, without reading it themselves. I wanted to know if this theory was even read before it was bashed, and I have proven my point, since no one recognizes it. The dog theory is nothing more than an explanation of all the medications and it sums up the side effects, the dog is just a small part of the posts and not even present in part 2.

In short: read before you judge.

**note: I am not saying the people who replied in this thread all ridiculed the "dog theory", I am merely pointing out that it is very easy these days to discredit people and distract them by claiming something, hence no one took the effort reading part 2 amd a lot of people skipped part 1 as well because someone said it was all crap. Just food for thought...

Did you read my reply to you about the use of drugs during Euthanasia?? I even asked you if you knew what I was meaning  :)

Yes I did, I read that before so I knew what you meant. I thought I replied, but clearly I didn't. I read a lot at work and I am not always able to answer.

The main reason for this post though was showing that people should read before they ridicule something, and I still think we should all investigate those meds more. We tried with the dog theory last year, but it was bashed to an amount we never expected, so that topic was more about us being morons than about the medication. I am glad the topic is discussed again and your post is a good contribution.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

*

MissG

The dog theory was not that wrong imo, since the drugs posted fit the drugs used for doggie euthanasia with the exception of one of the drugs.

Also, we have been seeing the word "wrongful death" used as well when talking about euthanasia (lethal injection)

Lately, we have been informed that Messerau is working on the case of a man sentenced with death penalty?

In any case, the doggie theory was more visionary than anything else imo.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
("Minkin güerveeeee")
Michael pls come back


"Why a four-year-old child could understand this hoax. Run out and find me a four-year-old child. I can't make head nor tail out of it"

Can anyone remind me where did we read that he was addict to any of these medications please? I mean official documents, not tabloid press? Thanks!

Anyway, my grandma's drawer has way more meds than this, and she's not an addict.

The number of drugs one person takes doesn't make them addicts, in fact doesn't tell you anything. If someone has 10 diseases, may need 10 meds in a daily basis and won't be an addict coz he/she takes 10 pills.

If you make the maths: Number of days from prescription to death- Number issued (e.g "x pill")- Number remaining (There are some blogs on that, like AnnieIsOkey) you'll have an idea of how he was taken them.

There were more than one medicament of the same group, let's say BDZ's: what if the first one prescripted wasn't working and the Dr. decided to change it for other? We don't know enough to assume things, IMO.

I often read members saying "I don't think he would take the risk of take drugs, he has kids and he loves them so much" and things along these lines. If I remember well, we have here a member who said she's addict and that she has a little boy. Does it mean that she doesn't love him? No. That's why it's called addiction, you can't control it.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"Won't you just let me be?..."

*

mjj4ever777

  • Hoaxer
  • View Profile
  • 1468
  • BE LOVE..LIVE LOVE! I LOVE you all, so very much!
Quote from: "BeTheChange"
Great information Souza!

There has always been many 'versions' of MJ over the years....some media created, some 'fan'/'non-fan' created, some MJ created, etc.  For me, the drug issue since June 25th has, in essence, boiled all those 'versions' of MJ into only two.  (I would not be surprised if, over the years, he did have dependency issues with pain killers or other meds...that's not what I'm addressing here).  The laundry list of meds, including the propofol, that the media (and perhaps MJ himself) would have us believe, paints a very distinct 'version' of MJ.

If we are to believe that he was as addicted, as they claim, then it would probably not be a far stretch to suggest that he had lost all self-control (as many drug addicts do).  Much can be inferred from that alone.  He would not have been able to focus on his work, while in this condition, let alone co-ordinate, manage, produce, and engineer the top selling music documentary of all time....let alone finish the ever so 'top-secret' Dome project (which we have not yet been fully privy to) just two weeks before his 'death'.  It probably wouldn't be a far stretch, either, to say that if true, his drug addiction would have caused a loss of control over his finances as well (money or fame or recogintion would have taken a backseat to the drugs).  And, by extension, a loss over his professional and personal relationships as well (how many times have we heard that MJ surrounded himself with enablers?).  So, not only would he have been a walking zombie incapable of putting in a regular 8-hour shift (or a coherent sentence), let alone a grueling rehearsal schedule, but he would have lost the ability to control his finances...and most importantly, he would have distanced himself from everyone (except those that supported his habit), instead of embarking on an 'adventure' to touch people's lives and hearts (even if it that adventure was simply the This Is It concerts....which we can safely guess is SOOOO much more).

The other 'version' of MJ, if we eliminate the drug rumors (which is what IMO they are)...is a very astute businessman (see Sterchen's list, sorry for misspelling), a very generous humanitarian (see Souza's list), a very kind and gentle father (listen to anything anyone has ever said about him being a father), and a MAN would went about doing extraordinary things while everyone was too stuck on the drug "version" to notice.

But who knows?  I may be wrong and I can say with 100000000% certainty that if the 'drug' version of MJ turns out to be true, then I won't love him any less, but I will definitely come to know "the man I never knew".

With L.O.V.E. always.

Bravo my friend...Bravo! Well said, BetheChange...I don't believe the "druggie" story at all. That's all for the "tabloids" I'm sure that Michael is still at the top of his "game."  If Michael was such a druggie, then why weren't  tons of pictures out there in the "rags", showing him strung out? I mean he had the Paps, following his every move right?  No...Michael is an astute, business man, a loving father, brother, son and the greatest Humanitarian, this world will ever know! Michael Jackson's name will go down in history, for bringing Love back to our planet, on top of all his other achievements. He gave so much for us and it is now our turn to show him his messages were not said in vain. We need to unite in love and help others to believe in love, and to help them make a change also!
Thanks again for your post BetheChange!
Blessings and love to all!
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Ah, Souza, ah! I read that blog when you first posted it around this time last year, I thought it was the most interesting theory, but I wasn't registered at any hoax sites yet..! I thought it was plausible and I couldn't believe that people were just blowing it off.. There's been so much information and so little time since then, I haven't read it since, but I was so into all of your blogs then, they were one of the main reasons for my believing in the hoax.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

 

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal