Oprah to reveal "Family Secret" / Major Reunion on Monday

  • 43 Replies
  • 3193 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MJmakesmespeechless

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 1468
    • Show only replies by MJmakesmespeechless
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.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Speechless, Speechless, That\'s how you make me feel!!!
I Love You now and forever Michael

Offline reasonables+luvs+MJ

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 916
    • Show only replies by reasonables+luvs+MJ
Quote from: "MJmakesmespeechless"
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.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
C--ontains
O--ptional
I--nformation
N--ot
C--razy
I--ncidents
D--emanding
E--motional
N--aive
C--razed
E--nforcements


-----------------------------------

b--elieving
e--verything
L--ike
I--nconsistent
E--vidence
v--aries
i--n
n--umerous
g--enres


------------------------------------

If you would just \'Hold my Hand\', together we can cause \'Breaking News\', because we will find out who is \'Behind the Mask\'. --reason

Online skyways

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • in tune)
  • Posts: 728
  • open to the openness
    • Show only replies by skyways
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 !
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline ForstAMoon

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 1126
    • Show only replies by ForstAMoon
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/
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline curls

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 3111
    • Show only replies by curls
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!)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Online ~Souza~

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Hoaxer
  • *****
  • Mrs. SEHF
  • Posts: 10008
    • Show only replies by ~Souza~
    • Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
That story is eerily similar to Eliza's story. Just change the names...

 :?:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline reasonables+luvs+MJ

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 916
    • Show only replies by reasonables+luvs+MJ
Well, IMO, that was a big waist of time. :roll:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
C--ontains
O--ptional
I--nformation
N--ot
C--razy
I--ncidents
D--emanding
E--motional
N--aive
C--razed
E--nforcements


-----------------------------------

b--elieving
e--verything
L--ike
I--nconsistent
E--vidence
v--aries
i--n
n--umerous
g--enres


------------------------------------

If you would just \'Hold my Hand\', together we can cause \'Breaking News\', because we will find out who is \'Behind the Mask\'. --reason

Offline Glinda

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 658
    • Show only replies by Glinda
http://www.wargs.com/other/winfrey.html
Oprah is related to the Presley's as well..
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Grace

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 2864
    • Show only replies by Grace
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-)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Create your day. Create the most astounding year of your life. Be the change you want to see in the world! L.O.V.E.
***********************************************************************************************
"I am tired, I am really tired of manipulation." Michael Jackson, Harlem, New York, NY, July 6, 2002
***********************************************************************************************
******* Let's tear the walls in the brains of this world down.*******

Time to BE.

Online Andrea

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 3787
    • Show only replies by Andrea
Quote from: "~Souza~"
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...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Le Papillon Bleu

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 1209
    • Show only replies by Le Papillon Bleu
Oh My God they have to put me to sleep in my padded cell  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Serenitys_Dream

  • *
  • Guest
    • Show only replies by Serenitys_Dream
Quote from: "Glinda"
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://http://www.weirdworm.com/5-random-and-ridiculous-rock-star-myths/
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline MissG

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 7403
  • We are always in our own company
    • Show only replies by MissG
Quote from: "Grace"
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.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
("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"

Online ~Souza~

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Hoaxer
  • *****
  • Mrs. SEHF
  • Posts: 10008
    • Show only replies by ~Souza~
    • Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
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:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Serenitys_Dream

  • *
  • Guest
    • Show only replies by Serenitys_Dream
Quote from: "Gema"
Quote from: "Grace"
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.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Online ~Souza~

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Hoaxer
  • *****
  • Mrs. SEHF
  • Posts: 10008
    • Show only replies by ~Souza~
    • Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
Quote from: "Serenitys_Dream"
Quote from: "Gema"
Quote from: "Grace"
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.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline hesouttamylife

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 5393
    • Show only replies by hesouttamylife
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:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
"Don't stop this child, He's the father of man
Don't cross his way, He's part of the plan
I am that child, but so are you
You've just forgotten, Just lost the clue.”

MJ "Magical Child"
Still Rocking my World…
   and leaving me Speechless!

“True goodbyes are the ones never said

Serenitys_Dream

  • *
  • Guest
    • Show only replies by Serenitys_Dream
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "Serenitys_Dream"
Quote from: "Gema"
Quote from: "Grace"
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://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://http://www.drkenhunt.com/papers/everyday.html
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline mjkate

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 276
    • Show only replies by mjkate
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
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline voiceforthesilent

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 5485
    • Show only replies by voiceforthesilent
Quote from: "hesouttamylife"
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 :)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
I'm proud to be a child of God and a member of MJ's Army of L.O.V.E.
 
"Press coverage of my life is like [watching] a fictitious movie...like watching science fiction. It's not true." ~Michael Jackson (2005)

"You should not believe everything you read. You are missing the most important revelations". Craig Harvey 3-15-2012

Online ~Souza~

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Hoaxer
  • *****
  • Mrs. SEHF
  • Posts: 10008
    • Show only replies by ~Souza~
    • Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
Quote from: "Serenitys_Dream"
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://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.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline RK

  • *
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoaxer
  • ****
  • Posts: 3537
    • Show only replies by RK
Quote from: "mjkate"
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.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Serenitys_Dream

  • *
  • Guest
    • Show only replies by Serenitys_Dream
Quote from: "~Souza~"
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.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Online ~Souza~

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Hoaxer
  • *****
  • Mrs. SEHF
  • Posts: 10008
    • Show only replies by ~Souza~
    • Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
Quote from: "Serenitys_Dream"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
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.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline MissG

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 7403
  • We are always in our own company
    • Show only replies by MissG
Quote from: "Serenitys_Dream"
Quote from: "Gema"
Quote from: "Grace"
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  ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
("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"