Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • 29 Replies
  • 1267 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DancingTheDream

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 4923
    • Show only replies by DancingTheDream

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 01:49:37 PM
Does anyone have a link to this second part of the interview?

I agree... i dont think MJ was close to his family, either.. especially his siblings.  

That makes total sense and it is something i have suspected for a long time.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline CrazyBanana

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 745
    • Show only replies by CrazyBanana

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 02:11:05 PM
umm..im sorry I dont get this..
then whos body did they see?
its not making any sense to me... they have to be..or at least some of them
to me, if the family is not in on it then there is no hoax...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline DancingTheDream

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 4923
    • Show only replies by DancingTheDream

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 02:54:26 PM
@naku..     Your theory does not fit,

We have learnt that MJ shut his family out.   Thats very clear to me.  Explains the families behavour and emotions.  They have seemed false and fake and money grabbing from the start.  

WHy would Michael leave his three children in that Encino house????   If he felt that way about his family, why would he leave those kids at that house and expose those kids the way they have been exposed?

They were put on stage at the memorial... we were all shocked at that at the time and the bodyguards have confirmed all our thoughts on that.

Its not adding up for me anymore.  I think he may be gone.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Doctor Death

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 484
    • Show only replies by Doctor Death

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 02:58:46 PM
Sorry man...dont agree.

The family wont risk making a fool of themselves by sayiing things like "he wasnt there at the AIRPORT when he left"....and things like "I AM GONNA SEE MY BROTHER REAL SOON"......


I have no idea as to how and why these bodyguards were told to speak the way they did, but If MJ is hoaxing around, then the family has gotta know....

Primary Reason: He was very protective and possessive about his kids....And he WOULD NOT let them stay for 8 months at his brothers homes with whom he was so "disconnected".

Remember what Joe Jackson said at the Larry King interview aftert the Memorial?

Larry King asked him where Mihcael's body was....He said that he ddint know.....He said that he didnt know where "THEY" had taken it after the memorial.....


Who do you think "THEY" be?......
Plus although MJ has a lotta doubles, you can still tell the difference between them and  the real MJ.....And the family of all people would know that.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline CrazyBanana

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 745
    • Show only replies by CrazyBanana

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 03:05:37 PM
ok so they say they were not there when he passed...maybe MJ felt threatened and organised it with  the fam around the time when the bodyguards wernt there? but that still makes no sense to me...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Happy Feet

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 320
    • Show only replies by Happy Feet

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 03:24:50 PM
Quote from: "CrazyBanana"
umm..im sorry I dont get this..
then whos body did they see?
its not making any sense to me... they have to be..or at least some of them
to me, if the family is not in on it then there is no hoax...

I agree Crazybanana. Latoya identified the body. Latoya was present at the funeral home when they removed a hair sample. Latoya viewed the body with Paris.  

Katherine Jackson has all of Michael's children, who in turn also has Jermaines kids and his ex-wife living with her. If this is a hoax and Michaels family are not in the know, then we must assume Michael has moved on from being a father as he would never see his kids again without revealing himself to at least his mother.

Whilst I may accept to some degree the family were not that close, I don't believe they don't know about the hoax.
as you said crazybanana..... "if the family is not in on it, then there is no hoax".
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

the arabian nights

  • *
  • Guest
    • Show only replies by the arabian nights

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 04:12:16 PM
family stick together, at the end of the day - even if you cant stand them

its a means to an end

if money got in the way - well he has none now
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline kingofmystery

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 585
    • Show only replies by kingofmystery

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 04:59:28 PM
Read this thread for another possible interpretation of the interview:
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=7047
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."  Margaret Mead

Offline heisinme09

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 494
    • Show only replies by heisinme09

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 05:10:04 PM
Some thoughts I have about the Bodyguard's Interview:

1) If it is true that they claim to be giving the interview "to set the record straight, to defend him", then why would they divulge information that could be embarrassing to Michael's memory such as credit cards being declined and subsequent evictions from hotels, the fact that Jesse Jackson had to pay for Michael & his family to come to his birthday party because Michael couldn't afford the trip or even that he'd allegedly asked them about getting him some marijuana? Even if these things were true, what positive purpose did it serve to divulge them? And let's look at the marijuana question...you'll notice that it is the interviewer that puts that question to them, as if she already knew the answer...typical media sensationalism... who cares if he wanted to smoke a little pot? He would have been a lot better off doing that than many of the prescription drugs he allegedly took.
It could have helped him with his pain and, for the sake of his lungs/singing, he actually could have taken it in pill form rather than smoke it.
And as I understand it, in California, it is completely legal to obtain it for medicinal purposes. But most importantly, IT WOULDN'T HAVE KILLED HIM!

2) As for their reaction when asked what the children would think if they saw this interview, you could tell that the question hit them like a ton
of bricks....like they hadn't even considered that possibility....clearly they were quite fond of the kids....but they didn't think about them, did they, when they
agreed to do this interview, unless they planned to only talk about positive things...but let's see what they DID talk about:

Daddy making out in the backseat with different women.
Daddy asking where to get pot.
Daddy not paying his bills.
Daddy not allowing Grandpa Joe or Uncle Randy on their property.
Daddy having a drug intervention with their uncles.
Daddy throwing a cell phone through a window & breaking it.

Are ANY of these things that those children, at their respective ages, needed to hear about their Daddy after he's gone?

3) When they talked about "all these millions, all these zero's" coming in and out of that house and yet "we can't get a check cut to us for $5000?"
To me, that sounds like motivation to "tell all"....to "get what's coming to me"....to "betray"....to "write a book"....to "make money".....why should Michael
have expected one single person in his life, except his mother and children, NOT to betray him....to be his Judas....to ask for their silver pieces...so, so
sad....and yet, these same fools have the nerve to pass judgment on all the celebrities they saw at the memorial who hadn't come around in the last two
years? Seriously? Cannot they not see the hyprocrisy in this?

4) I didn't get the impression that these guys had a lot going on upstairs....brawn vs. brains....very poor grammar throughout the interview....but perhaps that's not uncommon in the Bodyguard Business.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
"And above all, watch with glittering eyes the whole world around you because the greatest secrets are always hidden in the most unlikely places....and those who don\'t believe in magic will never find it" - Roald Dahl

Offline paula-c

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 7597
    • Show only replies by paula-c
    • https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/378800000669499472/986af9e4566ce7ab11ef8703e3b19b04_normal.jpeg

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 08:46:23 PM
I think there are many people who now want to make money at the expense of Michael, a lot of garbage in this interview. And do not say so of women, is a man and has the right, but there are more private places the back of a car, but as I said earlier these men are talking a lot of "garbage" :geek:

Offline deedee75

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 192
    • Show only replies by deedee75

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 10:34:54 PM
I think after the 2005 trials MJ and family grew closer together MJ knew that if he left custody of his kids to his mother they would be around more of his family and that what he must have wanted because it clear she has a good relationship with all of her children and MJ must have known this before he pick her.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline SearchingForTruths

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 79
    • Show only replies by SearchingForTruths
    • http://dark-desert-rose.deviantart.com/

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 10:56:02 PM
Quote from: "paula-c"
I think there are many people who now want to make money at the expense of Michael, a lot of garbage in this interview. And do not say so of women, is a man and has the right, but there are more private places the back of a car, but as I said earlier these men are talking a lot of "garbage" :geek:

I agree. I sense much of what they were saying was crap. I really can't see Michael asking someone for weed, seriously. I'm not claiming to know him, I'm not saying it's impossible. I think it just bothers me too much to believe it... I know far too many people that do pot, they are NOT enjoyable to be around. I think that clashes a little with people saying how amazingly nice and smart Michael was.
I also just don't really get a trustworthy vibe from these guys. Um, who's heard of them before this? What happened to Tippy, he came back right? If I was Michael's friend, I totally wouldn't go on TV and talk about him at all, especially private things like his love life  :?  They had to get paid for this or something, it's too sudden.

I just don't know what to think anymore. I think the hear-say is getting to me... It's ruining him...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

L.O.V.E.
It\'s A
Mystery
Where You\'ll
Find Me
Where You\'ll Find...
All is LOVE

Offline CrazyBanana

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 745
    • Show only replies by CrazyBanana

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 10, 2010, 11:27:06 PM
Quote from: "SearchingForTruths"
Quote from: "paula-c"
I think there are many people who now want to make money at the expense of Michael, a lot of garbage in this interview. And do not say so of women, is a man and has the right, but there are more private places the back of a car, but as I said earlier these men are talking a lot of "garbage" :geek:

I agree. I sense much of what they were saying was crap. I really can't see Michael asking someone for weed, seriously. I'm not claiming to know him, I'm not saying it's impossible. I think it just bothers me too much to believe it... I know far too many people that do pot, they are NOT enjoyable to be around. I think that clashes a little with people saying how amazingly nice and smart Michael was.
I also just don't really get a trustworthy vibe from these guys. Um, who's heard of them before this? What happened to Tippy, he came back right? If I was Michael's friend, I totally wouldn't go on TV and talk about him at all, especially private things like his love life  :?  They had to get paid for this or something, it's too sudden.

I just don't know what to think anymore. I think the hear-say is getting to me... It's ruining him...
I think they said he asked about it...(weed)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline ABeautifulMind

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 198
    • Show only replies by ABeautifulMind

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 11, 2010, 12:09:22 AM
Just a question, didn't one of the reports say they found Marijuana in MJ's house? maybe there's a connection.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Happy Feet

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 320
    • Show only replies by Happy Feet

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 11, 2010, 01:25:41 AM
Quote from: "ABeautifulMind"
Just a question, didn't one of the reports say they found Marijuana in MJ's house? maybe there's a connection.

Yeah that's the first thing I thought when I watched the interview this morning and connected it to that story. The family found the rancid marijuana and actually altered LAPD to it. I think they said they thought it was crack or heroin or something in those lines found in his gym bag. I thought it was an interesting coincidence.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

the arabian nights

  • *
  • Guest
    • Show only replies by the arabian nights

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 11, 2010, 04:43:34 AM
these bodyguards say they want to defend mike but you will find that what they are saying is far from that.

they will let him down - for 30 pieces of silver

just wait and see
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline jessicakthx

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 460
    • Show only replies by jessicakthx
    • http://www.causes.com/mjpeace

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 11, 2010, 06:45:10 AM
Quote from: "the arabian nights"
these bodyguards say they want to defend mike but you will find that what they are saying is far from that.

they will let him down - for 30 pieces of silver

just wait and see

This is what has been wrought for 30 pieces of silver - the tongues of men & angels bought by a beloved betrayer...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

the arabian nights

  • *
  • Guest
    • Show only replies by the arabian nights

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 11, 2010, 09:13:19 AM
Quote from: "DancingTheDream"
@naku..     Your theory does not fit,

We have learnt that MJ shut his family out.   Thats very clear to me.  Explains the families behavour and emotions.  They have seemed false and fake and money grabbing from the start.  

WHy would Michael leave his three children in that Encino house????   If he felt that way about his family, why would he leave those kids at that house and expose those kids the way they have been exposed?

They were put on stage at the memorial... we were all shocked at that at the time and the bodyguards have confirmed all our thoughts on that.

Its not adding up for me anymore.  I think he may be gone.

but all the more reason you would take care of your health, if you could not leave the children with anyone, there are no money and their future was uncertain

i think any single parent knows that
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

the arabian nights

  • *
  • Guest
    • Show only replies by the arabian nights

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 11, 2010, 09:18:59 AM
Quote from: "nakupendapia"
...Perhaps a pompous title will get us focus on the whole interview ...feel free to lock or redirect, cheers.


This is a very damaging interview for the Jackson Family, Hoax or not:

i believe these guys, they were very well briefed and perfomed well...except the fake tears...!

I think the primary aim is for the  Public to dissociate with the thought that the KIDS ARE BETTER OFF WITH THE JACKSONS..as I posted before in the Breaking news section, all is in motion to UNITE WITH KIDS...

ON ALL THE JACKSONS:
It demonstrates there is no close link between them contrary, to what they pretended. According to them no famliy gatherings in 2 years excpect for the intervention in the security trailer...?r. He clearly did not want them around. THEY ABANDONNED HIM, JUST LIKE THE REST OF SHOWBIZ, MEDIA ect....he is just clarifying that ...

ON JANET:
It is aimed at diminishing whatever so call close link she had. Mike is 10 years or so older than her..I never bought the "we are best of friends blalalahh.".brothers don't hang out with their sis for ever. I remember reading Janet first saw Prince when he was 2 years old!!! and for years she hasnt seen Mike,..he didnt return calls (she said it herself on an Oprah interview)


When we think about t is actually VERY CLEAR. Mike rather give his 3 kids to an 80 year old grand-mother/albeit his mother or a non relative he trust , Diana Ross than ANY of his relatives...speaks volume.

This is the proof to me that te Jacksons know nothing about the Hoax. they might suspect something but have NO IDEA how to go about it.
that's why the're pushing for Murray and murder conspiracy stories, because otherwise it CLEARLY shows how disconnected they are, and how Mike did not let them in.


Therefore I conclude MURRAY, ORTEGA, AEG (Which I am sure Mike owns some shares) BRANCA..are all in this HOAX with Mike...

P.S Did you notice Murray's look at the camera and smile has he entered the courtroom in February? it's very subtle, but it's real...

"He is watching them..yeaw I am sure he's watching"

hmm..and possibly  reading!

1 am very interested in what you say about the family i thought that he had been close to janet - she went of tours with him accompanied by ma jackson but that was in  1990's  he gave her material he said in his home movies
randy lived with him for a bit

what happened.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline virgo75

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 514
    • Show only replies by virgo75

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 11, 2010, 09:35:44 AM
Quote from: "Happy Feet"
Quote from: "ABeautifulMind"
Just a question, didn't one of the reports say they found Marijuana in MJ's house? maybe there's a connection.

Yeah that's the first thing I thought when I watched the interview this morning and connected it to that story. The family found the rancid marijuana and actually altered LAPD to it. I think they said they thought it was crack or heroin or something in those lines found in his gym bag. I thought it was an interesting coincidence.

Wait, marijuana goes rancid???   :?    :lol:  
If it was rancid, then I guess it wasn't getting smoked up...
Also, as was already stated, marijuana can be legally obtained for medicinal purposes - easing pain from arthritis & multiple sclerosis, slowing down glaucoma, treating nausea in chemotherapy patients, etc.  So if it was there, and it was Michael's - it's possible it was for a specific ailment and he never finished it?

Or it could have been someone else's?
It's not like he doesn't help people who are sick or in need...

Or it could have just been planted but no one was willing to give up their "good" weed and just dropped some old, moldy weed into a bag...

Arabian Nights - I too wonder what happend between the family that they weren't as close?

Even if they went on tour together in the early 90s, that was what, almost 20 years ago!
They all seemed to come together for the trial, but maybe they just all went their separate ways after that?
Since Michael lived overseas for a few years, it's possible that they just never got that closeness back?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline lilith

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 105
    • Show only replies by lilith

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 11, 2010, 11:25:53 AM
Maybe Michael did not like being around his family (which we don't know) there is still the possibility that they know about the hoax nevertheless. Maybe it is a win win situation. They play along and in return they get the public attention they need and use the time of his absence to sell their own stuff. That is what I feel from the very beginning of it all.

E.g. when Joe broke out so shortly after Michael's "death" with his publishing firm - it is just so unimaginable that Joe really thought about that in that moment if Michael was dead indeed. But if Joe is part of the hoax and Michael made him understand that if he plays his part in it, he would have his profits off it - and Joe is just bad with his timing ... you know what I mean?

Like the Jacksons reality show, they use Michael to get attention - maybe that was part of their deal. Like help me with this and you will benefit from it.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »


Offline deepu priyanka

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 162
    • Show only replies by deepu priyanka
    • http://www.twitter.com

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 11, 2010, 12:13:53 PM
THEY MIGHT HAD COUPLE OF FALLOUTS IN THE PAST..[THE FAMILY MEMBERS N MIKE] BUT TO  PULL OF THE HOAX THING ITHINK MJ NEEDS HIS FAMILY SUPPORT N THE HOAX THING WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPOSSIBLE WITH OUT THEIR SUPPORT. IF THEY R NOT INTO THE HOAX ,THEN WHAT R THOSE SLIP UPS FROM THE FAMILY. WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

the arabian nights

  • *
  • Guest
    • Show only replies by the arabian nights

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 11, 2010, 04:29:10 PM
i lean towards the family knowing
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Happy Feet

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 320
    • Show only replies by Happy Feet

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 11, 2010, 05:17:09 PM
Quote from: "virgo75"
Quote from: "Happy Feet"
Quote from: "ABeautifulMind"
Just a question, didn't one of the reports say they found Marijuana in MJ's house? maybe there's a connection.

Yeah that's the first thing I thought when I watched the interview this morning and connected it to that story. The family found the rancid marijuana and actually altered LAPD to it. I think they said they thought it was crack or heroin or something in those lines found in his gym bag. I thought it was an interesting coincidence.

Wait, marijuana goes rancid???   :?    :lol:  
If it was rancid, then I guess it wasn't getting smoked up...
Also, as was already stated, marijuana can be legally obtained for medicinal purposes - easing pain from arthritis & multiple sclerosis, slowing down glaucoma, treating nausea in chemotherapy patients, etc.  So if it was there, and it was Michael's - it's possible it was for a specific ailment and he never finished it?

Or it could have been someone else's?
It's not like he doesn't help people who are sick or in need...

Or it could have just been planted but no one was willing to give up their "good" weed and just dropped some old, moldy weed into a bag...

Arabian Nights - I too wonder what happend between the family that they weren't as close?

Even if they went on tour together in the early 90s, that was what, almost 20 years ago!
They all seemed to come together for the trial, but maybe they just all went their separate ways after that?
Since Michael lived overseas for a few years, it's possible that they just never got that closeness back?

I don't know whose it was. I'm just quoting what was reported and the fact the family called it in.  Why there was some left, who knows. Maybe it was pretty potent  :lol:. You can get some really strong weed out these days (not that I know from experience, just what I've been told). I haven't touched that stuff in over 20 years  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  I'm a good girl now  :lol:  Weed from past experience can go rancid if it is not stored properly.

The bodyguards said he just "enquired" they didn't say purchased. If you watch the smaller guy on the right all in black, he says "enquired", "enquired" when they spoke about it near the end of that segment.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

the arabian nights

  • *
  • Guest
    • Show only replies by the arabian nights

Re: THE BODYGUARDS INTERVIEW: Analysis

  • on: March 11, 2010, 05:19:46 PM
the jacksons love secrets

janet marrying - how many times?
joes daughter - i didnt know that one
jermaine marrying (well it was not legal but) his brothers ex wife

there is alot going on
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
377 Views
Last post January 19, 2010, 10:11:21 AM
by mmz
6 Replies
496 Views
Last post January 24, 2010, 11:06:55 PM
by thecheetoman2004
11 Replies
936 Views
Last post March 09, 2010, 05:09:40 PM
by kingofmystery
3 Replies
649 Views
Last post March 10, 2010, 10:26:42 PM
by PinkTopaz
3 Replies
420 Views
Last post April 25, 2010, 03:47:31 PM
by mjj29081958