Read if you dare !!!!!!!!

by speechlessornot Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:30 am

I am not sure this haven't been posted before. If so, please apologize and delete it.

Please read it....be prepared for a shock!!!

http://souza-mjhoaxdeath-themovietheory.blogspot.com/

I think i'll take a break . My mind need a break or i'll get crazy soon.

by 4evermichael71 Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:38 am

I read it..is no comment a comment?

by wandulka Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:53 am

BS?

I mean, this is too much..lol..

by infinitylady Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:54 am

Ok...Ok...I am trying to understand. So, the real MJ is dead? Maybe I misread something. I'm.....okk Read if you dare !!!!!!!! Icon_question

by H'aime Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:56 am

Umm...this is going to sound harsh and I don't want to offend you, but I've got to be honest. I think you're being taken for a ride. There's a sucker born every minute . Those "birth records" look really, really FAKE. So according to this, Katherine Jackson is related to a "Billie Jean Jackson"? I'm not trying to make fun of you or Souza, but please critically analyze any information you're given.

by 4evermichael71 Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:57 am

wandulka wrote:BS? I mean, this is too much..lol..

Thank you for saying what I was thinking Very Happy

by giannip Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:57 am

Ok. Interesting... but I'd have a questiom: where was this twin when they were the Jackson 5? Don't you think that Joe would have used Mike's talent too?

by infinitylady Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:57 am

LOL! Wow!

But you know what though, Michael Jackson isn't the only Michael Jackson. Just like there is more than one person with my same name and last name and could have the same date of birth.

But this is something else.

by ishealive Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:58 am

More BS, please don't believe everything you read.

by wandulka Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:59 am

4evermichael71 wrote:
wandulka wrote:BS? I mean, this is too much..lol..

Thank you for saying what I was thinking

You're welcome Read if you dare !!!!!!!! Icon_biggrin

by mjgirl86 Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:59 am

I only skimmed it... but it seems like nonsense...

by WanaBstartnSthn Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:59 am

H'aime wrote:Umm...this is going to sound harsh and I don't want to offend you, but I've got to be honest. I think you're being taken for a ride. There's a sucker born every minute . Those "birth records" look really, really FAKE. So according to this, Katherine Jackson is related to a "Billie Jean Jackson"? I'm not trying to make fun of you or Souza, but please critically analyze any information you're given.

Those are not birth records. Souza already mentioned that it's from a website called intelius.com. It's already known that the results of the search aren't 100% accurate all the time. I've searched myself on it as well.

by wandulka Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:02 am

I believe Michael is alive, but this is just...STOOPID Read if you dare !!!!!!!! Icon_evil

by WanaBstartnSthn Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:05 am

I think this theory might be a little too far-fetched as well. Especially considering the fact that they don't really make clear what happened to "Mike". They say "Malachi" died a day after birth so how does that fit in with the twins both being alive up until now. It doesn't make much sense to me. I also dont see why the Jacksons would hide a twin from the public all these years as well unless he looked like the Hunchback of Notre Dame lmao Im joking but seriously I don't think they thought out this theory too much. I think they should've developed it just a bit more.

by H'aime Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:06 am

@ WannaBeStartinSthn

I'm aware that they are not actual birth records, but what I mean is the database where you received them doesn't seem accurate. There are many Katherine Jacksons and many Michael Jacksons. Once again, "Billie Jean Jackson"? Really???

Edit: I just read your second post. Nevermind.

by ~Susie~ Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:31 am

As for the site, I don't know how accurate it is, but I don't think it's 100% accurate.To be honest, I believe it's all fake.And as for the photos where Michael's height is different, it could be one of his impersonators.I don't believe that. No offense, but it's far-fetched.

by 4evermichael71 Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:37 am

I thought it was Marlon who had a twin named Brandon that died shortly after birth?
And I found 4 people with the same name as me 2 with the same middle initial. I have a long Polish last name and a rare one at that. So, if there are more with my name, how many Jacksons do you think will be found? BTW, I mean no offense to anyone.

by 4evermichael71 Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:39 am

wandulka wrote:I believe Michael is alive, but this is just...STOOPID

Hey! You're channeling my thoughts again Very Happy

by 4evermichael71 Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:42 am

~Susie~ wrote:As for the site, I don't know how accurate it is, but I don't think it's 100% accurate.To be honest, I believe it's all fake.And as for the photos where Michael's height is different, it could be one of his impersonators.I don't believe that. No offense, but it's far-fetched.

With the height differences it could possible be as simple as an optical illusion because the depth perception and the angle of the photos is in different perspective.

by mo2kidzs Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:46 am

Well it's about time.. I have been searching this myself for some time now.. great find!
What started me on this was this vid.. see the one pic of the boys jumping up and down.. twins are there, also note.. how can Randy be the little one??? Was he born then? See vid above.

Also, I had wondered why he would name his own two boys Michael..
I would never hold this over there heads, I'm sure they had to do what they had to. Afterall this is a "FAMILY" business.

by 4evermichael71 Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:56 am

A random tidbit of nothingness...It is plausible Michael named both his boys Michael because he just wanted to. George Foreman named ALL his kids George..even the girls.

Isn't the littlest one Michael? I see the two in goldish shirts, but twins? IDK..

by mo2kidzs Sat Oct 31, 2009 10:59 am

4evermichael71 wrote:A random tidbit of nothingness...It is plausible Michael named both his boys Michael because he just wanted to. George Foreman named ALL his kids George..even the girls.

Yes that could be.. but take a real good look at the interviews with MB.. see the two different MJ's.. also did u ever notice how one MJ says he got beat badly and the other one says he didn't and he guesses he was the golden child.. it's all there if you look with an open mind:)

by xXxAmyxXx Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:02 am

Are they saying mj has a twin?

by MJ'sForever Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:04 am

I have thought the same thing... I have wondered if Michael could have been a twin? Just the two interviews one with Oprah and Living with Michael Jackson.... It almost looks like two different people... He seems taller in the living with Michael Jackson.. more antimated with Oprah..... The smile is different. I have not yet watched the vidio posted here yet but I think it should be considered... The answeres he gives in the Living with MJ interview are too simular to the ones he gives in Oprah...I am not sying I believe it... I am just saying it should be looked at again.

by mo2kidzs Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:06 am

4evermichael71 wrote:A random tidbit of nothingness...It is plausible Michael named both his boys Michael because he just wanted to. George Foreman named ALL his kids George..even the girls.

Isn't the littlest one Michael? I see the two in goldish shirts, but twins? IDK..

No I don't think so.. in a cyber chat way back in the 90's MJ stated there was 10 in the family.. he messed up.

Also in looking into his past me and someone else found he WAS in the Middle East and Ireland in 2006 .. how can that be?

by 4evermichael71 Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:07 am

mo2kidzs wrote:
4evermichael71 wrote:A random tidbit of nothingness...It is plausible Michael named both his boys Michael because he just wanted to. George Foreman named ALL his kids George..even the girls.
Yes that could be.. but take a real good look at the interviews with MB.. see the two different MJ's.. also did u ever notice how one MJ says he got beat badly and the other one says he didn't and he guesses he was the golden child.. it's all there if you look with an open mind:)

I never watched the entire MB interview, it sickens me. As for one saying he was beaten and the other saying he wasn't..I could explain that one too, but I'll just let this one alone and move on Smile

I hope everyone has a nice Halloween and have a fun and safe night if you're going out. Don't eat too much of your kid's candy LOL (no I wasn't implying anyone would, I just know I used to eat some of my daughter's when she came home..you know..to test it..yeah, that's it Very Happy

)

by Rach Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:10 am

I'm all for keeping an open mind when it comes to things like this but my question is: why?

How could Katherine have known she was going to have twins and one of them was going to grow up and be the worlds biggest superstar? Why keep a twin secret from birth?

Yes the clues are there if you are going down this route, but I need a valid explanation as to what the mystery of keeping a twin a secret was.

by mo2kidzs Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:13 am

MJ'sForever wrote:I have thought the same thing... I have wondered if Michael could have been a twin? Just the two interviews one with Oprah and Living with Michael Jackson.... It almost looks like two different people... He seems taller in the living with Michael Jackson.. more antimated with Oprah..... The smile is different. I have not yet watched the vidio posted here yet but I think it should be considered... The answeres he gives in the Living with MJ interview are too simular to the ones he gives in Oprah...I am not sying I believe it... I am just saying it should be looked at again.

Right.. and when you go over the past 45 years with that thought in mind, you'll see more.Also in the Living wityh Michael Jackson.. you'll a part where MB mentions, he seems like another MJ today.. ( It is the one with him trying to feed Blanket)There is soooo much more I need to write it all down.. and sorry but I think one of them, "MIKE" might have been addicted to drugs..I will try to find this vid where he is acting very strange, jumpy, like he is speeding his brains out.. sorry but it's the truth, and if we want to find the truth, we have to look at ugly things.

by mo2kidzs Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:17 am

Rach wrote:I'm all for keeping an open mind when it comes to things like this but my question is: why?
I don't know why.. that is what gets me everytime.. cuz I really cannot imagine the why
How could Katherine have known she was going to have twins and one of them was going to grow up and be the worlds biggest superstar? Why keep a twin secret from birth?
She didn't, why would that matter?
Yes the clues are there if you are going down this route, but I need a valid explanation as to what the mystery of keeping a twin a secret was.

I wish I knew too.. hopefully someone can help with that.

by 4evermichael71 Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:19 am

IDK but the dead twin Brandon would make 10 in the family he was a live birth but died shortly after of respiratory failure.

by Rach Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:19 am

Keeping a secret twin from birth is a massive deal and the feeling I got from the theory was that the twin was there to fill in for the "real" Michael whenever he needed a break or things were getting too much for him.

So again my question is (with this in mind), why keep a twin a secret and Katherine could not have known one of her children was going to be a superstar so this cannot be the explanation for it.

by xXxAmyxXx Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:22 am

so if mj has a twin does that mean the twin got vitiligo too?

by H'aime Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:23 am

All images are processed through a filter. Michael Jackson, being the one of the most photographed and videotaped person in history has had his image go through many filters for 40 long years. Sometimes different things come through a photograph at different times. Individuals are constantly changing... their moods, attitudes, faces and bodies change sometimes naturally and sometimes artificially. This can explain part of why Michael Jackson looks different in some places, and acts different at some times. I do believe that he may have had doubles (even if they weren't necessarily in the movie), but I think that a lot of the inconsistencies can be chalked up to being a complex person who is constantly under the gaze of the public.

by mo2kidzs Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:24 am

Rach wrote:Keeping a secret twin from birth is a massive deal and the feeling I got from the theory was that the twin was there to fill in for the "real" Michael whenever he needed a break or things were getting too much for him.

So again my question is (with this in mind), why keep a twin a secret and Katherine could not have known one of her children was going to be a superstar so this cannot be the explanation for it.

I don't know why or how they did it yet... but it always comes back to it though.. even in the movie, the songs (who is it) and so on.

by yaya Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:25 am

H'aime wrote:Umm...this is going to sound harsh and I don't want to offend you, but I've got to be honest. I think you're being taken for a ride. There's a sucker born every minute . Those "birth records" look really, really FAKE. So according to this, Katherine Jackson is related to a "Billie Jean Jackson"? I'm not trying to make fun of you or Souza, but please critically analyze any information you're given.

agreed.

by Rach Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:25 am

H'aime wrote:All images are processed through a filter. Michael Jackson, being the one of the most photographed and videotaped person in history has had his image go through many filters for 40 long years. Sometimes different things come through a photograph at different times. Individuals are constantly changing... their moods, attitudes, faces and bodies change sometimes naturally and sometimes artificially. This can explain part of why Michael Jackson looks different in some places, and acts different at some times. I do believe that he may have had doubles (even if they weren't necessarily in the movie), but I think that a lot of the inconsistencies can be chalked up to being a complex person who is constantly under the gaze of the public.

I agree 100% with you.

by Rach Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:26 am

What bothers me about things like this there is never any explanation for a motive.

That is what you do with theories. You break them down piece by piece and tell your "audience" why you feel this. I could come up with a new theory based on Michael been murdered on June 25th (BTW I don't believe this) but without breaking it down and explaining the hows and whys it doesn't prove anything.

by 4evermichael71 Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:29 am

I'm with Rach..that's the part that makes no sense. Why hide one back then? Why not put them all out there. Forty-five years ago no one new the things Michael would achieve. AND in a Harper's Bazaar interview done by Janet recently she calls Michael "Mike" and so did Katherine. She wasn't referring to a twin but to Michael. Go figure..anyway..stay safe and Happy Halloween!

by Harleyblonde Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:31 am

It would be a logical explaination but to my mind really far far fetched. So she is saying that Michael has a twin and from being knee high to a milk bottle and growing up all the distant family members and neighbours didn't breathe a word to anyone? even when the Jackson 5 were world famous and there were people interviewed and write ups on the family in comics and magazines about Michael especially as he was everyone's favorite no one thought to mention it? Why would they keep it secret? Oh maybe it was just in case little Michael grows up and gets to be the King of pop and the most famous guy on the planet he can have a double and help when and if it gets too much? If they could predict that then they would be picking winning lottery numbers every week and LaToya and Jermaine would be happy!!
I think that it would be far easier to think this as it is some sort of an explaination and it would bring a sort of closure and I think in a quest for the answer she has thought of what she wants to believe is the answer-we all want answers but I sincerely doubt this is what happened.

by mo2kidzs Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:33 am

Rach wrote:What bothers me about things like this there is never any explanation for a motive.

That is what you do wit theories. You break them down piece by piece and tell your "audience" why you feel this. I could come up with a new theory based on Michael been murdered on June 25th (BTW I don't believe this) but without breaking it down and explaining the hows and whys it doesn't prove anything.

I told you I didn't get to the why or how yet, but I agree with the twin theroy. Any of this for the last four months has not been all in your face facts, if that was the case well then we'd have it sloved already.Have we yet to get any of these facts confrimed yet? No we have not, if the rest of the world thinks we are nuts... are we not suppose to "look" at everything no matter how crazy it sounds? Hey even the ones who have come up with the whys or hows, is it sloved yet.. no. And it won't ever be til the Jackson come forward and spill the beans.

by 4evermichael71 Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:34 am

Rach wrote:
H'aime wrote:All images are processed through a filter. Michael Jackson, being the one of the most photographed and videotaped person in history has had his image go through many filters for 40 long years. Sometimes different things come through a photograph at different times. Individuals are constantly changing... their moods, attitudes, faces and bodies change sometimes naturally and sometimes artificially. This can explain part of why Michael Jackson looks different in some places, and acts different at some times. I do believe that he may have had doubles (even if they weren't necessarily in the movie), but I think that a lot of the inconsistencies can be chalked up to being a complex person who is constantly under the gaze of the public.

I agree 100% with you.

As do I

by Rach Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:35 am

It was also just brought to my attention that any photographers who were taking pictures would have to be in on this as well. To me that doesn't make any sense. I am sure there are many out there with greedy intentions who would sell on a massive story like this. Also as Harley said above, you can't silence everyone - not even with all the money in the world. Also, where was the "twin" hidden all these years? It reminds me of "The Simpsons" episode with Bart and Hugo!

I'm sorry to keep jumping into this thread with my opinions and I hope I'm not angering anyone. I'm not saying anyone owes me one, but without an explanation as to why and how this was done, I can't get on board with this one.

by Rach Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:37 am

mo2kidzs wrote:I told you I didn't get to the why or how yet, but I agree with the twin theroy. Any of this for the last four months has not been all in your face facts, if that was the case well then we'd have it sloved already.Have we yet to get any of these facts confrimed yet? No we have not, if the rest of the world thinks we are nuts... are we not suppose to "look" at everything no matter how crazy it sounds? Hey even the ones who have come up with the whys or hows, is it sloved yet.. no. And it won't ever be til the Jackson come forward and spill the beans.

Ok calm down. I wasn't addressing my comments at you. They were in general. If you believe that's fine. I never said you couldn't. I said in theories such as this you need to break things down to explain to the rest of us why you think this.

by mo2kidzs Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:39 am

I am sure there are many out there with greedy intentions who would sell on a massive story like this.

Read if you dare !!!!!!!! Icon_mad

was that to me.. I don't have any greedy thoughts.. okay, I'm done I can see why I don't post here anymore, I get bashed evertime I post.

by Rach Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:41 am

mo2kidzs wrote:I am sure there are many out there with greedy intentions who would sell on a massive story like this.

was that to me.. I don't have any greedy thoughts.. okay, I'm done I can see why I don't post here anymore, I get bashed evertime I post.

Ok you really need to calm down. If you read my post properly you will see I was addressing photographers and people who have grown up around the Jacksons and Michael. Stop jumping to conclusions.

by lovelidae Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:42 am

I think if Michael were a twin a couple of things would have never plagued him in life:

1. The constant loneliness he felt. He would have always had someone with him, like another part of him (no song pun intended)

2. Joe Jackson would have promoted Michael and his twin like a double Jackson wonder.

3. I don't think the Jackson's would ever have been ashamed of a twin child (they happily showed their whole brood to the world).

4. Two Michael Jackson's would have created way more buzz than one

5. Hiding a twin would just sound crazy...IMHO

@Mo2Kidzs

I'm not bashing you, I'm just giving my honest opinion. That's what we are all here for. We throw out ideas and then evaluate and discuss them amongst one another. What seems logical and rational to one person, when its brought to light among alot of brilliant minds can actually seem much different. I don't think its an attack, its just an opinion.

by Human_nature Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:49 am

hmm ok.....

so , if it's true, they had to have the same skin disease...it's possible but almost impossible too.

For me, to believe something like that, I'll need to see original birth certificates.

And more proof as well.

@mo2kidzs don't stop posting here, everybody have opinions. I respect other opinions, I don't always agree as well. We need all opinions to know the truth.

Peace !

by 4evermichael71 Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:53 am

You're right lovelidae..he wouldn't have been so alone..All the kids were shown because they all were special especially in Katherine's eyes.
In Joe's, the marketability alone would have made Mike the twin in the spotlight too. Can you imagine if they were identical? OMG a mirror moonwalk? The possibilities would be endless because the magnitude one has on the world would be doubled. IMHO Katherine would never hide one of her children even if one was "broken" challenged in some way..NO..he would have been just as special as the rest and IMO IF something was wrong with Mike the twin, Michael would have let him shine. I'm not implying something would have had to be wrong with Mike the twin for him to be hidden..I just don't think there was a twin to hide. Especially after one child died a year or so before Michael was born. I'm not bashing either, but I think we can agree to disagree.

by ilprincipe Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:58 am

I respectfully disagree with this theory...
we have some kind of "twins" in all this stuff
"Dave Dave" ..."Tohme Tohme"
and on MJHD a member mentioned the word "thome" --> different spelling than tohme
means "twin"
but I don't know in which language...
I think MJ has/had a lot of doubles the last 20 years....
but he never had a twin...
Marlon had Brandon and that's it.

If you have any solid arguments, feel free to convince me...
but I need more than this desperate try from Souza/and Mo.
BTW: Their theory before TII was released was "Where the wild things are"...
so how come they changed their theory so drastically?!

by Grace Sat Oct 31, 2009 12:08 pm

I have to correct my post since I found the original pictures with the wider view. This is one person in a mirror placed around him. Odd enough the mirror was not polished so I could clearly identify the mirror walls after all. Sorry, I did not want to be misleading.
However I stick to the double theory. Maybe we should ask Kenny about MJ und Michael in the rehearsals LOL

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

I don't want to comment on Katherine. Whether she knew, was behind or whatever. But there is always papa Joseph coming back to my mind who wanted the big career and reputation linked to his name. It was so difficult for everybody to get out of his reach and influence.

I am not so much in the twin theory but in the double theory. I think there was always a double in every phase of Michaels career. Just in case.
To keep the business going.
That has been the habit and attitude of that man Joseph Jackson throughout his life. Keep the business going no matter what and how.
I believe that Arnie is deep in this as to face surgery.

by Sponsored content