tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1213894567662583955.post6319923547414081492..comments2023-08-03T03:15:11.289-07:00Comments on MJHDC: See You In 4 Years ... MaybeUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1213894567662583955.post-70344681515375631072012-02-11T15:41:25.783-08:002012-02-11T15:41:25.783-08:00alot of people thought it was rubbish or stupid or...alot of people thought it was rubbish or stupid or selfish that michael would use a double...before he died, but think about it? <br /><br />I've seemed to noticed that michael' was using doubles in that bashir interview...,<br /><br />infact throught lots of interviews he's used doubles.Asianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1213894567662583955.post-37092639901891453402012-02-11T15:36:45.878-08:002012-02-11T15:36:45.878-08:00four years could have men't anything but I do ...four years could have men't anything but I do like your theory doggie :)<br /><br />do you think that michael was using a double before he died because michael's appearence has been so weird in the last few years like its not even him.?? it seems highly possible that he's been absent for the last few years in the public eye.Asianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1213894567662583955.post-9848664147705670712012-02-10T09:50:23.842-08:002012-02-10T09:50:23.842-08:00Anonymous said: "Maybe he meant 4 years for R...Anonymous said: "Maybe he meant 4 years for Ron Paul to wake people up and get more supporters to become President and actually make changes that matter. (okay...I'm dreaming....Go Ron Paul!) He truly wants to end the senseless wars, though. LOVE THAT MAN!"<br /><br />Ron Paul would be a great replacement for President Obama. I like a lot of his policies. If I could vote, here in the US, he'd be the one getting my vote.Blog Authorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327499013699316695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1213894567662583955.post-22080968259153630892012-02-09T20:49:16.834-08:002012-02-09T20:49:16.834-08:00Maybe he meant 4 years for Ron Paul to wake people...Maybe he meant 4 years for Ron Paul to wake people up and get more supporters to become President and actually make changes that matter. (okay...I'm dreaming....Go Ron Paul!) He truly wants to end the senseless wars, though. LOVE THAT MAN!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1213894567662583955.post-82732096562280926032012-02-09T00:37:37.471-08:002012-02-09T00:37:37.471-08:00IMHO MJ was referring to Barak Obama the first Afr...IMHO MJ was referring to Barak Obama the first African American president. <br /><br />Four years to make people realize that it does not matter whether you're black or white. Four years to UNITE. Only when people start to unite with one another, you can spread LOVE and make the world a better place. <br /><br />"K"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1213894567662583955.post-53637152201664363882012-02-08T17:20:30.276-08:002012-02-08T17:20:30.276-08:00OK, so TS logs in from Holland just Souza does. So...OK, so TS logs in from Holland just Souza does. So what! It's impossible for Michael to be in Holland? Of course not! TS = Front = MJ still stands :)) NOT!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1213894567662583955.post-91517425269738903672012-02-08T12:23:44.470-08:002012-02-08T12:23:44.470-08:00‘Inclusive reckoning’ is most unlikely, considerin...‘Inclusive reckoning’ is most unlikely, considering the context in which the 4 years have been mentioned.<br /><br />It is NOT the contemporary way of thinking about time !<br /><br />A simple example should put an end to this recurring topic:<br /><br />If my daughter’s art teacher is expecting her to finish with an art project by the 13th, she is going to say on the 9th: “ You have 4 days to get it right.”JMseesMJnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1213894567662583955.post-81286335655121457662012-02-08T11:07:06.302-08:002012-02-08T11:07:06.302-08:00Missed a point ... My bad.
bec said: "It'...Missed a point ... My bad.<br /><br />bec said: "It's a bit of a leap to assume that MJ was referring to his four year countdown as slated to begin the following year, in 2010. Why wouldn't he include the present year in his count when referring to the number of years we have left? <br /><br />When MJ said "we have 4 years (from now-presumed) to get it right""<br /><br />So it is safe to presume he meant 2009 but not OK to assume he actually meant full 4 years?<br /><br />Why is that? Does it have anything to do with one assumption is OK because it fits a particular theory. You cannot presume one thing because it fits a theory; and instantly discount another presumption purely because it does not fit the theory.<br /><br />Everything has to be looked at. And if you want to think that TS is 100% correct, without question, that is your choice. But in all honesty I'd rather look at all possibilities first before discounting any of them.<br /><br />But each to their own and all that. I'm just not going to nuzzle down on one person's theory when they aren't even who they say they are. <br /><br />Come on Bec, as a moderator you have less access to the database than I do. Instead of just accepting TS, Front, and Back ... why not ask your Admin to release details to you about where they log in from? Or are you scared of what the answer is?<br /><br />That is the main issue with some of the members of MJDHI that they have given up looking. They sit and wait for TS, Front, and Back to give them their latest morsel. Yet they won't even question who these three are.<br /><br />If there is a long story then to prove it that long story should be told; but if that story which proves something isn't being told you have to wonder why.Blog Authorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327499013699316695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1213894567662583955.post-67203357570183535582012-02-08T10:56:42.248-08:002012-02-08T10:56:42.248-08:00bec said: "If you say, today, "we have 4...bec said: "If you say, today, "we have 4 years (from now) to get it right", you mean: this year, next year, the year after that, and the year after that, correct?<br /><br />It's a bit of a leap to assume that MJ was referring to his four year countdown as slated to begin the following year, in 2010. Why wouldn't he include the present year in his count when referring to the number of years we have left? <br /><br />When MJ said "we have 4 years (from now-presumed) to get it right", you can safely deduce that he meant 2009 (THAT year), 2010, 2011, and 2012."<br /><br />Well if you want to get down to the actual timing of the speech it would still be 2013 including 2009. If the speech was made in anytime in 2009 then 4 years from that date would be a date in 2013 (including 2009).<br /><br />Lets say that it was said on January 7, 2009. Four years from that date is going to be January 7 2013. Unless you want to count actual days; which would make the statement invalid as it uses the term years.<br /><br />You can read anything into a quote, but he clearly says "we have" which would pertain to mean 'from this point' so it will be in 2013. Unless you want to include a part year (2009) and then if that is the case you could include the part year of 2012 and say that it has already happened; and it was wrong.Blog Authorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327499013699316695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1213894567662583955.post-64370664576545099662012-02-08T10:43:25.253-08:002012-02-08T10:43:25.253-08:00How wise of you to change the subject Doggy.
That ...How wise of you to change the subject Doggy.<br />That nonstop schoolyard bickering in some of the former comment sections was hard to bear. <br />Now even the people who have disassociated themselves from the forum can participate again.<br /><br />As for your theory “a full history of the hoax” which ties in Michael’s 4-year-speech, the footage in High Def and some other aspects – good thinking. <br />I dare to say that this message wasn’t only aimed at Doc. Murray, but also at every single person, that has been involved in the whole This Is It project. Dancers, stage crew, producers as well as lawyers, project advisers and personal confidantes. <br />As I see it, there were two 5-year plans present (starting around April 2008), an official one and a private one. The private plan, cleverly devised by Michael himself included the fake death and was the actual executed one. It was known only to a handful of key people. A plan so brilliant, everyone’s needs would be satisfied in the end and at the same time the ones who deserved it would get shafted….<br />So, the ‘pep-talk’ contained enough hidden messages for everyone.<br />You can see from his whole demeanor while talking, that this speech was very important to Michael, he already wanted to separate physically from the group and notably from one person. In that context also remember that he said “I can take it from here” to Randy Philips.<br />For me, there has never been a connection to environmental concerns or any EOW prophecies in this particular talk.<br /><br /><br />If you are interested in learning about Michael’s personal plan (and reasons) for creating a new life for himself, chapter Twenty-One in Jermaine’s book is quite revealing.<br />I am finishing with a telling quote from Michael in the planning stage: “Everyone thinks they’re in control around here – there’ll be changes made soon.”JMseesMJnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1213894567662583955.post-25007808390479288302012-02-07T20:46:44.669-08:002012-02-07T20:46:44.669-08:00If you say, today, "we have 4 years (from now...If you say, today, "we have 4 years (from now) to get it right", you mean: this year, next year, the year after that, and the year after that, correct?<br /><br />It's a bit of a leap to assume that MJ was referring to his four year countdown as slated to begin the following year, in 2010. Why wouldn't he include the present year in his count when referring to the number of years we have left? <br /><br />When MJ said "we have 4 years (from now-presumed) to get it right", you can safely deduce that he meant 2009 (THAT year), 2010, 2011, and 2012. <br /><br />TS is right, you are wrong.becnoreply@blogger.com