2/07/2012
See You In 4 Years ... Maybe
This idea may have been discussed elsewhere. If so I don't remember seeing it exactly anywhere. But if it has, my apologies for repeating something already discussed.
In the footage from "This Is It", which was supposedly filmed up until June 24, 2009; Michael Jackson is quoted as saying "We have four years to get it right." Now admittedly at the time he was speaking about the Earth's destruction and stopping it. But was he?
I know previously it has been discussed, by others, that this somehow tied in with the Mayan prophecy of the end of the world.
Those previous discussions fail on two counts. Firstly 2009 plus 4 years would give a year of 2013; which would be one year late. Secondly, the Mayan prophecy is not a prophecy. December 21, 2012 is the end of an era in the Mayan, linear, calendar. Some scholars dispute the accuracy of December 21, 2012 due to the fact of changes in the calenders used by the western world.
But what if, and it is a hypothetical if with no real basis outside pure coincidence, Michael Jackson's statement about 4 years was a message to Conrad Murray; to complete his part in the hoax?
The idea is slightly out there as ideas go. And in all honesty coincidence is the most likely answer; more than anything else. But as a hypothetical theory only the idea has a sound basis.
Sometime in June 2009 - Michael Jackson makes a statement about 4 years. Nowhere else does is this statement made by Michael Jackson. Yes, he made statements about saving the planet but never with any sort of timescale.
June 25, 2009 - The hoax plan is put into action.
October 28, 2009 - This Is It is released in theaters.
September 27, 2011 - The trial of Conrad Murray starts; where he is charged with the involuntary manslaughter of Michael Jackson.
November 7, 2011 - Conrad Murray is found guilty of the involuntary manslaughter of Michael Jackson.
November 29, 2011 - Conrad Murray was sentenced to 4 years.
October 28, 2013 - Conrad Murray's expected release date (not taking into account an appeal, or time off for good behavior) (which is also the 4 year anniversary of the release of This Is It).
So here is the theory, which really has no basis other than coincidence.
Michael Jackson and Conrad Murray had discussed the hoax and at some point had enlisted the help of Ed Chernoff for the legal aspects. Conrad Murray gets 'cold feet', even though the expected pay-off is more than enough to set him up for life; and needs a little convincing. Knowing that "This Is It" will be released after the hoax has been pulled off Michael Jackson throws the 4 year bit in as a reminder to Conrad Murray of why he is going through all the hassle of being classed as 'the man who killed the King Of Pop'.
Admittedly, as theories go, it has no sound basis; and as previously stated relies heavily on coincidence. But there are a couple of facts which can be tied in with the theory.
As stated before, why mention 4 years? It does not tie in with all the apocalyptic predictions that the world will end in 2012.
In the transcript of the L.A.P.D. interviewing Conrad Murray on June 27, 2009, with Ed Chernoff present, it does appear that Ed Chernoff knows a lot more about medical terms relating to the case than he should after only 2 days. This is only odd, as he has never completed a medical court case like that presented to him through Conrad Murray.
Also, and finally, why did Conrad Murray feel it necessary to make a documentary? Was it merely so that the 'whole' hoax is documented. Which does somewhat tie in with why all the rehearsal footage was hot in High Definition. A full history of the hoax.
So there you have it. A theory with no basis, and a little bit out there, that relies solely on coincidence and supposition.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
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?
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?
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.
TS is right, you are wrong.
How wise of you to change the subject Doggy.
That nonstop schoolyard bickering in some of the former comment sections was hard to bear.
Now even the people who have disassociated themselves from the forum can participate again.
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.
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.
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….
So, the ‘pep-talk’ contained enough hidden messages for everyone.
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.
For me, there has never been a connection to environmental concerns or any EOW prophecies in this particular talk.
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.
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.”
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?
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?
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."
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).
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.
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.
Missed a point ... My bad.
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?
When MJ said "we have 4 years (from now-presumed) to get it right""
So it is safe to presume he meant 2009 but not OK to assume he actually meant full 4 years?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
‘Inclusive reckoning’ is most unlikely, considering the context in which the 4 years have been mentioned.
It is NOT the contemporary way of thinking about time !
A simple example should put an end to this recurring topic:
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.”
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!
IMHO MJ was referring to Barak Obama the first African American president.
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.
"K"
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!
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!"
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.
four years could have men't anything but I do like your theory doggie :)
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.
alot of people thought it was rubbish or stupid or selfish that michael would use a double...before he died, but think about it?
I've seemed to noticed that michael' was using doubles in that bashir interview...,
infact throught lots of interviews he's used doubles.
Post a Comment