Archive for April, 2011

Challenging the non-believers arguments – part 1; “Michael would never do this to his kids”

April 3, 2011 66 comments


Most people on this website and forum believe Michael Jackson is still alive, but there are also people visiting here that say he is dead. Some do so in a polite way, some in a less polite way, but they all have the same arguments as to why Michael Jackson could never have hoaxed his death. Because it is going in circles mostly on the forum about this, I decided to resuscitate this blog and post my view on these arguments. This is only part one, more will follow whenever I have time.


One of the opinions that is most expressed by non-believers, is that Michael would never do this to his kids. I strongly disagree with that statement, and I will try to explain in this piece why I disagree. People are welcome to challenge my view, if they can and they are also welcome to reply to this blog and share other arguments that make you believe Michael is really dead. This is my attempt to show the non-believers why we think what we think and that we are in no way disrespecting Michael. We heard your side of the story, some of us even were on your side, now try to see this from our point of view, before accusing us of being disrespectful to Michael.


Let’s start with the person this is all about: Michael Jackson. Many of you know that I am not a fan, and that I never followed his life. That doesn’t mean I didn’t know and appreciate his work. I have always seen him as a fantastic artist and whenever Michael Jackson did something, it was something new, something different and often something shocking. He calls himself an innovator and a pioneer, and that is exactly what he is, and always has been when you look at his work. I’d like to start with some things coming directly from the horse’s mouth, before getting at the question if Michael would do this (hoaxing his death) to his children.


Michael holds a firm record with ‘Thriller’. Artists these days aren’t even trying to top that album, because they know beforehand that it’s most likely never going to happen. Not even Michael himself ever broke his own record. Does that mean he accepted that and planned some new albums that would probably do good, but never as good as Thriller, before he would retire and maybe even be ‘forgotten’ and replaced as the greatest entertainer? Or do you think he was planning something big that would shock the world? When I listen to some of his own words, I think the man had something up his sleeve for quite a while:


“But still, but still, I promise you; The best is yet to come!” on mark 9:21:



“My birthday wish is that you will join me in some new undertakings.” on mark 9:55:



“I’m very proud to be an entertainer and you ain’t seen nothing yet.” on mark 3:03:



Geraldo: “What’s the big plan, what’s the big picture at this stage in your life? What has been left unachieved, what would you like to do?”

Michael: “There are a lot of surprises… Film, I love film. […] It’s not so much film, but it’s innovating it and pioneering it. Taking the medium to a new place. […] And I’m having a lot of fun.” at the start:



Does this sound like another tour? Was that his big plan? It sounds more like a big movie project to me and certainly not another tour. Wouldn’t a real life Thriller, an interactive movie project with the whole world as a stage and an opportunity to expose the lies of the media be a movie project that Michael Jackson could have planned?


Okay, back to the children. One of the main arguments non-believers give for Michael being dead, is that he would never do this to his children. Fair enough, but that would mean that the original story (Michael died because of a Propofol overdose) is true, whether he was intentionally killed or not, because this is what the autopsy report says. So let’s have a closer look at the official story and draw some conclusions out of it.


According to reports, Michael was addicted to painkillers and anesthetics. He had trouble sleeping and shopped for RX, even begged doctors and nurses for propofol. On June 25, 2009, he came home after rehearsal and couldn’t sleep. Allegedly, doctor Murray gave him multiple kinds of drugs, before injecting the fatal dose of propofol in the morning.

Let’s assume this story is true. Whether Murray intentionally injected Michael with a fatal dose or not, we do know that Michael let Murray inject him voluntarily, since there was no sign of struggle on the crime scene, and no signs of struggle found on the body according to the autopsy report and Michael even had an IV. So either way, Michael was irresponsibly taking dangerous amounts and combinations of drugs, just to get some sleep. It means that if this were true, there are 2 scenarios for what happened that day:


1. Michael indeed was a hardcore drug addict, taking dangerous combinations of drugs for a long period of time and Murray just happened to be giving him the fatal shot, intentionally or not.


2. Michael was not a drug addict, but was stressed out and anxious about the upcoming concerts, had trouble sleeping and therefore hired an incapable cardiologist that doesn’t even know how to perform proper CPR, and pays him a shitload of money so he would administer him dangerous anesthetics.


People might argue that Michael thought that Murray was only going to put him on an IV for hydration, but Murray administered many other drugs before he allegedly administered the propofol. As reported, Michael was still not able to sleep, thus awake and knowing what Murray gave him. The drugs given to him do not feel like hydration, they effect you, whether they put you down or not.

People can then say that Michael didn’t stay awake and that Murray just kept giving him drugs while he was asleep, before giving him the propofol. That doesn’t make sense in either way. If Murray intended to kill Michael, he would have done it straight away, while it was still night and he could easily get away, after hiding the evidence and removing the bottles of propofol.

If Murray had good intentions it doesn’t make sense either, because if the drugs were working and Michael stayed under with the benzos, then why such a risk to give him propofol outside a hospital setting? He was already asleep, so no need for dangerous anesthetics.


So my point is, what sounds more plausible to you?


Michael being a hardcore drug addict who died because of a heavy addiction, risking his life and risking leaving his children without a father?

Michael is an irresponsible father, naive and stupid enough to let some incapable doctor administer a dangerous drug, just to get some sleep? That he wasn’t aware of the risks involved? That he is a dummy when it comes to medication? The man that rarely trusts anyone and who feared for his life, let some doctor inject him with stuff of which he didn’t really know what it was? Or that he did know and simply didn’t give a damn about the risks and therefore intentionally risking to leave his kids behind without a father?

Or do you think Michael is a genius, planned a complex death hoax for reasons that will only benefit his children and is maybe even seeing his kids on a regular basis? That Michael cares about this planet and his children enough to plan a death hoax that will bring some awareness, awakening and hope to people, that will benefit not only his and his children’s safety, but also that of you, me and planet earth, that will bring the proof that the media cannot be trusted -something he has been saying for years already- and on top of all that, will break each and every record and make him immortal?


You decide.