Fans Vs. Fam

Oh my God, that was HER in that thread?! Oh ew ew ew ew ew. Okay yeah, I can see why you clash with her haha! I'm so bad at remembering usernames like "MJthrillme" or "MJlurver" or whatever the hell people use. I mean it all just gets to be one, bland mess after a while.

To your question: I think Michael knew that Janet was going to be able to support herself and any family she could have in the future. Janet has had a long and successful career and there is no way she needs any more money than she has, and I think both her and Michael knew that. As for the other siblings, I don't think he left them anything for similar reasons. They will always have work in the way of interviews/shows etc, where as he wanted to give his children as much as he could in case they were never able to get proper jobs because of who they were. I think that's a pretty safe bet on his reasoning. As for Diana Ross, I really think that was for sentimental reasons. Let's be honest, Diana hasn't really ever interacted with the kids all that much. And I think Michael knew that Katherine would be able to take care of them until they turned 18 etc, and if not then they'd go to one of 3T who were also in the will.

Btw just read this disturbing thing by the same girl on MJJE:

"I held little Michael in my arms today and I just cried. Poor little guy ... he kept looking at me with his big, blue eyes not knowing what was happening with his teacher. Maybe you sent him to me, maybe it was God ... I don't know, but what I do know is that he brightens my days with his presence. When I look at him, I feel like I'm looking at you. He's a blonde, blue-eyed angel, so he doesn't really look like you, but he's funny, happy and naughty just like I imagine you used to be as a child. Plus, his name is Michael. Not the Romanian version of the name. Just Michael.

I think you live through these children. I don't believe that little Michael just happened to come in my class. He was meant to be there. And I was meant to be his teacher. A good friend told me that probably he was meant to be part of the healing process. I'm beginning to believe she's right. Will I ever heal completely? I don't think so, but at least I learned how to smile again.

You will always be a part of me. I will never forget you. I will always miss you and love you with every cell in my body. You were taken away from me abruptly 3 years ago, but I will keep you in my heart, my soul and my life for as many days as I have left in this world. I love you, Michael. "


Edit: OMG I THOUGHT I KNEW HER FROM SOMEWHERE: http://mj-rocks.tumblr.com/

I've clashed with her before on tumblr because of her shitty behavior!!

Short off topic:

I've always wondered why so many people (see the facts the adult part, and not by age) were separated from MJJE.
I'd like to invite you in another forum where topics like family and racism are discussed in very different ways.

Here

Yes, yes, yes to your above post and the one you edited just before!

Her ways of thinking about Michael are dangerous. It's just plain obsessive. And this is about someone you never even knew. People who's parents die don't even act like that. It freaks me out, and it's alarming. She also makes it no secret that her husband is the number 2 man in her life, and that their wedding day doesn't even compare to the day she saw Michael....

Just....Arrrrrghhhh! And that story is like....some sort of religious experience. It's honestly freaky. I love me some Michael Jackson, but you need to know where to draw the line. Do I consider him to be a big part of my life? Sure....Do I consider him my reason to breathe?....Um, NO. If I'm down, does listening to his music cheer me up a bit? Sure. Do I consider him to be the answer to all my sadness in life? NO.

I agree with your points about Janet/the brothers not getting any money. They will always have their last name to earn money where necessary. But then, that isn't good enough for fans, because of course, they were riding on Michael's coattails of his own success.

Oh, and 3T were in the will? Totally didn't know that!

GIRLS.

That post on MJJE. I swear, when I woke up this morning and read that I started shouting at my computer screen. For real. I mean...oooh! I swear! I would LOVE the opportunity to respond to her. I would LOVE the opportunity to just thoroughly go through that post and literally take a knife to it. But I just know, that if I do...I'll end up getting banned. (Which isn't really a loss, tbh, but I be damned if I lose it over her).

I have never witnessed a more dense fan in my life. A more cruel and spiteful one - yes. A more dense, condescending, arrogant, and just all out "holier than thou" fan - never. That entire post was to not only to coalesce herself with Cat, but to specifically spite Rhea (for stuff that doesn't even have to do with that topic) and to make a mockery out of Gemma's post. She totally flipped everyone's words around to fit her narrative. And those other posts, Rhea, you posted of her - she is seriously in need to some kind of help. That type of obsessive admiration is unhealthy. But her behavior in that post demonstrates that she does, in fact, have the mental capacity to purposely sh*t on other fans and ridicule them for their logic.

OMG..I soo want to post back to her. But so help me, I'd end up going off the deep end. This chick has created this god out of her Michael Jackson - and no amount of intellectual thought would influence her otherwise. Gemma and Rhea, I actually commend you both for not going in there and literally cursing her out, even as much as you may want to. That type of fan is a brick wall. We would only be causing our own heads to bleed.

She totally just ruined my mood in attempting to reply to Omertas post (which is brilliant, btw!) Girl, you laid out everything! Haha! And THANK YOU for trying to see ALL options and perspectives in this matter. Gosh, it's like...even if you don't agree with all of the family's decisions, but refuse to hate and bash them, you're made out to be a devil. I don't get it! Yes, it is possible to criticize Jermaine, Randy, Tito...all them damn Jacksons, without hating and slandering them. Just as it's possible to love Michael Jackson and call BS on some of his actions. No one is above reproach! No one is perfect or better. (And specifically to Cat - you know, you can compare behavior to behavior; but that doesn't mean you make the ultimate decision on who's the better person.) And you know, quite frankly, I believe that Michael's death (as sordid and tragic as it is to say) crystallized him into being this untouchable, mystical, angel-God for some fans. Just ughhhh! It's as if he became more perfect in death. That's siiiiiick.

Yeah, Jermaine didn't pay child support. Bad on him. But bad on Michael for going to his then wife and basically asking for permission (if even that) to get another woman to drop him some babies! Wanna talk about "child support"?!? How's that for love and commitment and honor? Hell, I'd drop a husband for doing that in a heartbeat - Thriller or no Thriller!

*deep breath* Okay. Okay. Let me calm myself down. This chick has my blood pressure up. I shouldn't have read that stuff just waking up. *hugs to Gemma and Rhea and everybody else who dares to use common sense* Ugh, and I am trying so hard not to let these fans make me transfer my anger over to Michael. That isn't fair. But my gosh, these people.

I feel sorry for them. (Okay...well some of them). Michael is god to them. Makes me feel sorry for Michael, in a way. With blind devotion such as this, how could we possibly expect him to function anywhere close to normal at times? But that's another conversation.

Sorry, sorry. I didn't mean for this post to be this long. But I really wanted to get that out and say to Gemma and Rhea that you all definitely had the right to speak your mind and that crap of a post that was meant to belittle both of you (as people and fans) was straight up wrong. SHE made it personal and I'm sure her little mod friends will protect her. But you know what, let them. If she needs a forum and an imaginary interpretation of Michael Jackson to keep her in tact, then fine.

MJJE bothers me. It is insulated from total chaos - for which I give them credit - but it's too restrictive. It's like a happy little MJ Island - where even if you do criticize him, you must end it with "but I forgive and love and respect him" every single time. You have to tie on the pretty pink bow. The board asks people to be polite, but I'd much rather want to post on a board that asks people to be "respectful." It's honestly not 100 percent for us, in some regards. Our forum here compared to that one is like night and day. We don't have to insult anybody or go off the deep end, even if we disagree. We don't have to hold our tongues - even on the deeper issues. I think I'll stop commenting on their Kat-Jackson thread now. That's not a place for me and after seeing that mess this morning, it's crystal clear that condescension is prized over actual conversation.

(P.S. Omertas, I love the way your brain works! Haha! I seriously was nodding my head up and down reading the whole thing. I want to come back and respond.)

(P.P.S. And regarding that matter of Michael not leaving the siblings in his will, I always took it as if Michael certainly knew that by Kat getting 40%, she would naturally want to take care of her kids with it in someway or another. Surely, he knew she would. PLUS, when you have children, you aren't necessarily thinking about including ALL 8 of your other siblings in your will. What was he going to do - say Jermaine gets 5 percent, Latoya gets 8%, etc. etc? Or leave them all 10% to be split up 8 different ways? Geesh, could you imagine? He has three minors as his primary priority. Not leaving his siblings in his will could have been a practical and logical matter - not a "I hate you, so you get nothing" sort of deal. And as I said, by leaving Kat 40%, he's basically leaving his family something too.

And you know, since it is her money, she has the right to do whatever she wants to with it. In fact, technically speaking, NONE of that money IS Michael's money anymore. It's Katherine's, PPB's, and the charity. That talking point of "Michael's money" is no longer valid. People act like he's going to come back and go shopping with it or something.

As far as custody? LaToya never expressed (to my knowledge) the desire to have multiple kids. Rebbie's already raised hers, as had Tito and Jackie. We all know that Janet has other priorities. Marlon (to my knowledge) didn't even live in CA. Jermaine has 80 kids (haha! You know that ain't right, tho...Haha) and Randy has...um...I know certainly more than 2, right? Perhaps Michael logically thought that they may not have wanted to take in 3 additional kids? Sounds logical to me.

I once asked my Ma which sibling she would have left me with had she passed on and I'd been a minor (we were talking about MJ's will. Not like I asked her this out of the blue! Haha). She has six other siblings. Her answer: none. Not because she didn't trust them or hated them (though some of them surely wouldn't have made the best parents, haha!) But because it just didn't...fit. Ya know? She'd have left me to my grandmother as the ultimate choice. Other than her, a very very close family friend of ours.

Diana Ross? She mothered him, to an extent, as a child. Plus, he was head over heels for the woman. I could totally see how puppied-eyed Michael Jackson would consider her a choice.

PLUS, he didn't even consider having the children (or P&P) go to their biological mother - in life or in death. If he didn't want her to have them, I can generally accept that he thought not to leave them to his brothers or sisters. I mean, she had the kids. And it was apparent that he did not intend on including her in his will.

Who else does that leave? Katherine. And I actually think that it was a good idea to have TJ in the loop now. The kids really like him and it is a good idea to have someone younger help Katherine.

The siblings, imo, aren't out to take PPB's money. There is no way for them to do that as it stands today. For me, this whole matter is more personal in the first place. Half of the siblings seemingly detest Branca and crew. Now, we'll definitely see what's up with this will and the executors. )

Update: Kat and the kids attended the Jacksons concert last night.

And what's cracking me up...is that the "true fans" are all astonished! They're trying to make it fit within their narrative:

Quote :

If what happened to them happened to me, I wouldn't want my grandmother out of my sight. Wherever she goes, I go.

Quote :

I bet that's the reason too: To watch grandma like a Hawk and make sure nno more funny business occurs. I wonder what it was like in the dressing room. They were probably(Just barely) polite to Jermaine for the sake of Grandma if they even gave himn the time of the day at all.

Quote :

Well, they're probably just supporting Jackie, Marlon and possibly Tito. They probably alreayd had the tickets before thiswho,le thing exploded. The tour is all but over anyway.

Quote :

I think this picture is old ... and why does Prince is wearing coat? Is not summer season on US?

I think this pic is old...

Quote :

IF that is really them, I wonder who FORCED them to go? Very convenient that we can't see their faces

.

Quote :

Euuuhhhhhh..... WTF??! Why they go to the show from some of the siblings who try to overtake them.... am I dumb here, or am I the only one who don't understand this....

Statement from Jermaine:

Quote :

Jermaine Jackson ‏@jermjackson5
Correcting @TMZ... I didn't travel alone to Saratoga for tonight's show, I flew with the brothers

Jermaine Jackson ‏@jermjackson5
I will now repeat what I told the fans from the stage tonight...

Jermaine Jackson ‏@jermjackson5
You all have families. Sometimes it gets complicated. Whatever happens, whatever is said, we are family, we are One, we will heal

^^

Haha, the fact that they went to the concert will be throwing them for a loop! I'll bet every excuse is coming out for that one! Most likely they went with a gun held to their head, I presume? Please...

I think I'm going to try not to post in the MJJE thread for a while. I am just so over it, and I feel like I just need a break. Although, no doubt, at some point I won't be able to help myself!

lmao@ them trying to find anything to explain why they went

oh lordy, and this is why I avoid forums, rotflmfao. OMG though...It's always bugged the shit out of me with the whole 'holier than thou' michael is above everyone and i am too and you don't understand...I'm on the same pyshic-realm as him and you just don't understand WHO he was and he was better than his family.

what the actual fuck dude? He is better than his family? And he can be removed from his family because he is an individual. DUH...everyone is an individual! But you can exist as an individual within a group or family setting. Family is not inclusive or exclusive. It doesn't have to be one or the other for crying out loud. I'm an individual...and lord knows there's all type of issues with my family BUT I am still a functional part of that unit and ALWAYS will be. Fucking pisses me off when people try to separate his personal self from his family just because he separated his career from his family. And FYI to some folks: just because you don't speak to a family member on a regular basis does not mean shit. I only spoke to my one sister TWICE the entire seven years I lived away from my home town. Once was because she couldn't pass a level is Spyro lmao! I had to walk her through it of-course. I saw her in person maybe 3 or 4 times a year..but that does NOT mean there is trouble in family paradise. JFC...it's sometimes just a part of growing up and people being busy.

why do fans love to turn everything into this giant drama?

and I still don't get where fans think the family is going after money. Hasn't enough facts gotten out that there is NO possible way for them to benefit from this situation money wise?

Quote :

Yes, it is possible to criticize Jermaine, Randy, Tito...all them damn Jacksons, without hating and slandering them. Just as it's possible to love Michael Jackson and call BS on some of his actions. No one is above reproach! No one is perfect or better. (And specifically to Cat - you know, you can compare behavior to behavior; but that doesn't mean you make the ultimate decision on who's the better person.) And you know, quite frankly, I believe that Michael's death (as sordid and tragic as it is to say) crystallized him into being this untouchable, mystical, angel-God for some fans. Just ughhhh! It's as if he became more perfect in death. That's siiiiiick.

Yeah, Jermaine didn't pay child support. Bad on him. But bad on Michael for going to his then wife and basically asking for permission (if even that) to get another woman to drop him some babies! Wanna talk about "child support"?!? How's that for love and commitment and honor? Hell, I'd drop a husband for doing that in a heartbeat - Thriller or no Thriller!

Quote :

(P.P.S. And regarding that matter of Michael not leaving the siblings in his will, I always took it as if Michael certainly knew that by Kat getting 40%, she would naturally want to take care of her kids with it in someway or another. Surely, he knew she would. PLUS, when you have children, you aren't necessarily thinking about including ALL 8 of your other siblings in your will. What was he going to do - say Jermaine gets 5 percent, Latoya gets 8%, etc. etc? Or leave them all 10% to be split up 8 different ways? Geesh, could you imagine? He has three minors as his primary priority. Not leaving his siblings in his will could have been a practical and logical matter - not a "I hate you, so you get nothing" sort of deal. And as I said, by leaving Kat 40%, he's basically leaving his family something too.

And you know, since it is her money, she has the right to do whatever she wants to with it. In fact, technically speaking, NONE of that money IS Michael's money anymore. It's Katherine's, PPB's, and the charity. That talking point of "Michael's money" is no longer valid. People act like he's going to come back and go shopping with it or something.

As far as custody? LaToya never expressed (to my knowledge) the desire to have multiple kids. Rebbie's already raised hers, as had Tito and Jackie. We all know that Janet has other priorities. Marlon (to my knowledge) didn't even live in CA. Jermaine has 80 kids (haha! You know that ain't right, tho...Haha) and Randy has...um...I know certainly more than 2, right? Perhaps Michael logically thought that they may not have wanted to take in 3 additional kids? Sounds logical to me.

I once asked my Ma which sibling she would have left me with had she passed on and I'd been a minor (we were talking about MJ's will. Not like I asked her this out of the blue! Haha). She has six other siblings. Her answer: none. Not because she didn't trust them or hated them (though some of them surely wouldn't have made the best parents, haha!) But because it just didn't...fit. Ya know? She'd have left me to my grandmother as the ultimate choice. Other than her, a very very close family friend of ours.

Diana Ross? She mothered him, to an extent, as a child. Plus, he was head over heels for the woman. I could totally see how puppied-eyed Michael Jackson would consider her a choice.

PLUS, he didn't even consider having the children (or P&P) go to their biological mother - in life or in death. If he didn't want her to have them, I can generally accept that he thought not to leave them to his brothers or sisters. I mean, she had the kids. And it was apparent that he did not intend on including her in his will.

Thank you! Just b/c he didn't have them in his will and didn't leave his kids to them it don't mean he hated them either. Also he might not have wanted to offend any of them for showing preference as to who would raise them. I'm in my sister's will to take custody of my nephew if anything ever happened to her and her husband. BUT...I am the ONLY one who knows that, lol. My parents, my sister's husband's parents, and none of either parties other siblings know this. It's to spare hurt feelings. Plus it's a matter of responsibility, circumstances, and priorities.

Michael probably never in a million years though he would pass away with his children soooo young. The obvious choice would be Katherine though for custody. He also probably never in a million years though this would come to pass and that there would be complications with it. As crazy or as unlikely as it sounds, he might have just put Katherine b/c of the obvious and picked D.R. for reasons of saving face or causing tension with the family. I sometimes wonder if D.R. even knew that she was put in this role, lol.
and who are we to say that he hated his family? that is not for us to decide! ugh...people bringing up things that happened in this family 20, 30 freaking YEARS ago are just trying derail the actual concerns and issues that are real.

And yes, I definitely think the estate has a LOT of explaining to do in all this. Nothing seems to be resolved at the moment and nothing has really been explained.

It doesn't look like Katherine is holding much of a grudge against her kids for kidnapping her either...



and kids ain't seeming to complain about it now...shrug.

lmao at fans making excuses for them attending that concert. Seriously people, do you have any critical thinking skills?

^ On that "better" issue, Chamone decided to come onto my profile on MJJE and berate me with it all over again and basically act like a conscending asshole about the issue. She maintained that she didn't think Michael was perfect, but he was somehow better than all his brothers. Riiiiiight. Like the logic was just failing on every level but she still found room to make me feel shit about MY opinion and how she was all high and mighty and right because she's against the Jacksons.

I'm so over this shit guys.

Quote :

Michael probably never in a million years though he would pass away with his children soooo young. The obvious choice would be Katherine though for custody. He also probably never in a million years though this would come to pass and that there would be complications with it. As crazy or as unlikely as it sounds, he might have just put Katherine b/c of the obvious and picked D.R. for reasons of saving face or causing tension with the family. I sometimes wonder if D.R. even knew that she was put in this role, lol.
and who are we to say that he hated his family? that is not for us to decide! ugh...people bringing up things that happened in this family 20, 30 freaking YEARS ago are just trying derail the actual concerns and issues that are real.

THIS THIS THIS. It's not like Michael planned to pass away at this time, he probably thought he was going to be around for another good 40 years at least, or to see his children grow up. When he was naming guardians in the will he obviously picked his mother first because she was the closest to the children, and knowing that she had contact with all of the family so if she couldn't look after them, somebody else in the family could. Diana Ross I agree on, I think it was just sort of a surface thing to be honest. I don't think Diana even knows the kids, does she?

I seriously doubt Michael hated his family given that he was going to dinner with them regularly before he passed! And I was thinking today, what about PHM? The family are ALL over that, and that was in 2003, right? During the time that Michael was supposedly out of contact with them and hated them all. Why would he devote entire sections of that program to different members of his family if he hated them so much? I mean seriously. He made a POINT to speak well about them, especially his father.

And then the 2001 30th Anniversary Concert. Helloooooo all the brothers performed together there! And this concert they're doing now is for Katherine, and is an extension of the idea they were working on BEFORE Michael died and that Michael was a PART of. For Katherine!!! It's not always about money. I wish people would do some goddamn research.

*sigh*

Sorry for that rant haha!

Also I bought this hilarious graphic novel of Michael's life today and this jumped out at me:

joanwas_quizzical wrote:

I don't think Diana even knows the kids, does she?

I've been wondering this too, because as far as I was concerned, I didn't think she had any kind of relationship with them AT ALL? I mean, if I'm wrong, someone correct me but...
All these fans saying "UGH just give over guardianship to Diana -- it's what MICHAEL WOULD'VE WaNtEd!!!!!123" ...just, yeah, side-eyeing this opinion SO hard because image being 14/15 and being taken from your actual family to live with a woman you have probably heard about constantly but barely know. How would that be better for them exactly?

Same with the fans who say that about Debbie Rowe.
Idek, I'm so fed up I can barely be bothered to type out the rest of this post or proofread it, lol~

raspberryberet wrote:

joanwas_quizzical wrote:

I don't think Diana even knows the kids, does she?

I've been wondering this too, because as far as I was concerned, I didn't think she had any kind of relationship with them AT ALL? I mean, if I'm wrong, someone correct me but...
All these fans saying "UGH just give over guardianship to Diana -- it's what MICHAEL WOULD'VE WaNtEd!!!!!123" ...just, yeah, side-eyeing this opinion SO hard because image being 14/15 and being taken from your actual family to live with a woman you have probably heard about constantly but barely know. How would that be better for them exactly?

Same with the fans who say that about Debbie Rowe.
Idek, I'm so fed up I can barely be bothered to type out the rest of this post or proofread it, lol~

Exactly!! I seriously doubt Diana knows those kids. The only thing that's going for her is that she did recently raise a teenager by way of Evan Ross, who's in his mid-20's now so she could probably handle another two teenagers quite well. But yeah apart from that, I don't think they know each other all that much. Although....I think Evan has spoken about the kids in an interview or two? I dunno, might have to look that up.

Debbie on the other hand, yeah that ain't gonna happen.

^^^
yep, I don't think they are that close to her. I'm sure they know her in that 'ugh...you're a friend of my dad's' and I have to behave while I'm around you and put up with you pinching my cheeks but please go away...type of way, hahahaha. But know her enough to actually live with her. No way. Not in my mind anyway and I've seen no evidence that it is otherwise. And Debbie, nope. I'm glad that they or at least Paris 'may' be forging some bond with her or at least doesn't hold a grudge or any malice towards her, but yeah....no. Taking them away from the family they know will serve no purpose imo so I don't really understand why fans are going that route.

You know this stuff is getting to be too much when you're up at two in the morning, eye-rolling the heck out of your computer screen.

Though to be fair, I've been watching the replay of today's Olympics. Rhea - the US beat AUS in volleyball. (Random fact, I hate volleyball). But you beat us in the women's swimming competition. Nicely played.

Anyways, I browsed Cat's convo on your profile. Okay, she doesn't like Jermaine. Fine. Why not just leave it at that? Why even start up comparisons? But okay, whatever floats your boat. Nobody's asking anybody to like anybody. You do not have to like the Jacksons. But you shouldn't transfer your dislike over to others (especially, the children). She didn't do that, but others have. Dislike Jermaine all you like - I'm sure he couldn't care less. Haha! I saw where she moved the convo over to the controversy section, but it doesn't look like anyone's biting. I'm not bothering with it anymore. (Though I am glad Zipper responded to that post! Haha!)

You all make a great point about Diana. And that Michael could not possibly have foreseen when he would pass.

You know, at the end of the day, those kids are going to be fine. I really believe that. They are smart, wonderful children. They will have to be aware of who is around them. And I wish them nothing but the best. That goes for the Jacksons too. As Jermaine said, it's complicated with family. Don't we ALL know that?! Haha! I hope they get on one page though - at least for Katherine. No 80+ year old woman should be surrounded by conflict - no matter who is causing it.

(Shoot, I wish Mike would have sent me a few dollars....Hahaha!)

Oh man I haven't even watched anything to do with the Olympics yet, haha! I dunno, it always turns into such a big thing over here in Australia and I really don't like much sport to begin with! Though that said, Australians are beasts in the water and nobody will ever beat us. Yup. LOL.

Love how she moved the convo to the ONE section I've been kicked out of on MJJE. And did you see her reply to me when I said some of us couldn't see that section in the thread? She was all, "everybody is welcome in the controversy section."

:/

Thaaaaanks.

Anyway, lemme know how it pans out in that section of the forum, I bet nobody will bite the thread though 'cause you guys are gunning them down with your logic and amazing way of writing stuff! Let's hope MJthrillsme stays the hell out.

Someone in MJJC just said this:

Quote :

@walking on the moon, i think if we all put our heads together we can know more than tmz like would know

Um...no. That's not how knowledge works, guys. You don't just magically KNOW all the things, just because you suddenly have more people speculating and trying to string together clues to reach biased points. LOL.

Like this is these peoples' ACTUAL logic.



And jfc, these fans are literally talking about ~*taking it 2 the judge*~

Quote :

Personally, I don't think we are overstepping our boundaries by reaching the relevant authorities, in this case, the Judge. It's similar to any other situation where a person reports an incident out of concern. We should only present the Judge with facts, not opinions.

Omg. Are you...I...yeah, it's TOTALLY not overstepping your boundaries to bombard a judge with "facts" that YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE OMG to get him to do your bidding with a family that YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW JFC WTF.

^ First appropriate use of this graphic:



Who the fuck do these fans think they are? I mean do they even listen to what they're saying? I remember back when Mike passed, they were seriously trying to come up with a plan to somehow get the kids or have the kids in the care of fans. Like seriously.

Haha, sorry -- Dana, when you said that people need to realise that Michael's money is no longer his specifically...And they're acting like he's going to return wanting to go shopping, I kept thinking of a situation like this

Michael: Hey guys! I'm back from the dead! Time to hit up Bloomies for a big spend-up!

Jermaine et al: Um, sorry Mike, but we've been having all these issues and the money is kinda...gone.

Michael: Are you KIDDING me?!? Do you realise how serious this is? They have 40% off Armani right now! And I have NO moo-lah to cash in at the sales!!!



In regards to the Diana thing -- I'd be surprised if the kids even knew her. Sure, they've probably met her a few times, as they have practically every other famous person out there. But was she a good choice for the guardian of the kids? Not really. As others have said, she's more just a symbolic choice, and I think Michael probably wanted them to maybe have a strong female figure in their lives and who is more stronger than Diana?

As for MJJE, I have since responded to the thread in the controversy section...Here's my post, so you can read it Rhea....

@Chamone -- What I think is bothering me personally, (not necessarily in your post(s) but others in the thread, as well as other stuff that is being thrown around in the fan community in general) is the fact that there does seem to be a 'need' of sorts to bring Michael's brothers down. That they were talent-less musicians, egotistical, cruel and power/money hungry. It saddens me to think that people (again, not specifically you) don't seem to give the siblings (especially the brothers) overall respect for who they were, and what they were to Michael.

Plus, what is it about Michael that you would say makes him a 'better' person that his brothers? I'm not trying to sound demanding, I'm just curious as to what your opinion is on the subject. Is it the fact that Jermaine wrote 'Word to the Badd'? Is it because Randy/Jermaine had children by the same woman, possible overlapping in terms of marriage? These are just some common things that seem to have cropped up lately.

Originally Posted by Chamone
Saying "Michael was a better person than -no-matter-who-you-want-to-compare-him-to-here" IS NOT the same as saying "Michael was an infallible angel and the best human being ever to walk this earth". I don't want this to be confused.

I hear you on this, but at the same time, I find them very closely intertwined. If you start saying someone is 'better' than someone else, isn't that slowly getting to the point where you want to crown someone as "the best"? Is Michael "the best" Jackson? And my question is, when does that comparison stop? The best musician? The best humanitarian? The best man/person?

Unfortunately, there are many fans who DO place Michael on this pedestal, and claim him as an angel. And because Michael has had (minor) run-in's with his brothers in the past, this constantly seems to be thrown in their faces that they aren't "as good" (in any way) as him.

As far as I'm aware, they try hard with their careers (something that they're always going to struggle with, because, let's face it, they were kind of 'left behind' while Michael went on to have all the success -- which has got to be really tough for them, I'm sure), they love their children, they give back to society....Sure, they might have questionable actions some of the time, but do I think they're out to 'get'/hurt people? No way. They're trying to do as best they can for themselves, sure, but I have never seen any kind of malice towards Michael or his kids that I deemed to be out of line.


Originally Posted by Chamone
Saying he's a better person than ... is not placing him on a high, fictional pedestal. What you're saying is that fans who say such things don't see Michael for what he is and that their affection for him can easily be broken once they open their eyes.

I think this is kind of a separate issue in itself, because, to be honest, over the past few years, I've become alarmed at the amount of admiration Michael receives in ANY aspect of his life. Yes, he was an amazing musician, singer, dancer, humanitarian...You name it. And that deserves admiration. But there is sometimes a line crossed that goes into worship, and it worries me because like you said, it could be broken at any time. It's almost like some are in denial to see him in any other way but the image they have painted of him in their own mind....It scares me a little because I have seen people defend Michael for everything, and some refuse to acknowledge certain aspects of his life. It's almost like he could kill someone and someone would find an excuse. Maybe some find it comforting to see him as a certain way, and sure, that's each individual's prerogative. But in situation's like what is happening right now, this needs to be exercised with caution. Not that this has occurred on MJJE, but to say things like Randy is a psycho, Jermaine is a jealous creep, and Janet is a fat ho....This is the sort of thing I'm talking about.

I think this is a separate topic, so I will end it there. Hope you understand what I mean though.

Originally Posted by Chamone
And third, what is unconditional love, really? Doesn't that also imply regarding the person you love in a more favorable light than the people around him or her, even though you - and everybody else - knows it's your feelings for the person that makes you do that?

Sure, good point. But in the case of Michael vs. his brothers...There is a tendency to possess the belief that if you love Michael, you automatically should dislike his brothers by default. It's this unconditional love that I think people try and use as an excuse to say that this is why they dislike [insert name here]. I honestly think that some fans worry that if they were to be neutral or even 'friendly' towards the Jacksons, that would somehow question their love for Michael.

I'm still confused as to the logic of how anyone can go round saying that Michael is "better" than his brothers? In what way specifically? I wanted to talk more about the fan worshipping etc (God, how tempting is it to name names and be like 'Yeah, this person is clearly f*cked!! *cough*...MJthrillme...*cough*) But no doubt that would be deemed as off topic but I definitely found it semi-relevant to touch upon it a little.

I am so not understanding Chamone's logic. I know this is probably true for you guys too, but Michael's flaws and etc actually make me more interested in him. I have admiration for him because of the things he overcame in his life and the struggles he went through, but just because he did some fucked up shit doesn't mean my love for him is suddenly "broken" or I don't see him in a favourable light. I see Michael as a whole person just like anybody else on this planet; just like my parents. Do I love them any less because they've done stupid stuff in their lives and stupid things to me? No. I acknowledge those things and I acknowledge that I love them. I don't know, it's just something that in my mind seems really simple, you know? It's hard to explain.

I don't like this btw:

Quote :

And third, what is unconditional love, really? Doesn't that also imply regarding the person you love in a more favorable light than the people around him or her, even though you - and everybody else - knows it's your feelings for the person that makes you do that?

No to me that's OBSESSION LMAO. I'm sorry but no, I don't agree with that view point at all. Unconditional love is what I'm talking about I guess, which is that you understand that this person is no better than any other person, but you're attracted to them in such a way that you just love who they are, and that you understand that they make mistakes like anybody else. You don't "favour" them over somebody else. That's ridiculous. Why would you "favour" somebody? I don't "favour" my friends or my parents. Why would you "favour" somebody you don't even know?

I think Chamone is a bit confused, to be honest. And I think I might have to group her into the category of people that are a bit blinded by their obsession for Michael. I hate doing that, I hate looking down upon fans that are like that, but it really scares me because nothing that I say will get through to them, they're just happy to sit in their little world where Michael only exists and everybody else is out to hurt him.

Also omg Gemma I sat and laughed for a good five minutes at the imagery of Michael coming back from the dead LMAO! I wish I had a gif from when he went shopping in LWMJ - you know the, "even celebrities like a bargain!" thing LOL!!!

joanwas_quizzical wrote:

No to me that's OBSESSION LMAO. I'm sorry but no, I don't agree with that view point at all. Unconditional love is what I'm talking about I guess, which is that you understand that this person is no better than any other person, but you're attracted to them in such a way that you just love who they are, and that you understand that they make mistakes like anybody else. You don't "favour" them over somebody else. That's ridiculous. Why would you "favour" somebody? I don't "favour" my friends or my parents. Why would you "favour" somebody you don't even know?

Yes, exactly! This is what I was trying to say (but didnt!) Unconditional love hardly means that because you love someone, that you automcatically hate everyone else! It shouldn't mean that you see NOTHING wrong with them. And again, yes, why would you favour someone you don't even know? It's almost along the lines of the whole race "preference" debate we had going! ie."I just prefer Michael over his brothers..."

joanwas_quizzical wrote:

I think Chamone is a bit confused, to be honest. And I think I might have to group her into the category of people that are a bit blinded by their obsession for Michael. I hate doing that, I hate looking down upon fans that are like that, but it really scares me because nothing that I say will get through to them, they're just happy to sit in their little world where Michael only exists and everybody else is out to hurt him.

I don't like doing it either, but I feel like there is a big divide in a way between the two groups. It is alarming though how far some people will go to show their love/support for him. It freaks me out.

LOL! That conversation between Jermaine and Michael. Hahaha! I imagine him coming back and buying all those tacky vases again. Gemma, your response was excellent! I'm glad you responded. I really don't have anything against Cat - other than I simply tend to disagree with some of her points. But at least she actually responds to people, ya know? Unlike others who use sarcasm and eye-roll similes to communicate... And, lol, I posted a response to the Joe/abuse thing. Really just to dig at a certain someone who said that we we're making excuses.

Amy. Those fans really believe that they aren't crossing the line? And that their motivations are about facts, not opinion? I've never been a member at MJJC. Glad I never tried to sign up.

More foolery:

Because saying that the Jacksons need to keep things private is equivalent to condoning child abuse:

Quote :

Yeah, because if it wasn't for Paris' and Prince's public displays the kids would now be safely locked up somewhere in Europe...Asia...Katherine would have been manipulated and Mike's lovely siblings would be digging into his bank account. They definitely have to keep things private.

You also need to keep everything private when your husband beats you, because that's what good wives do. Or when your uncle touches you, keep it in private, noone will believe a child anyway.
Yes.

And apparently the only reason Janet is able to find love is because of...you guessed it, The Almighty Michael:

Quote :

And he's together with her just because she's Michael's little sister. If her brother had not been that popular she wouldn't have been that popular and got to know that new boyfriend. He would not care about her.

Talk about a high horse. If we could only use this logic for everything: And if the slaves were never brought to America, Michael would have never been born and therefore he wouldn't have made Thriller and the world would never have become a better place for you and me.

Chamone's definition of unconditional love....oy. Unconditional love means you acknowledge all of the flaws in this other person, but regardless of what they do, you continue to to stick with them and support them. It does not at all mean placing that person above everything and everyone else and ignoring their flaws. It's about accepting the things that are "wrong" with them.
What part of "unconditional love" states that you have to hate everyone else around that person? LOL no....sorry.

Like you said Rhea, that's not unconditional love, that's blind obsession.

Also, I got the impression from her responses to you, hprox, that she wasn't really listening tbh. SHe just kept stating her opinion over and over even though you were really trying to get to the bottom of an issue in the fan community. Instead of considering your points and letting you know her thoughts on them, she just kept saying the same thing over and over. :/

raspberryberet wrote:

Chamone's definition of unconditional love....oy. Unconditional love means you acknowledge all of the flaws in this other person, but regardless of what they do, you continue to to stick with them and support them. It does not at all mean placing that person above everything and everyone else and ignoring their flaws. It's about accepting the things that are "wrong" with them.
What part of "unconditional love" states that you have to hate everyone else around that person? LOL no....sorry.

Like you said Rhea, that's not unconditional love, that's blind obsession.

Also, I got the impression from her responses to you, hprox, that she wasn't really listening tbh. SHe just kept stating her opinion over and over even though you were really trying to get to the bottom of an issue in the fan community. Instead of considering your points and letting you know her thoughts on them, she just kept saying the same thing over and over. :/

Yeah, I got that impression too. I think that it's just easier to pluck out certain things of what I was asking and ignore the rest, in a way. I still feel like there is no logical explanation to rate Michael as a "better" person than his brothers. People are just blinded by this hate for the Jacksons and it's really saddening to see.

Umm...I know a lot of crazy stuff went down. But I do not feel so excited by the executors keeping the family members away from - at the very least - seeing their own mother.

I get that they "own" the house...but wow.

ROLAND S. MARTIN EXCLUSIVE: Janet Jackson, Others Family Members Barred From Mom’s California Home
JULY 29, 2012

By Roland S. Martin
Editor-in-Chief
RolandMartinReports. com

The executors of Michael Jackson’s estate have barred a number of the late singer’s siblings, including Janet Jackson, from the California home where their mother, Katherine, is raising the late singers three children.

The details of who is and isn’t allowed onto the Calabas, California is detailed in an email obtained by CNN’s Roland S. Martin.

Howard Weitzman, who represents John McClain and John Branca, sent the email Wednesday to Charles Schultz, an attorney for Mrs. Jackson.

Weitzman writes that after the drama over the last two weeks, which including allegations that Katherine Jackson had gone missing for 10 days and was unable to reach Paris, Prince and Blanket Jackson, which led to her having to share guardianship of the children with another grandchild, TJ Jackson, it is necessary to bar certain family and friends from the property.

“Given the circumstances of the last two weeks, and in order to protect the children and Mrs. Jackson, the Executors believe that it would not be appropriate to allow the following individuals to enter the residence or its grounds and we instruct the security to preclude the following from entering the residence or the grounds: Randy Jackson and any of his children, Janet Jackson, Rebbie Jackson and any of her children, Jermaine Jackson, his wife and any of his children, Janice Smith, or anyone else who was involved in the recent events that led to Mrs. Jackson’s separation from and inability to communicate with Michael’s children, or any agents or representatives of any of these individuals,” Weitzman wrote.

“There will be no other security or drivers allowed on the property except those employed by the Estate of Michael Jackson. Joe Jackson is precluded from entering the property. Howard Mann who is in litigation against the Estate and is working with the Jackson siblings that wrote the “letter” should also not be allowed on the premises.”

The “letter” Weitzman is referring to is the one signed by Randy, Janet, Jermaine, Rebbie and Tito Jackson, alleging that the 2002 will authorizing Branca and McClain to be the executors of estate is fraudulent. Tito later apologized for signing the letter.

“Of course, Paris, Prince and Blanket, T.J. and his brothers, Tito, Marlon, Jackie and their spouses, current security (hired by the Estate), staff (per T.J.), Meg Lodise, Michael Kane, Sandra Ribera, Parry Sanders, Trent Jackson, you (Charles Shultz) and anyone else authorized by T.J. (other than the Excluded Individuals listed above), may enter and remain on the premises,” Weitzman wrote.

Weitzman’s email does not mention Michael’s sister, LaToya, and whether she can visit the property. She has publicly called on her family to stop the infighting.

According to a Jackson family source, the estate is allowed to make such demands because it pays the monthly lease payment on the Calabas home. Katherine Jackson controls the $70,000 monthly stipend the estate allocates to each Jackson child – a total of $210,000 – any way she sees fit, including school costs and other expenses.

Katherine Jackson is currently in the process of trying to purchase the home so the estate won’t be able to dictate such terms, the source said.

Weitzman writes that if law enforcement needs to be made of the letter, Schultz, T.J. Jackson or anyone else is authorized to show it to them.

“It is imperative to the Estate that from this point forward a safe and appropriate environment be provided for Michael Jackson’s children and his mother as well,” Weitzman wrote.

ROLAND S. MARTIN EXCLUSIVE: Janet Jackson, Others Family Members Barred From Mom

ugh, just saw this and I'm kind of sick to my stomach now.

This is what I was trying to express might happen and how the estate have control over the household. It just crosses that moral boundary. They have too much control with the in's and out's of Katherine, and PPB and just..the whole family. Barring people who weren't even part of the chaos? What is the purpose of that? But keeping Trent? Who filed a false missing person's report? Keeping around the possible people that were leaking info to the press? And Joe Jackson? What the hell does he have to do with this? He was probably in Vegas, hahaha. That's where he usually is, or at Hayvenhurst if you believe TMZ. And who are the estate to be firing Katherine's personal employees, lawyers and such?

It's one thing to want to protect the children, but wow.

and do it because their name is on the lease? they pay the rent. JFC.

and OF COURSE Katherine is going to try to buy the house now. They are keeping her grandkids and family from her!

and you know damn well the estate isn't going to give her the funds to do so. And if TJ remain's the full guardian they can kick Katherine out too if they want.

I just can't with this. I hope Janet and the siblings step in to maybe help her buy the house or do something. Jesus, and the estate owns Hayvenhurst too, they can bar people from that home as well.

jfakjfa;....now why isn't the fan community up in arms about THIS??? Having LAWYERS tell this family who is or isn't welcomed in their home.

ugh, I can already hear them now though. "it's for the kids safety...Janet attacked Paris...they kidnapped Katherine...it's good that the estate stepped in and did something" gah...wonder how these people would like it if lawyers and the courts decided who could come and go from THEIR homes, and who THEY could employ. Ugh, I'm ranting now. I feel so bad for Katherine at the moment, despite the fact that I don't always like her decisions/actions. You just don't do this. It's weird and just...wrong. It's odd, y'know?

That letter makes me feel sick too, it just proves how much the Estate is trying to control the kids and Katherine. As predicted, twitter has been blowing up with things like, "oh who are they going to hate now, TJ?" as if WE'RE the ones doing the blind hatred of certain family members. People keep quoting these suss articles from Radar.com that apparently say that Michael told the kids that Janet was "cheap and nasty" and that they should stay away from her. Also apparently Janet wants the brothers to control the money so that they don't bother her....LMAO. Wow that totally makes sense.

Also, new reports that TJ was the one who got the Estate to write the letter, because he wanted custody. I don't know how I feel about that either. I think TJ is a good guy, but getting involved with the Estate is a bit iffy.

For me I feel that a lot of these fans are absolutely blind to the EXACT same thing happening to the kids that happened to Michael in 2009. They're so busy hating on the family that they haven't been taking notice of the warning signs. FYI Branca and co are getting almost 5 million for running the Estate. I think that's a tad excessive, don't you?

Anything for money....