Michael - The Great Album Debate

144000

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
10,310
Points
0
Location
united states
Ok, here's what doubters don't seem to realize in their anger. I LIKE Monster, Breaking News and, to a lesser extent, KYHU. What you see as three songs that were a trojan horse of hatred and scandal, I see as three MJ songs I'm glad we have, even though they're part MJ, part post-production work. And I'm not alone in enjoying those three songs.

AND I know that if those three songs had NOT been released, for the precise reasons we now claim they shouldn't have been (incomplete, lame vocals, in need of too much work, etc.), fans would be clamouring for them to be released, saying that they didn't care about all of those things.

Eddie did the right thing in letting us hear those songs : they're what MJ sang in 2007, until proof to the contrary, proof which could easily be obtainable if the Cascios/Estate were sued.

dude..those songs ?suck. and i've never said that about an MJ song in my life. and that has nothing to do with the controversy. They're difficult, hard on the stomach, hard to digest..heavy...complicated..overproduced..overwritten..sink to the bottom of my soul's feet..i can't listen to them even once, let alone, more than once. Michael's songs are always light..airy...in your face, dry, memorable..hooky, magical..timeless...running around in my head, and me liking them there, as opposed to running around in my head, and me not liking them in there,(which has happened to me, on some songs in history)...these songs don't even run around in my head with me not liking them.

to me, listening to a song isn't about me having to think about it..or give an 'open mind' to it, or 'study' it, or even 'critique' it. i use my hard earned money to buy music to escape. that's it. it's supposed to be fun. not work. it's supposed to be my vacation. it's supposed to carry me. i'm not supposed to carry it. Michael does the former, those 'songs' do the latter, in my previous sentence. and they're too heavy for me to carry.

and how is MJ doing something for the 'first time', the way you stated? that's a red flag, right there.
 
Last edited:

StellaJackson

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
2,736
Points
63
When you listen to BN, Monster, KYHU and the 9 remaining Cascio tracks, this is the person you are listening to. Same accent. Same vibrato. Same pronounciation. Same timbre. Same tone. Same voice.

[youtube]UrB0ditWv4Y[/youtube]

Now show me something of Michael's that matches the Cascio track voice....
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
10,191
Points
0
Location
Mexico
I don't recognize Michael's voice in those 3 tracks at all excepting the vocals they added from previously recorded songs we alredy mentioned. He it's nothing about MAYBE, if those tracks are indeed authentic, why don't they show us the evidence then?
 

Lucilla

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
3,363
Points
0
Location
Neverland since 1991
For me personally all those 'red flags' are presented exactly the same way the media use to do trying to convince everybody that MJ's behaviour match the profile of the pedophile. Many people are buying this but not all fortunatelly

That's a completely different thing.

We are not spreading some theories here.
We (for ourselves) have the chance to 'experience' those songs and our own experiences give us those red flags.
 

Chamife

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
1,123
Points
0
Location
The Netherlands
If one listens to the Cascio tracks with an open mind, that is, admitting that MAYBE it is MJ, they will find a lot of nice things about them. They are not so devoid of emotion and cleverness as some say. They were just never given a fair chance by some people.

Take BN for instance. If it is a fake song, then obviously it's worthless. But if maybe, just MAYBE, it is a MJ vocal and lyric, you have the first time ever MJ sings about himself in the third person. And if Eddie's anecdotes are not lies, then you have MJ making fun of journalists, the way he apparently liked to do around friends. So there's a lot of MJ's personality in there.
I always listen to music with an open mind. I'm not saying the music is bad, but some lyrics are. And when I concentrate on the voice...I miss the little nuances that make me know it's Michael. I totally agree with 144.000. When I listen to music I don't want to think, I want to forget everything around me and be mesmerized by it and enjoy every note. I don't want to be irritated by it because of the way the singer performs it or the cheesy lyrics. That's what a great/good song means to me.

dude..those songs ?suck. and i've never said that about an MJ song in my life. and that has nothing to do with the controversy. They're difficult, hard on the stomach, hard to digest..heavy...complicated..overproduced..overwritten..sink to the bottom of my soul's feet..i can't listen to them even once, let alone, more than once. Michael's songs are always light..airy...in your face, dry, memorable..hooky, magical..timeless...running around in my head, and me liking them there, as opposed to running around in my head, and me not liking them in there,(which has happened to me, on some songs in history)...these songs don't even run around in my head with me not liking them.

to me, listening to a song isn't about me having to think about it..or give an 'open mind' to it, or 'study' it, or even 'critique' it. i use my hard earned money to buy music to escape. that's it. it's supposed to be fun. not work. it's supposed to be my vacation. it's supposed to carry me. i'm not supposed to carry it. Michael does the former, those 'songs' do the latter, in my previous sentence. and they're too heavy for me to carry.

and how is MJ doing something for the 'first time', the way you stated? that's a red flag, right there.

I totally agree with you. Love what you wrote.
 

elapentela

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
188
Points
0
That's a completely different thing.

We are not spreading some theories here.
We (for ourselves) have the chance to 'experience' those songs and our own experiences give us those red flags.

It's exactly the same with all the people who feel that Michael Jackson was a pedophile. Nothing will change their mind, they would claim this under the oath because they know(and they feel) the truth. And THEIR TRUTH is no different than YOUR TRUTH. THEIR FACTS are not different than YOUR FACTS. Their and your BOTH ARE OPINIONS. Try to understand it and maybe it will heal your frustration.
 
Last edited:

Lucilla

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
3,363
Points
0
Location
Neverland since 1991
elapentela;3723786 said:
It's exactly the same with all the people who feel that Michael Jackson was a pedophile. Nothing will change their mind, they would claim this under the oath because they know(and they feel) the truth. And THEIR TRUTH is no different YOUR TRUTH. THEIR FACTS are not different than YOUR FACTS. Their and your BOTH ARE OPINIONS. Try to understand it and maybe it will heal your frustration.

I completely disagree because as I said, we can experience the songs for ourselves.

This is not about just being frustrated and this is not about “negativity” from us.
Most doubters here are not Sony/Branca/Cascio haters, we just want factual proof of what happened to those songs.

In my case, I just don’t hear MJ in those songs BUT if in the future I’m proved wrong, I won’t be ashamed of my current belief, I will just acknowledge I was wrong and will close this chapter.

I repeat, I just want to know the truth, whatever the truth is.
Ps: We don’t hate believers either ;D
 

kreen

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,014
Points
63
dude..those songs ?suck. and i've never said that about an MJ song in my life. and that has nothing to do with the controversy. They're difficult, hard on the stomach, hard to digest..heavy...complicated..overproduced..overwritten..sink to the bottom of my soul's feet..i can't listen to them even once, let alone, more than once. Michael's songs are always light..airy...in your face, dry, memorable..hooky, magical..timeless...running around in my head, and me liking them there, as opposed to running around in my head, and me not liking them in there,(which has happened to me, on some songs in history)...these songs don't even run around in my head with me not liking them.

to me, listening to a song isn't about me having to think about it..or give an 'open mind' to it, or 'study' it, or even 'critique' it. i use my hard earned money to buy music to escape. that's it. it's supposed to be fun. not work. it's supposed to be my vacation. it's supposed to carry me. i'm not supposed to carry it. Michael does the former, those 'songs' do the latter, in my previous sentence. and they're too heavy for me to carry.

and how is MJ doing something for the 'first time', the way you stated? that's a red flag, right there.

Come on man, you only feel that way about the songs because of all the baggage you bring to them. If those three songs were on Invincible instead of on Michael, you'd have a different opinion about them. Your description of the Cascio songs is so over-the-top negative that it betrays an obvious bias.

I'll take "Monster" any day of the week over "Privacy", I'll tell you that.
 

kreen

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,014
Points
63
When you listen to BN, Monster, KYHU and the 9 remaining Cascio tracks, this is the person you are listening to. Same accent. Same vibrato. Same pronounciation. Same timbre. Same tone. Same voice.

[youtube]UrB0ditWv4Y[/youtube]

Now show me something of Michael's that matches the Cascio track voice....

This is like an exact repost of your first post in this thread 2 years ago. No progress at all. So much certainty, so little to base it on.
 

StellaJackson

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
2,736
Points
63
This is like an exact repost of your first post in this thread 2 years ago. No progress at all. So much certainty, so little to base it on.

How about basing it on the fact that the voice sounds exactly the same as the one on the Cascio tracks, the ones which didn't appear until almost a year after Michael died and have absolutely no supporting evidence that Michael was ever involved in them whatsoever. Now let's have a look at all that stuff you have to base your belief on. Oh wait...
 

elapentela

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
188
Points
0
Lucilla;3723789 said:
I completely disagree because as I said, we can experience the songs for ourselves.

This is not about just being frustrated and this is not about “negativity” from us.
Most doubters here are not Sony/Branca/Cascio haters, we just want factual proof of what happened to those songs.

In my case, I just don’t hear MJ in those songs BUT if in the future I’m proved wrong, I won’t be ashamed of my current belief, I will just acknowledge I was wrong and will close this chapter.

I repeat, I just want to know the truth, whatever the truth is.
Ps: We don’t hate believers either ;D

You won't know the truth untill you go through the legal system or suddenly Cascio/Porte will change their mind and want to please MJ's fans community as thank you for their slanders. It's like Michael Jackson would decided that he wanted to talk to Diane Dimond if he would still be alive.
 

144000

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
10,310
Points
0
Location
united states
Come on man, you only feel that way about the songs because of all the baggage you bring to them. If those three songs were on Invincible instead of on Michael, you'd have a different opinion about them. Your description of the Cascio songs is so over-the-top negative that it betrays an obvious bias.

I'll take "Monster" any day of the week over "Privacy", I'll tell you that.
hypocritical statement. i hated the songs before i realized what was going on. you are bringing the bias. for you to even think those trashy 'songs' would be on Invincible....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.

anyway....Michael's in the hall of fame for a reason.
So...you wanna go to Vegas and hazard a bet that the Cascios will be there? hmmm? Don't bet your house on it.
 

144000

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
10,310
Points
0
Location
united states
It's exactly the same with all the people who feel that Michael Jackson was a pedophile. Nothing will change their mind, they would claim this under the oath because they know(and they feel) the truth. And THEIR TRUTH is no different than YOUR TRUTH. THEIR FACTS are not different than YOUR FACTS. Their and your BOTH ARE OPINIONS. Try to understand it and maybe it will heal your frustration.
it's too bad Michael doesn't get respect in your posts. for you to compare the Cascios to Michael's trials is an insane comparison. Nothing was done to the Cascios. Nothing. Fans are asking questions about something(a recording) that was released to the world. Fans are helpless, as a recording comes out. That does NOT compare to the crucifying of Michael with the evil lies about pedophelia evil and evil attacks, that essentially took his life. How dare you. It's an insensitive thing to do, as we are still grieving. The Cascios are not dead.

How hard could it be to understand the idea that somebody is trying to hide behind the voice of Michael and mimick it? Why couldn't the Cascios release an album called 'The Cascios', featuring sounds that are wayy different from Michael, that sound like...the Cascios' singer, whoever that may be? Sorta like the Rolling Stones or something(sorry, Rolling Stones..i didn't know what else to write)

Why can't this family just be a seperate new act that comes out sounding like themselves? Test the market..see how they sound.

I have yet to see any other act in music be assaulted like this, other than how Michael was assaulted.

Does anybody on here know of an attempt by an act to mimick the Rolling Stones, behind closed doors?

At least, with Elvis, people came out in the open, and showed that they were impersonators. I'm trying to search in history to see if someone tried to release an album under Elvis' name, and tried to sound like him behind closed doors and pass it off to the public as Elvis. Does anybody know of this?

How about James Brown. Anybody know of somebody who tried to do this to him?

Any other famous act that somebody tried to do this to, that anybody knows about?
 
Last edited:

SoCav

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2005
Messages
1,951
Points
63
You won't know the truth untill you go through the legal system or suddenly Cascio/Porte will change their mind and want to please MJ's fans community as thank you for their slanders. It's like Michael Jackson would decided that he wanted to talk to Diane Dimond if he would still be alive.
Good to know you hold the fan community in such high regard. :smilerolleyes:

Come on man, you only feel that way about the songs because of all the baggage you bring to them. If those three songs were on Invincible instead of on Michael, you'd have a different opinion about them. Your description of the Cascio songs is so over-the-top negative that it betrays an obvious bias.
Oh no, not this again. How often do we have to explain to you that our dislike for these songs has nothing to do with an anti-Cascio bias and everything with the simple fact that they sound utterly shitty to us?
 
Last edited:

MusicMan26

Guest
This is like an exact repost of your first post in this thread 2 years ago. No progress at all. So much certainty, so little to base it on.

Well, why don't you add some difference to it and actually do what he suggests at the bottom.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
10,191
Points
0
Location
Mexico
The only reason I hate those songs it's because people involved with them claim it's Michael singing which is an absolute :bs:(people involve have done nothing to proove their authenticity.) If believers like them because those tracks are well produced, are danceable, etc it's another story.
 

Paw

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
73
Points
0
ivy;3723486 said:
Showers aren't the best place to record because it creates an uncontrollable reverb and echo. That can affect the vocals actually.


2n7nynr.jpg


and see the difference of reverb. Go to 1:15 and listen with without reverb and then the added reverb

[video=youtube_share;YZ9XMT5qXXU]http://youtu.be/YZ9XMT5qXXU[/video]

It will be the best place with towels over the shower curtains. :)

Jesta;3723497 said:
Oh, I forgot to mention one thing: In Bad 25, Matt Forger shows us that MJ recorded background vocals in the Hayvenhurst shower. The Way You Make Me Feel's background harmonies were definitely recorded in there... Or at least they were for the demo of the song.

And yes Eddie only mentioned background vocals too.

Let’s try a possible situation: add heavy echo to a line from Butterflies acapella, export the audio file, then try to remove the echos from the new audio file. See what will we get? Audio experts please have a try.
 
Last edited:

kreen

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,014
Points
63
Good to know you hold the fan community in such high regard. :smilerolleyes:


Oh no, not this again. How often do we have to explain to you that our dislike for these songs has nothing to do with an anti-Cascio bias and everything with the simple fact that they sound utterly shitty to us?

Ok, fine, so you don't like them. Hey, I don't like "Cry", "Can't Let Her Get Away" or "Be Not Always". You don't have to like every single one of MJ's songs. But I like them, especially Monster. Great hooks on that one.
 

AlwaysThere

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
4,886
Points
113
I have to admit that they are not TERRIBLE songs. I'm very interested in hearing All Right and Water. They just piss me off because they were billed as official Michael Jackson songs, when they are not of the sorts. Had then been released as a Jason Malachi track I would respect them much more.
 

kreen

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,014
Points
63
How about basing it on the fact that the voice sounds exactly the same as the one on the Cascio tracks, the ones which didn't appear until almost a year after Michael died and have absolutely no supporting evidence that Michael was ever involved in them whatsoever. Now let's have a look at all that stuff you have to base your belief on. Oh wait...

The voice on the Cascio tracks sounds just like MJ to me. In your subjective opinion, it doesn't; fine. In my subjective opinion, it does. The fact that about a dozen of MJ's closest collaborators agree it sounds just like MJ -- they were mentioned in an official statement, and have not contradicted or denied the statement, which means they agree with it -- puts me in good company. But hey, maybe your ears are much more powerful and precise instruments than theirs; after all, it's not like they personally worked with MJ for decades... Oh wait, they did. Well, what do they know, right?

Besides, you say the Cascio singer sounds like Malachi. I agree, he does. But of course, Malachi is an MJ impersonator, and the thing about impersonators is they sound like -- they IMITATE -- the person they impersonate. So to say the Cascio singer sounds like Malachi is the same as saying he sounds like MJ -- unless you deny Malachi sounds like MJ. But then, why would you even know of him? Or why would he be used as an MJ soundalike by the perpetrators of the crime? You gotta sound alike to be a soundalike.

Add to this the fact that the Jacksons haven't sued, and that the Estate hasn't removed the songs from the market, and it means that the Jacksons feel they can't win a case -- meaning their evidence is weak -- and that the Estate feel they can't lose a case -- meaning their evidence is strong. So the Estate probably have convincing voice identification reports, like they said. Any evidence that we have -- or lack thereof -- as mere fans, the Jacksons/the Estate also have, and then some. So their actions -- or lack thereof -- can be taken as an indication of the respective strength of their respective cases. Add to this that a large number of people -- friends, significant others, family members -- would have to be aware of the hoax by now, and it defies reason to think that all of them would hold their tongue, especially in today's leak-intensive environment.

As to all of the other issues -- the relative silence of the Cascios, the eventuality of the other songs being released or not, the opinion tweeted by so and so, the subtle, barely-there nuances some think they hear, etc. --, they are secondary to the points above, and could be raised about other songs not only in MJ's discography, but in any other artist's discography.

Ergo, until new evidence comes to light -- one must keep an open mind -- there is no objective reason why one should deny the official story, which is that those songs are MJ. I'll enjoy them as such until new evidence appears, in the same way I enjoy any other MJ music. I won't deprive myself of MJ music based on far-fetched theories and subjective, highly unconvincing impressions.
 

ADKIc3mAnX

Proud Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2011
Messages
1,105
Points
0
Location
New York City
Which books? By Frank Cascio? Whatever, maybe MJ nicknamed him Angel, he was good to everyone. But "Angelikson" is lame and pretentious. And he is not an "anglel" in any way. He had done some very devilish things since.
Accusing someone with no evidence?

Reminds me of another victim.

Not cool.
 

144000

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
10,310
Points
0
Location
united states
The voice on the Cascio tracks sounds just like MJ to me. In your subjective opinion, it doesn't; fine. In my subjective opinion, it does. The fact that about a dozen of MJ's closest collaborators agree it sounds just like MJ -- they were mentioned in an official statement, and have not contradicted or denied the statement, which means they agree with it -- puts me in good company. But hey, maybe your ears are much more powerful and precise instruments than theirs; after all, it's not like they personally worked with MJ for decades... Oh wait, they did. Well, what do they know, right?

Besides, you say the Cascio singer sounds like Malachi. I agree, he does. But of course, Malachi is an MJ impersonator, and the thing about impersonators is they sound like -- they IMITATE -- the person they impersonate. So to say the Cascio singer sounds like Malachi is the same as saying he sounds like MJ -- unless you deny Malachi sounds like MJ. But then, why would you even know of him? Or why would he be used as an MJ soundalike by the perpetrators of the crime? You gotta sound alike to be a soundalike.

Add to this the fact that the Jacksons haven't sued, and that the Estate hasn't removed the songs from the market, and it means that the Jacksons feel they can't win a case -- meaning their evidence is weak -- and that the Estate feel they can't lose a case -- meaning their evidence is strong. So the Estate probably have convincing voice identification reports, like they said. Any evidence that we have -- or lack thereof -- as mere fans, the Jacksons/the Estate also have, and then some. So their actions -- or lack thereof -- can be taken as an indication of the respective strength of their respective cases. Add to this that a large number of people -- friends, significant others, family members -- would have to be aware of the hoax by now, and it defies reason to think that all of them would hold their tongue, especially in today's leak-intensive environment.

As to all of the other issues -- the relative silence of the Cascios, the eventuality of the other songs being released or not, the opinion tweeted by so and so, the subtle, barely-there nuances some think they hear, etc. --, they are secondary to the points above, and could be raised about other songs not only in MJ's discography, but in any other artist's discography.

Ergo, until new evidence comes to light -- one must keep an open mind -- there is no objective reason why one should deny the official story, which is that those songs are MJ. I'll enjoy them as such until new evidence appears, in the same way I enjoy any other MJ music. I won't deprive myself of MJ music based on far-fetched theories and subjective, highly unconvincing impressions.
you say people that worked with MJ for decades know better than us, yet you selectively say you know better than MJ's family. Tomato Tomoto. Yet if i had to compare your people to MJ's family who worked with him since....the Jackson Five...well...you see my point. then again..i bet you will say otherwise. i wonder if you would consider the Jackson brothers so clueless about brother Michael's voice if this 'album' never came out? wait...don't answer that. (but of course you will answer that.)
 
Last edited:

Pentum

Proud Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
7,225
Points
83
Location
Norway
It will suck forever. But I just can't wait for the day when it all comes out. Jason, Eddie, jail, fraud, Cascio songs removed from MJ disc.
 

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
Jason, Eddie, jail, fraud, Cascio songs removed from MJ disc.

I will repeat this again, there's no jail penalty for civil cases. Even Milli Vanilli case ended with the record company accepting returns for the CD's sold - which only 5-15% of people took and the producer that did the faking paying $500,000 as a penalty. At least keep your expectations realistic so that you won't have any further disappointments.
 

kreen

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,014
Points
63
I’d like to raise one last important point, that I don’t think has been talked about sufficiently. I would like people who are really interested about finding out the truth about this to read on.

The doubter’s theory raises a number of difficulties, one of which we haven’t really talked about is the consistency of character of the parties to the hoax.

Here is what I mean. In order for Cascio/Porte to come up and carry out such a hoax, they have to be scheming, crafty, clever people. I don’t think that can be denied: the results speak for themselves.

On the other hand, doubters make much of the fact that no handwritten MJ notes about the songs have been produced, which, to them, is an indication MJ never sang the songs.

Here’s where consistency of character trips the doubters’ theory. If Cascio/Porte as so crafty, scheming, devious and clever as to be able to pull off their hoax, then surely it would have been child’s play for them – either in preparation for the controversy that was bound to follow or in subsequent days – to produce fake MJ handwritten notes. Anybody who can hire a MJ soundalike can do the lesser task of finding a MJ “writealike”.

Now, some may say that MJ’s handwriting was inimitable. Let’s grant this objection for the time being. But then, Cascio/Porte – being crafty and clever – could have done something even more simple: just find some scrap of paper MJ had left behind in their possession after their decades-long friendship – any piece of paper where MJ had jotted down a few lines of poetry, an idea for a song, a thought, any thing – and create a song based on that scrap! Doubters argue that a whole year went by between MJ’s death and the first public mention of the songs; implying that the songs were at least in part created during that span. They why would Cascio/Porte, being so devious and clever, not create from scratch a bunch of songs based on unrelated notes left behind by MJ, and produce THAT as convincing evidence the songs are MJ?

This is just an example of the problem of consistency of character that the doubters don’t take into account. For the hoax theory to work, we have to assume, among other things:

That Eddie was both loyal enough to NEVER betray MJ while he was alive, and when there was ample opportunity to do so…. but devilish enough to then betray him AFTER his death.
That Eddie/James were both clever enough to hatch an incredibly risky scheme and get away with it… but not clever enough to actually cover their butts by making sure they could produce some pieces of paper with the words “Monster” on it in MJ’s handwriting.
That Eddie was discrete enough NOT to record MJ while he was working on the WBSS vocals in his studio (no such recording had been released, and none has been asked)… but that he would become so vain a bit later as to necessarily want to record MJ working on his tracks in the same studio, in which case the absence of such video becomes incriminating against him.
That Eddie would be ballsy enough to go on freakin’ national TV with Oprah and lie without cracking a smile to an audience of millions… but then so unsure of his capacity for deceit that he would guiltily shy away from a Q&A by indirect email with a few fans.
That Eddie is so greedy that he would go to the lengths of hatching a risky, bound-to-fail hoax that would land him in a heap of legal trouble if anything went wrong… but would not choose to make easy money by the much less risky and much easier sale of MJ-related memorabilia or salacious MJ stories to the tabloids.

The list goes on an on. The portrait of Eddie Cascio that one has to believe in for the hoax theory to work is not a believable portrait. If he was a movie character, we’d criticize the screenwriter for his poor grasp of the art of characterization.
 

144000

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
10,310
Points
0
Location
united states
kreen;3724090 said:
I’d like to raise one last important point, that I don’t think has been talked about sufficiently. I would like people who are really interested about finding out the truth about this to read on.

The doubter’s theory raises a number of difficulties, one of which we haven’t really talked about is the consistency of character of the parties to the hoax.

Here is what I mean. In order for Cascio/Porte to come up and carry out such a hoax, they have to be scheming, crafty, clever people. I don’t think that can be denied: the results speak for themselves.

On the other hand, doubters make much of the fact that no handwritten MJ notes about the songs have been produced, which, to them, is an indication MJ never sang the songs.

Here’s where consistency of character trips the doubters’ theory. If Cascio/Porte as so crafty, scheming, devious and clever as to be able to pull off their hoax, then surely it would have been child’s play for them – either in preparation for the controversy that was bound to follow or in subsequent days – to produce fake MJ handwritten notes. Anybody who can hire a MJ soundalike can do the lesser task of finding a MJ “writealike”.

Now, some may say that MJ’s handwriting was inimitable. Let’s grant this objection for the time being. But then, Cascio/Porte – being crafty and clever – could have done something even more simple: just find some scrap of paper MJ had left behind in their possession after their decades-long friendship – any piece of paper where MJ had jotted down a few lines of poetry, an idea for a song, a thought, any thing – and create a song based on that scrap! Doubters argue that a whole year went by between MJ’s death and the first public mention of the songs; implying that the songs were at least in part created during that span. They why would Cascio/Porte, being so devious and clever, not create from scratch a bunch of songs based on unrelated notes left behind by MJ, and produce THAT as convincing evidence the songs are MJ?

This is just an example of the problem of consistency of character that the doubters don’t take into account. For the hoax theory to work, we have to assume, among other things:

That Eddie was both loyal enough to NEVER betray MJ while he was alive, and when there was ample opportunity to do so…. but devilish enough to then betray him AFTER his death.
That Eddie/James were both clever enough to hatch an incredibly risky scheme and get away with it… but not clever enough to actually cover their butts by making sure they could produce some pieces of paper with the words “Monster” on it in MJ’s handwriting.
That Eddie was discrete enough NOT to record MJ while he was working on the WBSS vocals in his studio (no such recording had been released, and none has been asked)… but that he would become so vain a bit later as to necessarily want to record MJ working on his tracks in the same studio, in which case the absence of such video becomes incriminating against him.
That Eddie would be ballsy enough to go on freakin’ national TV with Oprah and lie without cracking a smile to an audience of millions… but then so unsure of his capacity for deceit that he would guiltily shy away from a Q&A by indirect email with a few fans.
That Eddie is so greedy that he would go to the lengths of hatching a risky, bound-to-fail hoax that would land him in a heap of legal trouble if anything went wrong… but would not choose to make easy money by the much less risky and much easier sale of MJ-related memorabilia or salacious MJ stories to the tabloids.

The list goes on an on. The portrait of Eddie Cascio that one has to believe in for the hoax theory to work is not a believable portrait. If he was a movie character, we’d criticize the screenwriter for his poor grasp of the art of characterization.

what you don't take into account with all this is that no matter how crafty the plan..unforseen circumstances following is a bi***
rainy days always get in the way of peoples' plans after the plans are planned.
however, nothing ever gets in the way of someone's natural tendency. so unforseen circumstances easily gives away the difference between someone being natural and someone attempting to copy someone natural.

nobody plans what is natural.

if i plan to be you, you aren't giving any thought to your natural ways. on the other hand, i AM giving thought to tracing your natural ways. Somewhere along the line I will swing and miss, due to trial and error, which is greatly enhanced by unforseen circumstances, during my planning. But You will not swing and miss at something you don't give any thought to, because you do it naturally, without thought.

plus, there is something inside you that makes you the natural you, that i obviously won't know about, but if i don't find out what it is, i will give myself away as a woeful counterfeit. it never fails. how could i know, exactly what it is, that's inside you, since it's inside you?

there are going to be quirks..nuances about you, some that you might want to hide, due to embarrassment or something else, that manifest themselves outwardly in some other way, that i won't be able to capture, because i can't possibly know Everything about you. Never. No matter how much time i am given.

This is true about everybody..no exceptions. We are all equal that way. We can NOT be copied by someone else...Ever. Evidence will continue to give that away..Forever.

Do you deny this?
 
Last edited:

StellaJackson

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
2,736
Points
63
Good news. I can now confirm that the snippets of Monster have been completely removed from the Immortal show.
 
Top