Michael Jackson's blanket of secrecy to be removed?

i4ui4u Posts: 54,804
Forum Member
The New York Post is reporting the promoters of the ill fated 'This Is It' shows is prepared to uncover that only Blanket, has the King of Pop’s DNA.

The promoters AEG are the subject of a $40 billion legal claim by Katherine Jackson and the three children.
"There was a whole lot that Michael Jackson or his family wasn’t and isn’t being forthcoming about,” an AEG source said. “The drug use by Jackson, his use of alcohol, his relationship with his own family, and the identities of the children’s parents.”

Among the evidence AEG could present are sworn affidavits, including one from a mystery woman identified only as “Helena,” who could be Blanket’s mother.

Some years ago in a TV interview Michael Jackson told the world Blanket was born out of a loving relationship with a woman he knew, but in the same interview he said he had no idea who the mother was just that she was healthy.

Will Mark Lester be stepping up to the plate again?
«13456729

Comments

  • beast1982beast1982 Posts: 5,350
    Forum Member
    Just let him rest in peace. What's wrong with people??? (I dont mean the OP)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,275
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I always get the hump when his caucasian kids are paraded in the news as 'his' children. Adopted, yes but not biologically.
  • Dave3622Dave3622 Posts: 1,819
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The opening post made no sense to me at all until I realised the word 'blanket' was referring to a person. How bizarre !!
  • dee123dee123 Posts: 46,195
    Forum Member
    beast1982 wrote: »
    Just let him rest in peace. What's wrong with people??? (I dont mean the OP)

    The answer to that question is simple:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcXMhwF4EtQ
  • InspirationInspiration Posts: 62,694
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    i4u wrote: »
    The New York Post is reporting the promoters of the ill fated 'This Is It' shows is prepared to uncover that only Blanket, has the King of Pop’s DNA.

    It's none of our business. Why do AEG feel this is even relevant? It has absolutely nothing to do with them or the events they were planning on staging. We have no right to be told anything regarding his children. I hope the Jackson family ensures that remains the case.
  • Betty BritainBetty Britain Posts: 13,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Michaels family won't let him rest in peace if there is money to be made..
  • belive940belive940 Posts: 32,463
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    beast1982 wrote: »
    Just let him rest in peace. What's wrong with people??? (I dont mean the OP)

    Oh I think it is the OP,S life's work to make sure M J never rests in peace, quite sad really.
  • L-unaL-una Posts: 228
    Forum Member
    jackbell wrote: »
    I always get the hump when his caucasian kids are paraded in the news as 'his' children. Adopted, yes but not biologically.

    Of course they are his children.What does it matter if they have his DNA or not? They called him Dad and never knew any other parent but him.
  • L-unaL-una Posts: 228
    Forum Member
    i4u wrote: »
    The New York Post is reporting the promoters of the ill fated 'This Is It' shows is prepared to uncover that only Blanket, has the King of Pop’s DNA.

    The promoters AEG are the subject of a $40 billion legal claim by Katherine Jackson and the three children.



    Some years ago in a TV interview Michael Jackson told the world Blanket was born out of a loving relationship with a woman he knew, but in the same interview he said he had no idea who the mother was just that she was healthy.

    Will Mark Lester be stepping up to the plate again?

    And your point is....?
  • Daisy BennybootsDaisy Bennyboots Posts: 18,375
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Michaels family won't let him rest in peace if there is money to be made..

    ...and for that reason, I guess "Jackson Kids Paternity" prime time TV show the minute they turn 16.

    Either way, I don't think it will be a secret forever. Paris is seemingly building a relationship with Debbie Rowe and although I'm sure they adored their father,they will wants answers at some point.
  • SloopySloopy Posts: 65,209
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    beast1982 wrote: »
    Just let him rest in peace. What's wrong with people??? (I dont mean the OP)

    On the contrary.

    Four years on, the cryptic posts continue.....
  • SloopySloopy Posts: 65,209
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jackbell wrote: »
    I always get the hump when his caucasian kids are paraded in the news as 'his' children. Adopted, yes but not biologically.

    Many adoptive parents probably refer to adopted children as 'theirs' as well. They are the ones who care for and raise their children.

    As far as they're concerned MJ is their father. It's not really anybody else's place to question that.
  • Betty BritainBetty Britain Posts: 13,721
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    ...and for that reason, I guess "Jackson Kids Paternity" prime time TV show the minute they turn 16.

    Either way, I don't think it will be a secret forever. Paris is seemingly building a relationship with Debbie Rowe and although I'm sure they adored their father,they will wants answers at some point.

    And I believe they have a right to those answers..but they shouldn't be done in public or on TV
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,177
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Or Blanky of secrecy.
  • haphashhaphash Posts: 21,448
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I've always been curious about how Michael acquired these children. Yes he was their father in terms of looking after them but he obviously did not produce the sperm to perform the biological part of fatherhood.

    Why? is the big question. It's not difficult for a man to produce sperm for artificial insemination.
    I've always found the having children to order and being able to choose the mother/father extremely creepy.

    I think the kids have a right to know who their biological parents are.
  • haphashhaphash Posts: 21,448
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    L-una wrote: »
    Of course they are his children.What does it matter if they have his DNA or not? They called him Dad and never knew any other parent but him.

    Of course it matters. We demand to know :D
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 2,177
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    L-una wrote: »
    Of course they are his children.What does it matter if they have his DNA or not? They called him Dad and never knew any other parent but him.

    Do any of the kids know who their biological mum (or mum/dad) are?
  • codebluecodeblue Posts: 14,072
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I cannot believe that three children turn up from nowhere and no questions are asked by the authorities. You cannot just adopt children like this - and with his background.
  • haphashhaphash Posts: 21,448
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Lets say it is safe to assume that none of the 3 are biologically Michael's children. I have 2 questions about this:
    1. Why did he not donate sperm himself for artificial insemination?
    2. If he couldn't produce sperm, then why didn't he use a black donar?
    He could have chosen a black male with a passing resemblence to himself and if he had done so people would assume the kids were fathered by him. I find this very strange.

    Nobody has yet been able to answer these questions satisfactorily.
  • lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    haphash wrote: »
    I've always been curious about how Michael acquired these children. Yes he was their father in terms of looking after them but he obviously did not produce the sperm to perform the biological part of fatherhood.

    Why? is the big question. It's not difficult for a man to produce sperm for artificial insemination.
    I've always found the having children to order and being able to choose the mother/father extremely creepy.

    I think the kids have a right to know who their biological parents are.

    Maybe he couldn't have kids? Didn't he have vitiligo... maybe he had other genetic disorders which he didn't want to pass on?

    ETA: Maybe whoever donated the sperm was a good friend and colour didn't come into it?
  • codebluecodeblue Posts: 14,072
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    lexi22 wrote: »
    Maybe he couldn't have kids? Didn't he have vitiligo... maybe he had other genetic disorders which he didn't want to pass on?

    Vitiligo?

    No, you are mixing that up with skin bleaching
  • lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    codeblue wrote: »
    Vitiligo?

    No, you are mixing that up with skin bleaching

    No, not mixing anything up. It was confirmed in the autopsy that he suffered from it. Everyone knows he went in for skin bleaching but that doesn't negate the fact he had the condition.

    But whatever. Not interested enough to argue, just thought I'd add my 2p worth re why MJ may not have been in a position to have bio kids. :)
  • haphashhaphash Posts: 21,448
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Vitiligo isn't a life threatening condition. It can be genetically inherited but it doesn't automatically follow that a child will have it if the parent does. None of MJs siblings appear to have it.
    It seems very unlikely that this is the reason he didn't father the children.

    As for the racial issue it surprises me still that he didn't want a black sperm donor. His family are black and identify themselves as part of African-American culture. If they had a black parent his children would more easily fit in with the rest of the family. I know people will say, what does it matter what colour the kids are, but in America they are more into labelling themselves than we are.
  • lexi22lexi22 Posts: 16,394
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    haphash wrote: »
    Vitiligo isn't a life threatening condition. It can be genetically inherited but it doesn't automatically follow that a child will have it if the parent does. None of MJs siblings appear to have it.
    It seems very unlikely that this is the reason he didn't father the children.

    As for the racial issue it surprises me still that he didn't want a black sperm donor. His family are black and identify themselves as part of African-American culture. If they had a black parent his children would more easily fit in with the rest of the family. I know people will say, what does it matter what colour the kids are, but in America they are more into labelling themselves than we are.

    ? I never said it was a life threatening condition. Merely pointing out that he suffered from it. If it was something that affected him badly (not just physically but psychologically and emotionally), then it could have been a factor in that he didn't want a child of his to go through the same thing. And let's remember, he wasn't exactly living on planet earth for most of his adult life so judging him by 'normal' logic is pretty pointless.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,100
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Do they really have to do this? It's obvious that Blanket is his only biological child. Similar facial features aside, his name gives it away. Why would Michael name his last son Michael Joseph Jackson Jr and not his first, but give him a different family name? ( I also find it weird that all his children have the name Michael in their names. A bit like George Forman.) as far as his children are concerned, MJ is their father regardless of the true paternity.
Sign In or Register to comment.