First of all-- how about that interesting Google Ads experiment? I was totally surprised to find that Google Ads obviously has some kind of filter on it, because even Rachel's "strong themes" filled guest-post couldn't make it give us an ad for, say, a sexually transmitted diseases clinic or a place to buy a Massengil Disposable Douche. Final score = Google Ads 1, Humans 0.
So, now LaToya Jackson is talking about how there was a conspiracy to murder Michael Jackson for his publishing catalog (in case you aren't up on this, in addition to being an eccentric person, Michael Jackson apparently also had enough business acumen to purchase a large portion of the publishing rights to about half of the Beatles' catalog, which is certain to be a producer of a large amount of passive income ad infinitum).
It does stand to reason that without Michael Jackson's substantial monthly outlay of expenses (for drugs, and nannies, and face bleaching crean, and monkeys, and God knows what else), this income could be amassed into a billion-dollar fortune for whoever holds the keys to the kingdom. But-- isn't Katherine Jackson (Michael's mother) the trustee, along with the children and some charities? I don't know why I am attempting to apply regular logic here, but wouldn't the eponymous "they" of conspriacy theory lore only benefit in murdering Michael Jackson if "they" were beneficiares of the trust? By this logic, this supposed murder would have to have been engineered by the Jackson family....and they are the ones crying "conspiracy" in the first place.
Don't get me wrong-- I'm not saying Michael Jackson's own family murdered him, not at all. I'm sure it's an incredibly painful time for them. I just think it's weird that LaToya is now on the record with a conspiracy theory, when there's no third-party beneficiary, no Da Vinci code, no 2012, no CIA connection, no actual evidence to prove motive, and a ton of supporting reports that Michael Jackson had a terrible drug problem that ended up killing him. Frankly, I'm also kind of disappointed-- I mean, we knew there was going to be some kind of Michael Jackson Death Weirdness, but this is it?
I'm going to throw this new conspiracy theory into the mix: "Blanket" Jackson, the youngest of the three children (who are probably not biologically related to Michael Jackson, which just adds another layer of weirdness to the mix) is a rarely-seen, genius seven year old who noticed that his eccentric father was spending all of his inheritence on weirdness. In the style of "Stewie" from "Family Guy," "Blanket" plotted with one of the still-unnamed charities that make up the remaining 30% of the Michael Jackson Trust to eliminate Michael Jackson so that his estate's assets could start to build back up. Eleven years from now, when he's 18, he assumes control not only of his portion of the Michael Jackson Trust, but also takes the reigns of one of the charitable organizations. He also changes his name to something like "John Smith," so no one ever knows his true identity.
Thoughts? I think this one is better than "someone who is not even going to benefit murdered him for no good reason." Oh, also-- I just read this article where apparently Joe Jackson is trying to get the little kids to tour as "The Jackson Three." Because that whole "Jackson Five" thing worked out so well and totally didn't mess anyone up forever, right?
Watch, Blanket is going to take out Joe Jackson now too.
Comments