Latest on MJJC

Brad Sundberg: Remembering a friend. Nice read and pics.

Some good sentiments in there but agree with everyone about the skin colour comments.
 
My heart is aching now. Although millions of fans love him, no amount of love we give him can compensate what was taken from him when he was little. He gave up more than his childhood to become the most successful entertainer. He gave up himself to his arts. I just cannot imagine the amount of pain and loneliness he suffered. Instead of showing him compassion, people mocked him for his so-called "eccentricities". If I suffer a fraction of what he suffered, I think I would have became a mess. He must be a very strong person to endure all those excruciating pains. People gave him ignorance, he gave back kindness and love. What a big heart he had.

All people that worked with Michael said only good things about him. He remained humble and professional even he was the biggest star on earth.

The more I read about him, the more I love him and cannot let him go. I would give anything to be on that plane with him and hug him and tell him not to be scarred
Click to expand...

Beautiful post.
I feel the exact same way and many others do, too.
 
well...let me put it this way. it's an article i would expect from an engineer after Michael died. i'll leave it at that.
 
Lovely article apart from the face comment. It seems to mean that some people judged Michael when they worked with him every day. People are weird. I am still angry at Quincy and what he said. Shame on him and Brad and all the other people who say michael was/is a genius in one breath and then go on in another to make nasty and untrue comments about his appearance.
People are so shallow. it is so sad.
 
So many many times when people comment on Michael. They would praise his talents, his kindness and his professionalism. But, they can't help to add the word "but" here and there. They like to bring up his appearance to criticize him and to negate his accomplishments. I truly think people are threatened by Michael, obviously by his unparalleled talents, by his immense wealth and power.

Michael's talents and achievements are so extraordinary and unprecedented. Michael was just too unique for so many to accept. Many are not comfortable facing something new and different, so they try to bring Michael down. Hence, all the mockings and ignorance. Unfortunately, his vitiligo and his shyness made him an easy target.

To be fair, I believe Brad Sundberg meant well when writing this article. But, his comments on Michael's appearance is not necessary. I appreciate the stories he shared with us though.
 
wybt said:
So many many times when people comment on Michael. They would praise his talents, his kindness and his professionalism. But, they can't help to add the word "but" here and there. They like to bring up his appearance to criticize him and to negate his accomplishments. I truly think people are threatened by Michael, obviously by his unparalleled talents, by his immense wealth and power.

Michael's talents and achievements are so extraordinary and unprecedented. Michael was just too unique for so many to accept. Many are not comfortable facing something new and different, so they try to bring Michael down. Hence, all the mockings and ignorance. Unfortunately, his vitiligo and his shyness made him an easy target.

To be fair, I believe Brad Sundberg meant well when writing this article. But, his comments on Michael's appearance is not necessary. I appreciate the stories he shared with us though.
Click to expand...

your post is right on point. you're kinder to brad than i would be, though.

i have already been accused of 'never being happy', but, i have yet to see an article written by someone who is not threatened by Michael's greatness. until then, i will see truth mixed with ignorance...sure..the stories told, were first hand, but the guesses about his finances and personal life are just that..guesses. and guesses equal lies.

it's the filthiest form of writing, because how does someone mix truth with lies, if they had first hand experience with Michael? well..enough examples have proven that it's easy for them to do.'
the only person that doesn't seem to have written anything extracurricular about Michael, is Bruce Sweiden. but he didn't volunteer any after death articles either. people had to post questions to him, to pry anything out of him. and, when something was pried..it focused totally on the professional relationship. nothing more. and it was totally glowing and positive, as expected. Seth Riggs is another. and he added the humanitarian reports.
 
I thought that was a great article on Michael, and he speaks well of Michael. But as many of you have pointed out, Brad Sundberg make an inaccurate and unfair comment about Michael changing his skin colour. He had vitiligo and his autopsy proved that. Also Brad Sundberg say's Michael changed his face shape. Michael never changed his face shape, that always stayed the same, only his nose changed, and the added cleft to his naturally refined chin. I also dislike the fact he claimed Michael was abnormal looking, Michael didn't look abnormal. If he didn't care about Michael's surgery way say what he felt Michael had done to his face, and way use the term abnormal to describe Michael's appearance.

I wonder why he turned down doing work for Michael at Neverland in 2003. It's hard to trust some of Michael's so called friends and associates because many or hypocrites and not loyal. Many like Quincy Jones turned there back on Michael in 2003. And a lot of those people now speak well of Michael now it's cool to like Michael Jackson again. Stevie Wonder, Smokey Robinson, Elisabeth Taylor, Bruce Swedian are the people who never turned there backs and Michael and never mention his surgery. As Jermaine said in Celebrity Big Brother in 2008 when asked about his surgery "he's still Michael".
 
In all fairness the article was written before the autopsy came out and confirmed that Michael had vitiligo. I just wish his friends had more faith in him when Michael said he had vitiligo. Even people that worked with him never believed him. Its only now it has been confirmed it has been now put to rest. But the rest of it was nice.
 
144 said:
your post is right on point. you're kinder to brad than i would be, though.

i have already been accused of 'never being happy', but, i have yet to see an article written by someone who is not threatened by Michael's greatness. until then, i will see truth mixed with ignorance...sure..the stories told, were first hand, but the guesses about his finances and personal life are just that..guesses. and guesses equal lies.

it's the filthiest form of writing, because how does someone mix truth with lies, if they had first hand experience with Michael? well..enough examples have proven that it's easy for them to do.'
the only person that doesn't seem to have written anything extracurricular about Michael, is Bruce Sweiden. but he didn't volunteer any after death articles either. people had to post questions to him, to pry anything out of him. and, when something was pried..it focused totally on the professional relationship. nothing more. and it was totally glowing and positive, as expected. Seth Riggs is another. and he added the humanitarian reports.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you that Bruce Swedien is a person with integrity. He wrote a book about recording with Michael. I didn't buy the book as the book is very technical. A sound engineer may find it a good read though. I read exerpts of the book at Barnes and Noble. Whenever he mentioned Michael, he reamined totally professional. He never wrote a word that would bring controversy.
 
:no: I had no idea why people were so obsessed over Michael's appearance, it's no one's business but himself.
 
This was a nice article to read. He seemed to believe in Michael. But, I wonder why he didn't try to contact him when he was going through that horrible trial? And I wonder why he would say:

Yes, he changed his color and facial shape. No, I really don't care.

Maybe he didn't see Michael do the interview with Oprah Winfrey in January or February 1993. He answered that question. He told the world he had Vitiligo. After that there is no need to speculate or say something that is false.
 
Last edited:
Sophielo said:
In all fairness the article was written before the autopsy came out and confirmed that Michael had vitiligo. I just wish his friends had more faith in him when Michael said he had vitiligo. Even people that worked with him never believed him. Its only now it has been confirmed it has been now put to rest. But the rest of it was nice.
Click to expand...

I notice that too. He knew about his own body better than anyone else. Just like any of us.
I just believed him and that was the end of it.
 
144 said:
the only person that doesn't seem to have written anything extracurricular about Michael, is Bruce Sweiden.
Click to expand...

Not really, the quote below was posted on KOP last year, unfortunately the link doesn't work anymore

"I don't have any first-hand knowledge of Michael doing any of the things that he is accused of. But people that I trust implicitly claim that they have seen things. That's why I couldn't come forward in Michael's defense when I was asked.

When you are under oath you MUST tell the truth.

'I can't truly vouche for Michael's character. No one can do that but Michael. I have worked with him closely since he was 17 years old. I have never personally seen him do any of the things that he is accused of. Have you?

I have been told things that would curl your hair about Michael. I have not seen any of those things. Have you?

By-the-way, when I was asked to come forward for Michael, I couldn't do it! Not with any good conscience.' "

http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?/ubb/get_topic/f/1/t/024844/p/1.html
Click to expand...
 
wybt said:
I totally agree with you that Bruce Swedien is a person with integrity. He wrote a book about recording with Michael. I didn't buy the book as the book is very technical. A sound engineer may find it a good read though. I read exerpts of the book at Barnes and Noble. Whenever he mentioned Michael, he reamined totally professional. He never wrote a word that would bring controversy.
Click to expand...

that shows even more integrity on his part. he probably knew that a person wouldn't buy the book unless they were a fellow engineer. Bruce didn't do something to get more sales. just for that, i might buy the book, even if i don't understand it.

as for this Brad fellow..i wonder if he didn't charge Michael a king's ransom more(just because he was Michael Jackson, and was showing no signs of decreasing in value and popularity, despite the media), for more equipment installation, and thought MJ's offer was too puny..even though it probably was a nice offer[maybe more than before or the same as before, but that wasn't enough in the dollar sign eyes of this Brad fellow]...and this Brad fellow interpreted that as Michael being in debt, since the media said he was in debt...probably how a lot of MJ's enemies spin into deciding that MJ was in debt.
 
Nice article but also odd for the couple of reasons you guys have pointed out. That ending strikes me as very odd. How could it be so easy for a long time friendship to end? And over money. He said he knew it was the last time he would ever see Michael. There's more to this little story we'll never know.
 
Yes, there were allegations. No, I don't believe them.
Click to expand...
His enormous debt has apparently been lowered from $500M to $300M with income continuing to flow
Click to expand...
Yes, he changed his color and facial shape. No, I really don't care.
Click to expand...
What a great article. The author, Brad Sundberg, went into great depth about many of the things we love about Michael but that still doesn't appear to be enough for the fanatics who insist on only completely flattering portrayals of Michael. Sundberg also acknowledged controversial aspects of Michael's life much less briefly. His brevity was the correct choice seen these aspects have been discussed exhaustively elsewhere. Technically, there is truth to what he said about Michael changing his color. The vitiligo changed his skin color from dark brown to a splotchy pastiche. To even it out, "he changed" it from that to an even porcelain tone by using Benoquin. I don't understand the animosity toward his remark. Are people like Sundberg, Quincy Jones, Deepak Chopra, John Landis, Tarak Ben Ammar, etc., going to be vilified unless they ignore Michael's metamorphosis or parlay his self-deception on the subject?
 
Agent M said:
What a great article. The author, Brad Sundberg, went into great depth about many of the things we love about Michael but that still doesn't appear to be enough for the fanatics who insist on only completely flattering portrayals of Michael. Sundberg also acknowledged controversial aspects of Michael's life much less briefly. His brevity was the correct choice seen these aspects have been discussed exhaustively elsewhere. Technically, there is truth to what he said about Michael changing his color. The vitiligo changed his skin color from dark brown to a splotchy pastiche. To even it out, "he changed" it from that to an even porcelain tone by using Benoquin. I don't understand the animosity toward his remark. Are people like Sundberg, Quincy Jones, Deepak Chopra, John Landis, Tarak Ben Ammar, etc., going to be vilified unless they ignore Michael's metamorphosis or parlay his self-deception on the subject?
Click to expand...

makes one wonder about the objectivity of your assessment, and your own standing, when you call people fanatics. MJ obviously needs the protection, when there are people who post as you do. and there are too many of them. did it ever occur to you that these snide remarks all came from people who either didn't get the money they were hoping to get from Michael, or, people whom he left in the dust to continue a stellar career, and other similar reasons?

what are you trying to say by using the word 'self-deception'?

and you wonder why so many fans are up in arms when you list a long rap sheet full of names of people who were intentionally ignorant to Michael's situation, and decided not to do any research? the fact is there is NOBODY who ever flattered Michael jackson. they either laced their positives with negatives like this guy does, or they were completely negative. NOTHING that's completely positive. so the only people left to be totally positive about Michael, are his fans. it gets tiring to see MJ be a regular lamb to the verbal slaughter. especially since it's all unfounded. when referring to his skin, they should all use the word 'vitiligo'. it's not that hard. nobody had to research it. it was in the FAMOUS Oprah Winfrey Michael Jackson interview. the most famous interview, ever.
 
Last edited:
144 said:
makes one wonder about the objectivity of your assessment, and your own standing, when you call people fanatics. MJ obviously needs the protection, when there are people who post as you do. and there are too many of them. did it ever occur to you that these snide remarks all came from people who either didn't get the money they were hoping to get from Michael, or, people whom he left in the dust to continue a stellar career, and other similar reasons?

what are you trying to say by using the word 'self-deception'?

and you wonder why so many fans are up in arms when you list a long rap sheet full of names of people who were intentionally ignorant to Michael's situation, and decided not to do any research?
Click to expand...
You're the one who is not objective since you believe Michael is "a saint" and that there are "no peaks and valleys in his career." That kind of dogmatism is the hallmark of a fanatic. "Did it ever to occur to you" that one or more of these individuals might have a legitimate grievance or criticism of Michael? There were no "snide remarks" in that article. It was overwhelmingly positive, flattering, and insightful. The self-deception or outright lie refers to the two surgeries. Hopefully, even you can concede that.

And I will concede that Michael does "need protection" from overzealous critics but one mustn't delve into the opposite extreme. I don't appreciate you questioning my loyalty since I have defended Michael from overzealous critics, including some in my own family, for many years but I understand it's borne out of your frustration from debating with me.
 
Agent M said:
What a great article. The author, Brad Sundberg, went into great depth about many of the things we love about Michael but that still doesn't appear to be enough for the fanatics who insist on only completely flattering portrayals of Michael. Sundberg also acknowledged controversial aspects of Michael's life much less briefly. His brevity was the correct choice seen these aspects have been discussed exhaustively elsewhere. Technically, there is truth to what he said about Michael changing his color. The vitiligo changed his skin color from dark brown to a splotchy pastiche. To even it out, "he changed" it from that to an even porcelain tone by using Benoquin. I don't understand the animosity toward his remark. Are people like Sundberg, Quincy Jones, Deepak Chopra, John Landis, Tarak Ben Ammar, etc., going to be vilified unless they ignore Michael's metamorphosis or parlay his self-deception on the subject?
Click to expand...

The thing is, that these "controversial" aspects are not based on the reality. Michael was never a controversial person, the media and the scumbags are the people who tried to portray him as "controversial". So I really don't even get why there has to be any sort of acknowledgment to things that aren't even real..Maybe he could say it like "There are so many lies surrounding Michael and his life, he did not deserve that" Or something like that. People just flat out squash the lies, and not act like "Oh he was so great..but.....he was "controversial." Just my opinion..

As far as the Skin changing remark, he said "Yes, he changed his color" , we have all heard that remark before and we often don't take it the way as you are saying. Saying that kind of thing makes it seem like that he wanted to change his color and that it was his own choice. If he meant it literally the way you are saying it then he would have said it that way, to avoid any kind of confusion.
 
Last edited:
virginia_woolf said:
Not really, the quote below was posted on KOP last year, unfortunately the link doesn't work anymore
Click to expand...

WOT?? I Cant believe bruce swedien said that.... thats sooooooooooo disappointing.
man...why can't people c. it s the most BLARINGLY OBVIOUS thing to anyone who knows his character that he was innocent. i don't understand how we know the truth and someone who knew him so well would still even doubt....Thats depressing...grrrr.
on the other hand i liked the article. things like this make me love him even more than i thought possible
rip our angel
 
0o0jackie0o0 said:
WOT?? I Cant believe bruce swedien said that.... thats sooooooooooo disappointing.
man...why can't people c. it s the most BLARINGLY OBVIOUS thing to anyone who knows his character that he was innocent. i don't understand how we know the truth and someone who knew him so well would still even doubt....Thats depressing...grrrr.
on the other hand i liked the article. things like this make me love him even more than i thought possible
rip our angel
Click to expand...

Bruce didn't say that. Brad Sundberg said it.
 
0o0jackie0o0 said:
oh no i meant the bit in post #46, not the main article. someone posted something about what bruce swedien sed. that was bruce right? =)
Click to expand...

oh. well...that's pretty disheartening. i don't suppose that what he said, would be taken the right way, anyway...he said he had no first hand knowledge..but..apparently, he trusts other people better than he trusts himself..and..Michael...so..in the end...if that statement is true...that is truly sad..

the media would twist it, anyway...he would be better off having not come forward. because they'd take the second hand 'knowledge' over the first hand knowledge, knowing them. then again, no, because he was acquitted..but the court of public opinion seems to have more weight than the court of LAW. this world has not long to go.

but if Swedien couldn't think for himself, then...better he be cut off...

how is it...if this is true(and i have reason to believe it, because of the consistency of personalities, that are opposite of Michael's)that a man can live with his conscience, after being blessed with such a rich association with Michael, for so many years..and also be blessed with riches untold, for his gift of engineering, and the gift of working with the greatest artist ever..when there are so many who didn't receive the wealth of good fortune that Swedien received....how could he live with himself?
 
Agent M said:
What a great article. The author, Brad Sundberg, went into great depth about many of the things we love about Michael but that still doesn't appear to be enough for the fanatics who insist on only completely flattering portrayals of Michael. Sundberg also acknowledged controversial aspects of Michael's life much less briefly. His brevity was the correct choice seen these aspects have been discussed exhaustively elsewhere. Technically, there is truth to what he said about Michael changing his color. The vitiligo changed his skin color from dark brown to a splotchy pastiche. To even it out, "he changed" it from that to an even porcelain tone by using Benoquin. I don't understand the animosity toward his remark. Are people like Sundberg, Quincy Jones, Deepak Chopra, John Landis, Tarak Ben Ammar, etc., going to be vilified unless they ignore Michael's metamorphosis or parlay his self-deception on the subject?
Click to expand...

Agree with you 100%. That was a great article and people are focusing on the mundane issues.
 
if Michael wrote an article like that, you wouldn't call it great...and you wouldn't consider those 'mundane' issues to be mundane. never mind that millions of people aren't saying the same bad things about you, everyday, amplified by media, and yet, you're still bothered by people you are not related to, harping on 'mundane' subject matter, about someone totally foreign to you. i can only imagine how bothered you'd be if it was directed AT you, by just one person, let alone many.
 
Last edited:
144 said:
if Michael wrote an article like that, you wouldn't call it great...and you wouldn't consider those 'mundane' issues to be mundane. never mind that millions of people aren't saying the same bad things about you, everyday, amplified by media, and yet, you're still bothered by people you are not related to, harping on 'mundane' subject matter, about someone totally foreign to you. i can only imagine how bothered you'd be if it was directed AT you, by just one person, let alone many.
Click to expand...

Please don't tell ME what I would or wouldn't call great, or what I would or wouldn't consider mundane.

I'm not talking about an article MJ wrote anyways... I'm speaking of this particular article and I found it to be a great, sincere read. I'm confused why people are zooming in on two or three little bits (which are more or less in MJ's favor, sans the appearnace issue) instead of the bulk of the article which is very much pro-MJ.
 
PCR said:
What are friends for? But no offenses, Mr. Sundberg is honest when saying he was far from being a close friend to Michael.

oh well... this kind of stories make me wish so hard I could have done something, any single thing, just to help Michael, the man. The more I read about him, the more I miss him and the more I realize he was one of a kind, one of the strongest men I've ever known.

and people say we are fanatics... oh well :doh:
Click to expand...

You realize sometimes people don't want to be helped, right? I've always been there for my friends no matter what and still there are friends of mine in hard times who simply don't want to be helped.
There's a friend of mine wasting his life in alcohol, I tried my best for YEARS to help him - no success. HE himself wants to get out of it... not. He's called Italo and he's just ONE example I have.

Sometimes OUR WILL to help is not enough, sorry. That won't change what happened and how it happened. I know we ALL wished we could have done something, but that wouldn't be enough if the man himself didn't want. Plus, for those criticizing the guy behind the article... Walk a mile in the man's shoes. People talk about bias when themselves are biased by their own love for MJ.
My sincere "2 cents and a half", no offense meant to anyone.

PS.: give me a break, there was a quote made of his comments about allegations... The guy said himself he DOESN'T believe them... It was not "OMG allegations - I love him even if that was true". You people can go the "extra mile" sometimes...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top