Challenge Match: SonoftheSun vs Rising Against: Are Mysterious Celebrity Deaths A Mystery At All ?

page: 1
10

log in

join

posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   

******************************



A Big Thank you to Rising Against for accepting such a debate, thank you to the many Moderators for accepting to invest so much time so that these games regain life and finally, thank you, the viewers, without whom these challenges would most definitely remain in a silent area, in some cast aside Forum of ATS.

******************************




Are Mysterious Celebrity Deaths A Mystery At All ?




*** Opening Statement ***




Here we go with another great conspiracy that has been living longer than I ever did. Within the course of this debate, it is my intention to raise doubts about certain deaths within the musical industry.

While there are certain aspects that I do not wish to touch upon, namely, celebrities faking their own deaths, the Powers that Be or the Illuminati deciding on these individual’s fates, for example, I do wish to touch on the fact that certain celebrities have gained more status after dying than before they did, and having had a mysterious death is surely a good way to keep their memories alive amongst conspiracy theorists.

I do not have facts. No one does. There lies the conspiracy in itself.

There are dozens of celebrities that have died under mysterious circumstances. It is not my intention to go into each case individually but only into certain musical individuals lives that have been so suspect that their deaths lead to more questions than just sex, drugs and rock and roll.

There are three celebrities that I would like to discuss in this debate. And further try to show evidence that there is much more than what meets the eyes. Jim Morrison, John Lennon and finally, in our recent past, the late Michael Jackson.

These musical geniuses have left a huge impact in most people’s lives. Their songs and memories remain, forever in our hearts. Although their individual lives were draped in controversy, their legacy will embrace future generations for decades to come.

They do have 2 big things in common:

1 - They started to talk. They talked about the nefarious deeds that follow the musical industry. They talked about the infrastructure being corrupted. They denounced the enslavement of it all.

2 - They’re dead. Way before their time.


Their deaths are surrounded with mystery:


• The way they died...
• The judicial and medical procedures following their collapse...
• The final paperwork leaving controversial statements...
• The many witnesses leaving controversial testimony...
• The controversy in their financial succession.


It is my intention to show the viewers that if these three individuals have walked on political mines that put an end to their careers, perhaps, we can begin to come to similar conclusions in regards to other musical, cinematographic and political personalities such as Bob Marley, Tupac, Janice, the late Whitney Houston, Heath Ledger, Brandon Lee, Marilyn Monroe, JFK, RFK (smiles at RA), Princess Diana and so on...


There is a powerful financial structure behind the known celebrities that should not be touched or discussed.

And it is my very intention to do so.




posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Are Mysterious Celebrity Deaths Really a Mystery at all?



Hello all and welcome to this debate between myself and SonoftheSun on what’s clearly a fascinating subject, and one I hope you’ll all thoroughly enjoy reading. Before we begin let’s just quickly establish a few important details. The chosen debate for today is on whether alleged mysterious celebrity deaths, think Marilyn Monroe for example, really are a mystery at all, or are they instead nothing more than mere speculation. I’m arguing the con position thus I’m trying to show that they are not in fact a mystery, and that they're largely not a conspiracy. My esteemed opponent, SonoftheSun, is taking the position of arguing in favor of this, and will be attempting to show that on the whole they are indeed mysterious.

I hope you enjoy reading this debate as much as we're going to enjoy taking part, thank you.

Now, let me begin by making a few key points that will be crucial in this debate..

 
 


Celebrities Are People Too..

Conspiracy theories are something we all love. If we didn't enjoy a good conspiracy theory, we just wouldn't spend the time we do on ATS posting away every single day, and we certainly wouldn't be taking the time to participate in an online debate here either, not forgetting of course that you, the reader, most probably wouldn't have stumbled across this debate and chosen to read it too.

See, conspiracy theories by nature are just interesting, fascinating, and everything else of this nature. They just are. It's something that captivates many of us. That includes those whom happen to be in the "public eye" too, shown perhaps more so in the music industry where there's a great deal more room for expression of opinion..

Celebrities, on the large part, have almost a God-Like status amongst most, and seeing them as mere ordinary mortals is simply out of the question. But, that, as I'm sure we'll all recognize when we think about it, is flawed. They are people and they're just like everybody else. Period. They just happen to be largely known. As they're like us in looks they're also like us in personality too. Now, if we're to believe that a large majority of "ordinary people" are "into" conspiracies to some degree, we're safe in saying that some, maybe even a large section of, celebrities are also into these topics too. After all, they're just people, naturally curious as the rest of us...

In death Is where Fame is truly found..

In death is where fame is only ever truly found, a young death in particular as the potential of what someone could've achieved outshines what they actually did achieve. A great example of this would be Jeff Buckley perhaps.

A supremely talented individual, most remembered for creating one of the most moving performances in Hallelujah perhaps ever recorded, and today achieving one of the highest statuses possible. Marilyn Monroe, a popular actress who died young, today seen as one of the greatest actresses of all time, the stories of her personal life not as known. And of course JFK, seen as one of the greatest presidents and people ever, despite his known personal life issues, and is it really a coincidence that he died young before his full potential could be fulfilled? No, it certainly is not. Is it also a coincidence that all these deaths have a vast amount of conspiracies flying around? Again, no, it is not.

Of course this isn't to say that fame isn't deserved for some of these, as well as other non-mentioned, individuals. But the fact cannot be ignored that in death one's status is truly elevated to another level, unreachable by the living. With this, unfortunately though, there is a dark side. With an elevated fame and also death comes a third.. speculation. See, we'll never truly have all the facts at our disposal, and with this, speculation is born..

The nature of speculation

Speculation, it is the feeding ground where all the facts are not known, and even then It exists in the eyes of those skeptical and paranoid. And, whether we like it or not, all the facts are never met. Speculation about someone famous and how they really died, or if they really died, (think Elvis, Tupac, and countless others) is always going to happen. With-in hours of the death of Michael Jackson for example, rumors and conspiracy theories were rampant. Not because they actually existed, but because he was famous and he had passed on at that time. The same protocol is always met to some degree with others too. Is it because conspiracy exists? The facts do not seem to agree at all.

But now I digress, but I do say to everyone the following:

Always question, but never choose to speculate. Always be open to the possibilities, but never let go of reality.


Are celebrity deaths really a mystery at all? Maybe, but almost certainly not. If there's ever any room for speculation, however small, It will spread like wildfire as it has before..



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Official Stories...The Fuel For Mysteries



A mystery, by definition, is something that is difficult or impossible to understand or explain. And there is a strong lead of evidence pointing to such a definition, as far as some celebrities are concerned. Reality remains unchanged. They died. Yet they died under circumstances that are, indeed, difficult to understand or explain.

---

The Lizard King, Jim Morrison, died of heart failure, in 1971, Paris.

That is the official story.


The reality is that he was found dead in his bath, by his then girlfriend, Pamela Courson. No autopsy was ever made as the French saw no foul play. His coffin closed even before anyone got the news. There are rumors that he overdosed in a nearby club and was carried to his bath by unknowns. Which is a possibility...no one will ever know. Buried in a French cemetery that rarely allows deceased foreigners, his tomb, forever sealed.

Although those circumstances mentioned above do meet the criteria to classify his death a mystery, it gets better. Jim Morrison thought he was a marked man. He thought that he was trailed by the FBI and other agencies. Is it the result of a paranoid mind? Perhaps...no one will ever know. But his outrageous rebellions, on stage and out, could have indeed painted a target on his back. His political stances on enslavement, his willingness to push people to rebel and overthrow the establishment could have put him in a dangerous position.

Here is an interesting piece:

Author Bernard Wolfe writing “The Real Life Death of Jim Morrison” for Esquire (June 1972) related the story of:


If you want to know the cause of Jim's death -- not just the physiology of it -- ask what triggered his heart to stop...And whose finger was on the trigger.
-- Wolfe, pp. 106


A speculation, by definition, is expressing an opinion on incomplete evidence. Jim Morrison’s death is overwhelmed with such incomplete evidence. And to this day, is still surrounded in mystery.

---

John Lennon was killed by Mark David Chapman, in 1980, NewYork.

That is the official story.


And this is an undeniable fact. But what was the motive? Fame? Money? Being part of History? No.

So what was it???

It is said that Chapman had claimed that he had planned on killing Lennon three months before he did the act. But his claims ended up “muddled” in later parole hearings...

And to be honest...the whole John Lennon death follow up is...muddled. Chapman pleaded guilty and played the insanity scenario. But was Chapman really insane?


But Arthur O'Connor, the Detective who spent more time with the assassin immediately following the murder than anyone else, saw it another way.



Detective O'Connor was speaking to Bresler, and publicly for the first time. Bresler's book, Who Killed John Lennon? -- Offers the most cogent argument that the assassination of John Lennon was not the work of yet another "lone nut."


Now, here is a part that sounds familiar and somehow similar to Jim Morrison’s supposed paranoia:


At nearly three hundred pages, John Lennon's Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) file reveals that he was under "constant surveillance." His apartment was watched, he was followed, and his phone was tapped. The FBI did not keep a particularly low profile around the ex-Beatle, apparently attempting to harass him into silence or at least drive him nuts


John Lennon promoted peace. Not war. John Lennon promoted freedom. Not slavery. Did he know he was a threat to the establishment? Or did he also turn into a supposed paranoid individual like Jimbo?

Let’s see what he says, in 1972:


In late 1972, when the "surveillance" was at its peak, John Lennon told humorist Paul Krassner, "Listen, if anything happens to Yoko and me, it was not an accident."


My stance is that he knew he was a threat. Speculation? Of course. Who will ever know now? There is still just too much of a controversial mist enveloping the whole case to make an undeniable prognosis.

Thus, it remains a mystery.

---

Jim Morrison - Source

John Lennon - Source

---

As this post comes to an end, I will touch upon Mr. Jackson’s official story in the closing statement.

In the same closing statement, I will also get to the point of my position, which prompts this question to my esteemed opponent:

Socratic Question #1:

Elvis Presley, Jim Morrison, John Lennon, Michael Jackson, the late Whitney Houston...just names that come to mind...

Is it a possibility, that celebrities that do die young while living a decline in their stardom, regain a second life from which the musical industry in itself gains a huge financial advantage?





posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 09:21 AM
link   
The Autopsy – It seals the conspiracy, no?

In fact the answer really is.. no.

This is something that pops up in almost every single case of a potential “mysterious death”, to celebrity and civilian, and is always used as "the hook" as I call it - the very thing to pull in others and seal the deal of conspiracy so to speak. It's almost always claimed that someone was murdered and as "they", whomever they may be, don't want anyone, or many people, to see the body, an impossibly fast autopsy is thus performed to hide any further potential cause for suspicion.

What people seem to forget however, and as this is one of, if not the, most crucial aspect of almost every suspicious death case, is this, and let me explain it in It's most simplest form courtesy of medicinenet.com:


However, most autopsies are performed as soon as possible following death. The quality of the body's tissues (and thus the quality of the autopsy results) deteriorates over time because bacterial contamination and other decay processes affect the body. In reality, this generally means that autopsies in a hospital usually are performed on the day of death, if possible, or early on the following day.
(Source)

See, there's actually nothing suspicious about it at all. It's done for a very good reason, a reason we can find in seconds. There is in fact no conspiracy about it at all. It’s just standard protocol. And taking out the autopsy issue massively decreases the claims of mystery in most instances as It's used as the hook, the very sole, single hook.

With Jim Morrison, as my opponent pointed out, French police, found absolutely no evidence of foul play and by law, an autopsy was not needed. Is that by definition mysterious? No, of course not. Many people, including the fire department and members of the regular PD, even saw his body. He was also to die on the 3rd and he was also buried on the 8th, not straight away as was seemingly pointed out.

The “Could have" scenario

Over the course of this debate so far, there's been a lot of "Could have's" on the side of the pro position. "But his outrageous rebellions, on stage and out, could have indeed painted a target on his back" And "his willingness to push people to rebel and overthrow the establishment could have put him in a dangerous position" to name a few.

That's what the vast majority of claims seem to stem from on the pro conspiracy side of not just this debate, but claims of mysterious deaths everywhere. The "well this could have happened", "this could be why" and so on and on. Instead, I ask my opponent and others to reject this way of thinking as It only leads to theories, and instead choose, as it is a choice, to bring forth only facts and base conclusions from that. A clearer picture will indeed emerge. Then and only then can a mysterious deaths truly be called as such, as until it's done so, It's mere speculation.

The Elusive Mystery of Lennon's death

I'm a little confused by the approrach taken here. Here's a direct quote from my opponents last post:


And this is an undeniable fact. But what was the motive? Fame? Money? Being part of History? No.

So what was it???


Ok, well forgive me here, but why not? I don't see a reason and none have been provided. All I see is a claim of explanation flat out rejected, and then the search for a more sensationalist one sought out. As far as I can see, Chapman did it for the very reason claimed, attention. Something he's gone on the record saying.

(Source)

(Source)

Also:


Chapman said some of the widely conveyed details from the shooting are not accurate. He never said, “Mr. Lennon,” when the ex-Beatle emerged from the limousine to return to his apartment at around 11 p.m. after a recording session.

“When Mr. Lennon passed me I turned, pulled out my weapon and shot him in the back,” he said. “I have read in the record all through, since that time, that I said, ‘Mr. Lennon,’ but I did not say that. I just shot him. It was just me and him in the archway of the Dakota (apartment building) and I knew who he was. I met him earlier that day, and I just shot him then.”


Socratic Questions:

In reply to SQ#1:

I may misunderstand but answering the question at face value, yes, in death the music industry does gain a financial advantage and also, yes, the 'artist' does gain more notoriety as I have explained before.



posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   

The waters are muddier than what they actually appear...



----------------------------------------




Dear readers,

The premise of this debate is to find out if, yes or no, some celebrity deaths are still a mystery. My esteemed opponent has played the “all is fine” card from the beginning. Celebrities are people too...sure but who can claim to have the genius of a Jim Morrison, or a John Lennon or a Michael Jackson? We are then led the road to speculation, in an attempt to not speculate. And I say..Please, do Speculate !

My friends, if these three gentlemen had died in their ripe old age, of cardiac arrest, I would be the first one to say that “all is fine”. But we all know that no such thing occurred. Finally, my esteemed opponent advises us and I quote:


I ask my opponent and others to reject this way of thinking as It only leads to theories, and instead choose, as it is a choice, to bring forth only facts and base conclusions from that.


I would advise to do quite the opposite ! If we were to bring only facts and base conclusions from that, we would have to rethink other theories as well such as the Relativity Theory, the Theory about Gravity or hmmm...what about the Big Bang Theory? No. A theory is accumulating a body of evidence on a particular circumstance or circumstances that are unclear.

To do so, one must inquire, question and analyse.

The French helping, Morrison’s death is still a mystery. Did he overdose? Was he killed by his girlfriend who had an affair with Comte Jean de Breteuil? Was he poisoned by the FBI? Did he die in a Club nearby and dropped in his bath afterwards? Or did the musical industry get rid of him in order to rake in millions? No facts. But oh so many questions.

Lennon was shot by Chapman. But the motive remains unclear. My opponent says attention. Yes, Chapman said so. Along with other testimonies that have also changed over time. Was Chapman really insane? Was Chapman alone as he claimed? If so, why were his wounds on the left side of his body when Chapman claimed to be standing on his right when he took his shots? Some evidence points to the fact that Chapman fired from five feet away yet he claims he took them from twenty feet...Was Chapman brainwashed? Was he a tool? Was he unknowingly programmed by the FBI? Or did the musical industry get rid of Lennon in order to rake in millions? No facts. But oh so many questions.

Michael Jackson was killed by Dr. Murray. Negligence? Incompetence? Or a contract?


“I may misunderstand but answering the question at face value, yes, in death the music industry does gain a financial advantage and also, yes, the 'artist' does gain more notoriety as I have explained before.”


Let me try to clear up any misunderstanding. These celebrities have died under mysterious circumstances. They were still young but on the decline. They talked about the enslavement of the industry. They talked about the corruption. They were going against the mainstream flow. While they lived, the industry replied with rumors. Morrison was a dope. Lennon was a hippie. Jackson was a pedophile.

The only fact is that they died, way before their time. Circumstances nebulous to say the least. And what does the industry do...they put them back on top of the charts. Young, beautiful, idols...

Morrison is now claimed to be a great poet, a great voice in the dark. Lennon is now a Peace promoter, a loving soul. Jackson, a musical genius, young and beautiful...funny that they never capitalize on how they looked in the end...but how they looked in their primetime. Presley is another good example, they never capitalized on the fat transpiring prescription drug addict but instead, the young and proud military Elvis...Lately, who can prove this statement wrong if we look at how Whitney Houston is now portrayed??

This Jackson Source merely reflects how much his death is worth, for the industry.

Dear viewers, let me close stating one last external quote.

Bruce Wayne AKA Batman as he’s about to let Ra’s al Ghul take the plunge in Batman Begins:


I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you.


Source

Even if the musical industry has taken that stance, isn’t it indirect murder? Or is it simply fortunate circumstances to rake in the millions?

Do I know for a fact that the musical industry has taken them out? No. No one does. But we can reach different conclusions on unclear circumstances. To this day, it still remains a mystery.

It’s up to you, the viewers, to decide.

----------------------------------------



John Lennon Source

----------------------------------------




I wish to thank Rising Against for a fair and fun debate!

~Son.



posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   
They may have, therefore they did

In closing this debate, and with utmost respect to my opponent and my friend, but It must be pointed out that this, the above headline, seems to be a popular approach taken in this debate as far as I can see. And again, as I tried to point out previously, It's something closely linked to the nature of speculation - something we must always try to avoid, and instead concentrate on remaining neutral and looking for facts, not simply searching for any possibility and then believing it to have truth simply because we want it to, as is so common in investigations of this kind.

Looking at Jackson whom my opponent has decided to bring up, once again, we have claims such as this but without anything backing it up:


Michael Jackson was killed by Dr. Murray. Negligence? Incompetence? Or a contract?


Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Always. And without it, we have mere speculation, not attempts to find facts. The trial of Doctor Conrad Murray was even televised, especially here in the United Kingdom and I happened to watch the vast majority of it, and I'm yet to find anything mysterious about the death, as all mystery had been explained away already, live on television even. If the trial was conducted behind closed doors however I'd understand, but it wasn't.

Murray was responsible, and was proven so. To claim otherwise and instead adopt a mystery approach, we should require a rather valid reason. None had been provided.

(Source)

(Source)

The Indu.. eh.. People Factor

In reply to my opponents reply to my reply to his Socratic question, and with a continuation of the look at Jackson and his main point, let me firstly post this interesting quote from him:


The only fact is that they died, way before their time. Circumstances nebulous to say the least. And what does the industry do...they put them back on top of the charts. Young, beautiful, idols...

Morrison is now claimed to be a great poet, a great voice in the dark. Lennon is now a Peace promoter, a loving soul. Jackson, a musical genius, young and beautiful...funny that they never capitalize on how they looked in the end...but how they looked in their primetime. Presley is another good example, they never capitalized on the fat transpiring prescription drug addict but instead, the young and proud military Elvis...Lately, who can prove this statement wrong if we look at how Whitney Houston is now portrayed??


Now, this is wildly unfair. And it really must be pointed out that this is not an industry matter, this, described above, is a people, or should I say human, matter and factor. To blame the industry is unfair at best and I believe this is just further proof that any reason is being sought out to shift blame to their side.

See, if anyone in the public eye passes on, they're always going to achieve a higher level of fame than they had before. I already explained and discussed this previously in this debate in my opening post. It's actually not a music industry thing at all, It's a worldwide thing. I believe if anything It's a wonderful human trait to reach out and mourn others, even those who'd fallen on hard times or were previously unpopular.

That as opposed to typing their unfortunate deaths into a murder plot, the connection of which I'm failing to find, as surely claiming it may have been murder just because the common person puts them back to the top of the charts is surely not a valid enough reason - We can't all be in the plot. And if it was murder, surely, would those who did the deed really want them to achieve more fame and publicity? I would think quite the opposite.

The sad fact of life is people die. Everyday. Famous and unknown.



Now, I believe I've said all I have to say in this debate, and have done so with various points made over the course of these 3 posts. In my final comments I'd like to say that, for those who may believe that the vast majority of celebrity deaths out there are indeed mysteries. I urge you to not just speculate, but really look for your facts. To really think from a neutral position and then come to your conclusions from those basic rules. If we ever want to find a truth, It's how we must approach thing's.

Refrain from pure speculation and wild claims. They do nothing but muddy the waters in which your swimming in. We're all conspiracy theoriests and truth seekers. Make your job easier by sticking to your facts.


And as I come to the end of this debate, please do allow me to thank all of those who took the time to read in full, those in charge of organizing and judging and of course a big thanks to SonoftheSun for a thoroughly entertaining back and forth battle.

To the judges it goes..



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Judgments are in:




SonoftheSun opened strong, but brief, with a theory that famous people are marked by the establishment. I was hoping he'd have a solid position. Rising Against countered by the fact that people pass on regardless of their social status, and further reinforced his point throughout the debate, sticking solidly to his position. RA also seemed to be able to disrupt Son's train of thought by contributing more instances outside of Son's original three conspiracies.

Son made a recovery by his Socratic Question, which placed him in a position to expose corruption in the music industry, but RA countered it nicely by pointing out most of the theories were speculation, and reinforced it reminding us to stick to facts.

Instead of following his points with tenacity, SonoftheSun allowed himself to ask more questions than to provide solid information. You cannot ask questions in a debate without closure to them inherent in your argument, and he left the debate with more questions asked than answered. The overall point of a debate is to ask questions, and provide answers, not just ask them, and leave them open. Closure is something SonoftheSun needs practice with. It was actually his only weakness in this debate.

Both debaters provided an interesting read, and an insightful debate, but the debate goes to Rising Against for a solid defense and consistent responses.






In this debate, over the mystery of certain celebrity deaths, I think that SonoftheSun makes a good point that, in some cases, it works out best for the music industry when an artist dies, but he fails to demonstrate that this has motivated murder or complicity in it. His point regarding the controversial nature of some outspoken artists who have died is negated by far more controversial artists who have not (Rage Against the Machine, for one, comes to mind.) On the other side, Rising Against does a good job defending against these points, noting that the true nature of most celebrity deaths is the human factor, whether self-indulgence (in Morrison's case,) mental instability (Mark David Chapman) and a self-centered and indulgent group of "hangers on" who could have said "stop this behaviour" but chose not to (Michael Jackson and Elvis.) Though both scored points for good argumentation, I think that Rising Against wins, on the basis of the speculative nature of SonoftheSun's examples, without sufficient evidence to sway the audience in his favour.


RisingAgainst is the winner of this Debate.

Kudos to the two debaters and a thank you to the judges for their thoughtful evaluations.





new topics

top topics



 
10

log in

join