PatrickS77 said:

I don't think he was a victim in this (I think I did say that at the MJJC, if not I will). And I don't buy that it was a gift.

Timmy84 said:

Sorry.. I meant it in the sense, once that shit is wrapped up, meaning the trial is over! I don't believe there will be a settlement... I think that possibility has passed!

Timmy84 said:

Well, I also don't think it was a gift... but I would totally buy Michael thinking it was a gift! He doesn't seem to think about things like people in the real world would do... he always has people taking care of his shit, paying for him... I don't think that he really worries about where the money is coming from (his own pocket or someone elses) or where it is going to!

Anyone who does business with Michael is crazy How many times has he been sued for not following the terms of a deal? He's always so eager to take the money,but he never fulfills his obligations.Does he truly believe that someone would just give him $7 million as a "gift"....without expecting anything in return? LOL

PatrickS77 said:

He called his two eldest children "presents" by his artificial inseminated donor.

That statement still sounds weird to me.

And about deals he signed with then reneged on, honestly does he call everything he earns as a gift. Was Neverland a gift? I mean he did pay for Neverland right?

I would've understand if it was in his birthday or something but...
[Edited 11/17/08 12:55pm]

Timmy84 said:

well, it is possible that mj thought this man was a friend who was offering to help him in his time of need. if i had a friend who had gone thru a bad experience and it was within my power to help, i would and i wouldn't have expected anything in return except to see my friend get better. $7M clams is a lot to you and me, i doubt it was to a man whose a billionaire with a palace. maybe he did buy mj some watches or jewelry.

still, once it was clear that this man expected more or that he was going to sue (i think this case has been hanging over his head for a while), then mj should have just settled up with him and been done with it. and gone on to his next lawsuit!

The part of this story that made me laugh was that the Sheikh planned to revive Mike's career with songs he himself had written. You know Mike was leading him on if he said "Sure Al, I'll sing your songs. Now make sure you buy me the black Rolls Royce, not the white one."

This shit is almost as undignified as that million dollar autograph session he did in Japan last year. Anyone remember this line "If you want it, then earn it with dignity" from "Money"? Seems like Mike forgot his own advice. Get a job, Michael. We all gotta work for a living and unless you planning on reigning in your spending that means you too. One tour and Mike could've made three times what the Sheikh gave him, but we know why he won't do that.
[Edited 11/17/08 12:59pm]

^^Yeah, because he doesn't want to!

midnightmover said:

Someone JUST mentioned that song on MJJC! I compared it to Candi Staton's "Victim". Taking the 'victim' name out, Michael was really the song he was singing.

"Anything, anything, anything for money
Lie for you, die for you, even sell my soul to the devil..."

Timmy84 said:

He seems to thinks it is Michael...sigh...


Absolutely. And at the end of the day, he's got no one to blame but himself.

NaughtyKitty said:[quote]

Timmy84 said:

Agreed. I mean HE was the one who AGREED to it. He could've said NO but obviously he AGREED to it. Also, why DIDN'T he even sign it in the first damn place? If he was a victim in it like some think he is here, why didn't HE COUNTERSUE!?!

What defense does he have that will exonerate him. A gift? GTFOOH! I love Michael but come on, man...

At least he has nothing against gay people.....

monk76 said:

For obvious reasons....

^ What does that have to do with anything regarding the case? Don't make me do a nWo on my own damn thread!

Timmy84 said:

Some of the past cases have been greedy ppl trying to make a fast buck off MJ's
fame.But this is a legitimate lawsuit I even remember the whole fiasco about the
katrina charity single and they did discuss about recording together this is a easy case.
who is goin to loan him $7mil to pay off the sheik

asg said:

Exactly! I can't go on his side in this case at all. Michael agreed to the damn deal. Now he saying he got money as a gift.

Timmy84 said:

It´s really simple.Michael is a good man with a good heart who loves all kind of people so when he makes "stupid things" like this we forgive.
But can you forgive a man who hates a certain kind of people because they made the mistake to share love??

asg said:

But an awful lot more have been Michael not honouring his commitments.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/h...733608.stm

Sheikh 'planned Jackson revival'

The King of Bahrain's son planned to revive Michael Jackson's career with songs he had written himself, London's High Court has heard.

Sheikh Abdulla Bin Hamad Bin Isa Al-Khalifa also gave the pop star financial support, his lawyer said.

The royal is suing Mr Jackson for £4.7m for reneging on a music contract which would have paid back the loans.

An application has been made for the star to give evidence from the US via a video link during the 12-day hearing.

Sheikh's invitation

The sheikh and Mr Jackson had a "close personal relationship" during his six-month stay in Bahrain three years ago, the royal's lawyer Bankim Thanki told the court.

The singer travelled to the country, with his children and personal staff, at the sheikh's invitation "to relax" shortly after being cleared of child abuse charges in the US.

Prior to his stay, Sheikh Abdulla set up Mr Jackson with a recording studio on his Neverland ranch and sent him his own musical compositions.

A recording of a finished song will be played in court, Mr Thanki said.

The court heard that under the agreement, an album, autobiography and stage play were to be produced.

In 2006, plans were announced for the star to release a new album on a label based in the Gulf state and owned by Sheikh Abdulla.

The sheikh claims that despite having paid the $2.2m (£1.5m) cost for Mr Jackson to record a song intended to benefit the victims of Hurricane Katrina, the singer failed to attend the studio for the final recording and the song was never released.

He also says he paid for and built a recording studio in Bahrain for Mr Jackson and himself to make recordings together.

'Gifts'

In addition, he paid all the singer's living, travel and other expenses until his departure from Bahrain in May 2006, and advanced funds to retain legal and financial advisers.

Mr Jackson has contested the claim, saying there was no valid agreement, adding the sheikh's case is based on "mistake, misrepresentation and undue influence".

He has also said no project was ever finalised and payments were "gifts".

The singer has admitted that he signed a document which he understood gave him a substantial shareholding in the 2 Seas recording company.

But he challenges the sheikh's description of him as "an experienced businessman" and says he never read the terms of the document and was never advised to take independent legal advice.

He also claims that the sheikh, a powerful and influential public figure, exercised "undue influence" over him when he was emotionally exhausted after his highly-publicised criminal trial.

The dispute comes just days after the singer had to give up his Neverland ranch due to financial problems.

The hearing will continue on Tuesday.

See the thing that gets me is that--right off the heels of being acquitted in his child molestation trial--the trial he had to go thru because he made bad decisions in his personal life, made the bad decision to get involved with the shady Arviso family, didnt look out for himself, or protect himself---he went right outta that trial as a free man--but dove headfirst right into another bad situation, making yet another stupid choice, not looking out for himself...GRRRR!!!

And LOL @ him protesting the Sheik's calling him an experienced businessman! So Mike dont wanna be known as a shrewd business man anymore?

monk76 said:

So what you're saying? This case ain't about sleepovers.

NaughtyKitty said:

That statement threw me the fuck off too.

Timmy84 said:

So are you the first one in the line laughing when people are beaten up because of their colour and sexuality? You´re laughing now my friend.....

monk76 said:

NO!

Because the case has nothing to do with what you're talking. Michael's not immune to bullshit.

Anyway, I think Michael's too damn trustworthy with people because, well, I think, despite his statements in his Bash-His-Ass documentary that adults "have brought the world down", he trusted "another adult" with a record deal that went bad. Now he's being sued for $7 million by some opportunist. But if you want my opinion, both sides were opportunistic.

Timmy84 said:

Co-sign to that! I swear, some fans (not ALL, just SOME) how they can find excuses for Mike in this situation and try to make him the victim

Jacko a Royal Mooch, Says Prince

Monday, November 17, 2008

By Roger Friedman

Michael Jackson is being sued by Prince Abdullah Al-Khalifah of Bahrain today in London’s High Court.

The two have a hearing set for them today at 2:30 p.m. in the Queens Bench division. The session could include opening arguments.

This trial explains why last week Jackson transferred part ownership of his Neverland Ranch to his note holder, Colony Capital LLC, and changed the name to Sycamore Valley Ranch. Neverland is Michael’s last bit of real property not encumbered by liens with provisions.

Prince Abdullah is suing Jackson for $7 million, the amount he turned over to the pop star in exchange for a written contract detailing Michael’s indebtedness to him. The Prince, if you recall, had started a record company with Jackson. For the $7 million, he expected two albums, a Broadway musical, and possibly an autobiography.

But Jackson did what he always does: he took the money and ran. After receiving the $7 million, Jackson split to Ireland and then to Las Vegas. In all, he’d been the prince’s guest, on his dime, for about a year after being acquitted of child molestation charges in June 2005.

Prince Abdullah’s lawsuit sheds a lot of light on what went on when Jackson left the U.S. after his trial. For one thing, as this column first deduced, Michael’s brother Jermaine started paving the way for his refuge there in 2004 while Michael was awaiting trial.

Michael, the lawsuit contends, arrived in June 2005 with his children and personal staff. Prince Abdullah notes that prior to Michael’s arrival, he “helped the Defendant (that’s Jackson) with substantial financial and other assistance in these difficult circumstances including the funding of a substantial portion of his criminal defense costs.”

That’s not all: “Until June 2006, when decided not to return to Bahrain after a trip to Tokyo, the Defendant lived in Bahrain first as a guest of the Claimant (that’s the Prince) at the Claimant’s expense in the residence of the Claimant’s brother, later in property in Dubai owned by the Claimant’s father, and later in a rented property in Bahrain.”

We also learn what happened to Jacko’s famous charity record for Hurricane Katrina survivors:

“In or about September and October 2005, the Claimant paid the costs of venture to record, in London, a song called 'I Have This Dream.' The proceeds of the song were intended to benefit the victims of Hurricane Katrina. The Claimant’s payments included airfares and accommodation for the Defendant and other participants in this venture, and studio and recording costs. However, the Defendant failed to attend at the studio to record is vocal and the song was never released.”

Prince Abdullah says he built Michael a recording studio, paid all his and his kids’ living expenses, and even paid some of his legal bills back home so Jackson could hold on to the so –called Beatles Catalog—his 50 percent shared of Sony/ATV Music—and Neverland. In all, he advanced Jackson $7 million.

Jackson, of course, agreed to all this in writing. As we’ve seen before, he signs almost anything put before him, then pleads ignorance or amnesia.

But with the Prince, things are worse than usual. Abdullah says he funded Jackson’s May 2006 promotional tour to Japan which resulted in the singer’s not returning to Bahrain. Within a month of Jackson ditching him, the Prince claims that Jackson’s manager, Raymone Bain, wrote him a letter saying Michael would no longer work with him. Jackson refused to return Abdullah’s numerous phone calls. He never heard from him again.

One last thing: Prince Abdullah notes that after Jackson left him, he recorded a track with will.i.am and Pras of the Fugees called “No One Friend of Mine (Gangsta).” I remember at the time there was some thought that this was an old track, but the Prince implies the title was directed at him. That’s ironic considering Jackson turned out to be no friend of Abdullah’s.

http://www.foxnews.com/st...27,00.html

Timmy84 said:

i wont call the sheik an opportunist mainly because the money was a loan so he is just asking for his money back nothing wrong with that

NaughtyKitty said:

Ahhh that´s we love our Mike -some things will never change
[Edited 11/17/08 13:45pm]

NaughtyKitty said:

Yeah... it baffles the mind!


Well, only fans believe he's a great businessman... finally he's setting the record straight!

I remember how we were all waiting for "I Have This Dream". Then we started arguing about whether or not it would be released. The discussion we had over that song, and the Number Ones project and the Invincible album, is similar to wonder whether or not MJ sold Neverland, and whether or not Michael will work on an album and when he does, WHO he will work with.

Also Michael chooses to stay quiet and private and "invisible" so we don't even know what the hell he's thinking when he DOES do things like this. Despite his deals with Sony and the ATV catalog and what he possibly did with Neverland, he has made bad business deals so maybe that's why he dismiss the sheik's claim that he was "an experienced businessman". Then again, if Michael is saying this, does that discredit him for everything he HAS been credited with business-wise?

Damn.

The minute I heard about 2 faced records in 2005, I knew nothing would come out of it and one rich bastard would be suing another.