Given the size of Iraq’s undeveloped giants there are no technical reasons why within 10 years the country can’t supplant both Iran and Russia to become the world’s No. 2 oil producer after Saudi Arabia. No wonder Iraq holds three of the top 10 fields of the future.

The world gets its daily ration of 85 million barrels of oil from more than 4,000 fields. Most of these are small, less than 20,000 barrels per day. Giants, producing more than 100,000 bpd, account for just 3%. Then there’s the megafields that gush out 1 million bpd. These are the most important sources of energy in the world–fields worth fighting over. In figuring the top 10 fields of the future, we’re not interested in most of the giants of yesteryear, and not necessarily even the giants of today. Just the giants of tomorrow–those fields that might not even be producing yet, but will likely be doing better than 1 million bpd a decade from now.

The once and future king of the world’s oil fields, Ghawar, in Saudi Arabia, ranks first on our list. It is thought to have had more than 100 billion barrels of recoverable oil in place. At 160 miles long and 16 miles wide it confounds even the most experienced geologists. With something on the order of 60 billion produced over the past 60 years, you’d be excused for thinking that Ghawar was sliding into its twilight years. Yet the Saudis insist that Ghawar is still going strong, producing 4.5 million bpd from six main producing areas with the ability to do 5 million bpd if called upon.

The secret to Ghawar’s longevity is water injection. Starting in the 1960s Saudi Aramco began injecting water underneath the oil around the outer borders of the field. Today the water flood is up to millions of barrels a day, with the oil floating up to the top of the reservoir on sea of water. In conversations with Forbes in 2008 Aramco executives insisted that by continuing to treat Ghawar with kid gloves they’ll be able to coax 4 million bpd out of her for many years to come.

Coming in second is West Qurna, in Iraq, home to an expected 21 billion barrels of oil. This month a joint venture between ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell was awarded the contract to develop the 9 billion barrel first phase of the West Qurna oil field. They will aim to raise output from 300,000 bpd to 2.3 million bpd. It’s tough to make the case that the two biggest oil companies from the countries that invaded Iraq in 2003 are getting a sweetheart deal. The contract calls for the government of Iraq to retain ownership of the field and the oil. Exxon and Shell, as contractors, are to be paid just $1.90 for each a barrel they produce.

Third is Majnoon, also in Iraq. At 13 billion barrels, these massive reserves are in a relatively small area near the Euphrates River in southern Iraq. The field’s abundance was so mind-boggling that it was named Majnoon, Arabic for “crazy.” This easy oil hasn’t been developed in part because of its location so close to the Iranian border. In the 1980s, during the Iran-Iraq war, managers reportedly buried the wells, concerned that they might be targeted by Iranian forces. The field produces just 50,000 bpd now, but has the potential to do 1.8 million bpd.

The Rumaila field in Iraq, with 17 billion barrels, is the fourth-largest field. In November, British giant BP and China National Petroleum Corp. won the first oil contract of the post-Saddam era to redevelop Rumaila. Located on the border with Kuwait, the field is already producing 1 million bpd, half of Iraq’s total production. The partners intend to spend some $15 billion to treble that to 2.85 million bpd. That output would be enough to put Rumaila in second place worldwide after Saudi Arabia’s Ghawar.
So what won’t you see on this list? Mexico’s Cantarell is nowhere to be seen. It used to be the second-biggest producer in the world, giving more than 2 million bpd; it’s now in terminal decline, slipping below 400,000 bpd. It was the monster field of the Soviet Union, with production peaking at 3.5 million bpd in the 1970s. Today it’s doing more like 350,000 bpd. No respect for China’s biggest field Daging either; it still produces roughly 800,000 bpd but is in serious decline.

As for Canada’s heralded oil sands region–sure it’s a massive resource, but easy oil it ain’t. Oil sands require monstrous amounts of water and natural gas to recover and process. A barrel of oil sands oil costs roughly 20 times more to produce than one from Iraq. And environmentalists think it’s dirty.

Lots of oil provinces didn’t quite make the cut. West Africa could see the biggest growth of all across Nigeria, Angola and Ghana–but so far no individual fields look big enough on their own. Same for Siberia, which has most of Russia’s production, but from mature fields.
Saudi Arabia could have been better represented. Its 750,000 bpd Shaybah field was a runner-up. Iraq too. The government didn’t receive any bids to redevelop the 8 billion barrel East Baghdad field because much of it lies under residential neighborhoods. And Kirkuk, in northern Iraq, has something like 8 billion barrels remaining, but it was damaged by overproduction in the latter years of Saddam’s rule and won’t likely regain its peak of 700,000 bpd. But it could.

About the author

It is the biggest budget since 2005 and runs with a deficit of US$19.6 billion (23 trillion dinars).

There is innovation in this budget but not the sort that will bring in revenue to the government. This year, provinces that produce oil and natural gas will receive a guaranteed US 1 per barrel of oil or per 150 cubic meters of natural gas they produce.

This is of special benefit to Basra, responsible for between 60 percent and 70 percent of Iraq’s hydrocarbon industry, and the Kurdistan region, Iraq’s other major centre of production. The provinces originally demanded only US$0.50 but, under Article 43 of the bill, twice the amount will now reach them.

So as not to appear guilty of favoritism “there is an election on after all” resource poor provinces will also get a share of oil revenue, with 5% going to provinces bordering oil producers to help them cope with environmental fallout.

Desperate not to leave anyone out in the distribution of money the government doesn’t have, $20 will be paid for each visitor to governorates with holy shrines.

“This will make people complain and accuse the government of not being able to provide them with the support and assistance they need,” complained Nouri al-Maliki about opposition to the plan, which he believes would help solve unemployment problems but which also seems a nice way for him to extend patronage and build alliances.

There are three routes through which the government hopes to make-up the deficit, their first port of call being surpluses from previous years and the rise in oil prices last year ahead of predictions.

Abdul-Hadi al-Hassani, head of the parliament’s oil and gas committee, was optimistic about the government’s chances of making up the deficit.

“Oil and gas revenues and surpluses from previous years are expected to cover the state deficit in 2010,” he said, adding, “It is most likely that oil prices will increase rather than decrease, so the deficit will not be a big one, given that the budget was calculated on the basis of oil price of $62.5 per barrel.”

The current price exceeds $75 but al-Hassani’s plan is the same one the government hoped to use to deal with 2009’s deficit. Calculations for production of 2.15 million barrels of oil per day are also optimistic. Last year, production fell to just over 2 million barrels per day.

Manaf al-Sayegh, an expert at the Economic Reform Institute, contradicted the government approach.

“Compensating the budget deficit by relying on oil prices is the wrong approach. Oil prices depend on international supply and demand. You can’t plan for things going wrong. The global financial crisis of 2008 had a negative impact on 2009 budget.”

Al-Sayegh also criticized the government’s borrowing plan.

“This approach is damaging to the economy even if the debt is paid back over a long period of time,” he warned. “This solution will restrict the country’s capacities and will subject Iraq to ups and downs in the economies of foreign countries. It will only lead to significant problems for Iraq.

“Iraq needs economic policies that can develop its economy in general in the near future. We need to boost our GNP, not rely on foreign money.”

Under the 2010 budget plan, the Federal Minister of Finance can borrow up to US$4.5 billion (5.5 trillion dinars) from the IMF and use Special Drawing Rights up to a further US$1.8 billion (2 trillion dinars). On top of this, US$3.8 billion (4.5 trillion dinars) can be taken from the World Bank to cover the deficit.

Borrowing from institutions like the IMF or the World Bank will put the country under restructuring pressure, according to many Iraqi economists. One area where Iraq will be expected to make changes is in its food rationing system, which international institutions want to see limited to only the neediest.

The government is desperate to rebuild the economy in the wake of 12 years of sanctions and seven years of conflict following the invasion of 2003 and time will tell whether this gamble will truly pay off.

The dinar (Iraqi dinar) referred to in this article is the national currency of the Republic of Iraq and trades at a value of 1170 to $1.00.

About the author

Then, of course, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have made their own contribution to the US employment data. At least 150,000 working-age, non-military men and women are doing their bit in the conflict zones; so they don’t figure in the compilation of jobless Americans. And, at home, defense orders have required arms and war-related equipment manufacturers to hire new workers since 2003. “If we decide to bring our troops back today, the economic crisis will deepen, almost immediately,” one Wall Street analyst conceded on condition of anonymity. “Very few of those returning will find any decent jobs.”

In actual fact, American economists right across the political spectrum are unable to recognize the fact that the global economy is nowhere as robust as was being commonly proclaimed just a few short months ago. A closer look at the engines supposedly driving global demand, namely China and India, will show that the statistical information derived from repeated government announcements concerning GDP performance was extremely shallow, even misleading.

Very briefly, in the case of China, foreign investors failed to take into account the impact of loose credit and inflated real estate values; in the case of India, western analysts have proven themselves incapable of either estimating the potentially devastating influence of one bad harvest or the phenomenal role black money plays in the day to day lives of ordinary citizens. [The term "black money" is used to describe an amazingly broad range of tax avoidance schemes and criminal activities; certain knowledgeable observers point out that the sheer size of India's underground economy exceeds 50% of India's GDP].

In an appearance on CNN’s Larry King Live recently, Donald Trump emphasized that the US is in a recession today, and that the true extent of the problems relating to housing and credit cards was still to unfold in coming months. Mr. Trump laughed off Washington claims that “the structural foundations of the economy are strong”, and for very good reason. Because that claim is largely unsubstantiated: perhaps for fear of political repercussions, nobody in authority is willing to detail those structural foundations on the record.

There are simply too many powerful underlying factors playing a role in shaping America’s future: oil prices, debt default, global demand, commodity prices, foreign exchange rates, international trade and, lest we forget, the war on terror. Whether any or all of those factors can be construed as “structural foundations” is best left for the academicians.

But, theory apart, there are two compelling realities to contend with right away. Firstly, neither President Bush nor any of the presidential hopefuls have produced a thoroughly researched position paper addressing the complexity of the situation. Secondly, all those rosy predictions of increasing demand (for virtually everything) from the developing world are coming back to haunt forecasters. In other words, a deteriorating situation is being compounded by ignorance, or intellectual dishonesty, or both.

As far as the employment statistics are concerned, the change of seasons will help perpetuate the “all’s well with the world” illusion. As spring sets in, the job matrix will again expand, deck chair and patio salesmen, gardening and swimming pool assistants, bar tenders, life guards and gym instructors. Not to mention the apparently ever-expanding world of hamburgers, pizzas, tacos, donuts and coffee cups.

About the author

Iraqi State Oil Marketing Organization director Falah al-Amiri said Feb. 4 that Baghdad is not interested in participating in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries’ (OPEC) quota system until the country’s oil production increases to at least 4.5 million barrels per day (bpd) from its current rate of 2.4 million bpd – essentially double what it is now. Al-Amiri said integrating Baghdad into the cartel’s quota structure “is too premature,” and that it likely will take about four years before Iraq reaches its output goal. Al-Amiri added that even then, OPEC member states would have to factor in a number of aspects before setting Iraq’s export quota, such as the size of its oil reserves and its reconstruction requirements.

Though its production levels currently are low compared to other major OPEC powers, Iraq has refused to put any cap on its exports. Oil is Iraq’s primary revenue source, and Baghdad has no intention of cutting itself off from any potential income for the greater good of the oil cartel. At the same time, OPEC member states are eager to see Iraq join the quota system because of the threat its energy potential poses to the group’s ability to limit world oil supply.

When Iraq was last under OPEC’s quota system in 1998, its limit was 1.3 million bpd, less than a third of 4.5 million bpd figure mentioned by al-Amiri. It will take several years before Iraq is able to increase production capacity to 4.5 million bpd, given that energy firms will need several years to develop the fields for which they have been awarded contracts, especially in the light of the fragile political and security situation in the country.

But the development work already under contract has the potential to raise output levels to 10 million to 12 million bpd by 2025, a level that rivals that of Saudi Arabia and Russia, the world’s top two energy producers. That figure does not include known fields yet to be auctioned or fields that have not yet been discovered; given Iraq’s 1980-88 war with Iran, its 1990 invasion of Kuwait and subsequent sanctions and the fallout from the 2003 U.S. invasion, there has been minimal oil exploration in the country since 1979.

In recent days, Iraqi Oil Minister Hussein al-Shahristani has said there are no plans for additional auctions in the immediate future, but one cannot rule out the possibility of deals outside the auction process, as was the case with the contracts given to a consortium led by Eni for the Zubair field and the group led by Exxon Mobil for West Qurna Phase 1 field.

Regardless of the pace at which its output capacity picks up, Iraq’s oil fields, which are large, close to the surface and easy to develop, will ensure the country is free to produce as much as it wants for the next few years. The statement from the State Oil Marketing Organization is an indication that Baghdad is bound to resist any attempts to cap its production level.

About the author

Why should American men interested in international dating, travel, and meeting foreign women be worried about Inflation? Because inflation erodes the value of your dollars. The higher the amount of inflation the more expensive everything will get, including your current day to day expenses for food and energy as well as increased expenses to travel. Not only will airline tickets get more expensive, when you travel abroad, as other currencies appreciate against the dollar, traveling to places like Latin America won’t feel like such a bargain.

Brazil is a perfect example. Just seven years ago you could get $4 Brazilian Reals for just $1 U.S. dollar. As recently as 2007 the dollars decline against the Real to hit $2 Reals for $1 U.S. dollar. More recently the real hit a new recent high of $1.7 Reals for $1 us dollar.

The same effect has been seen in Canada. Seven or so years ago, one dollar could get you almost two Canadian loonies. At the time, Americans were crossing the boarder to vacation in Canada in large numbers because of the great bargains due to the currency exchange rate. From an American’s perspective, everything in Canada was practically half-off.

But all of these trends have been drastically reversed.

Many of the economists that correctly predicted this current recession like Marc Faber, Peter Schiff, Jim Rogers, and Gerald Celente, to name a few, all agree on one thing: Current government policy is leading us in the wrong direction.

The main problem with U.S. economy is that the low interest rates that have been offered by the FED practically this entire decade have made it unattractive to save. American’s have spent too much, and the people as well as the government have both incurred too much debt. The spending and borrowing was fueled by the housing bubble, easy money, and easy credit through credit cards and home equity loans. Now that the party is over, the government is trying to spend even more money, bailing out everyone, and increasing the deficits to levels that are unheard of.

How will we ever pay this money back? 30 years ago the U.S. was the largest creditor nation, today the U.S. is largest debtor nation the world has ever seen. In the past foreigners would gladly lend us the money, but now they’re having their doubts. China, our biggest creditor is no longer interested in funding our out of control government spending, and other countries are following suite. Nations have raised there concerns about this problem by proposing oil be traded in other currencies (oil is currently traded in dollars), and even suggesting the dollar be taken off as the world’s reserve currency.

If we’re unable to borrow money from the rest of the world, the only option left is to print the difference, and reek havoc on the dollar, yet government keeps getting larger, and current government policy is to spend more money and try to stimulate more spending from the American people.

If the dollar continues to devalue, and if government policy is not reversed, it may very well get very very expensive to travel. Not just abroad, but just imagine a $1,000 dollar flight from New York to Miami. Imagine hotels abroad coasting just as much, or more then hotels at any large U.S. city. A strong dollar benefits every American, not just those who travel, but American men who enjoy the benefits of a decently strong dollar today should be worried about the current inflationary policies of the U.S. government.

About the author

But the root problem they were correctly speaking to is the source of the spending money, not the spending itself. Spending is essential for demand creation, and increasing demand is what produces jobs.

So why we ask, does government remove the dollars from the economy before they accomplish the demand stimulus “thingie” (highly technical economics jargon)? Nearly half the survey responses observed that consumption taxes (The Fair Tax) are far more productive/creative than income taxes.

The other half wants to replace the IRC (Internal Revenue Code) with a Flat Tax on all forms of income. Both suggestions are simple, and quantum leaps better than anything being seriously considered by congress— “seriously” being the operative word.

A combination of the two— priceless, but later!

The single, easiest, fastest, biggest, consumer-spending instant winner bonanza is not even a twinkle in an old politician’s eye— there are far too few new politicians. Replace the Social Security Retirement Program with a plain vanilla pension plan, pre-funded by smaller, mandated employee contributions.

The current methodology is simple: it takes money out of our pockets (and our employers) puts it though governmental blenders, and spits out IOUs for a meager benefit at retirement. Why not let the private sector provide pension benefits to all employees under the direction of a trimmed down Social Security bureaucracy?

How? By purchasing Social Security Retirement Income Annuities (SSRIAs). Google “A Capitalist’s Social Security Reform” for the nitty-gritty details, but here’s what we accomplish:

We stimulate spending immediately by only withdrawing 3% of income from 300 million pockets and pocketbooks, and nothing from employer treasuries. We provide demand-push spending money and reduce demand for consumer credit.

And, looking forward an article or two, we collect a tax on every dollar spent in the economy— except those for food, healthcare, and higher education; even from our friends and neighbors in the Underground and Internet economies.

Some SSRIA details include: (1) No sales commission, no more than 10% in an approved list of equities, no multilevel derivatives or open end Mutual Funds, and no speculations; (2) Limited voluntary contributions and unemployed dependent eligibility; (3) Phased in transfer of existing Social Security and government employee pensions (including congress).

Using life annuities + a 50% of cash value, pre-retirement, term-life insurance benefit could prepay retiree Medicare benefits as well!

There are several other ideas on the more-spending-money-in-consumer-pockets agenda, and some thoughts about consumer confidence. It’s tough to be confident, for example, when you click the links between congress and business lobbyists.

It’s tough to be confident when we see Wall Street control its regulators, constantly produce the same speculative garbage, and reward its senior employees and sales persons from the carcasses of mutilated shareholder-owners and “hostaged” taxpayers.

These confidence destroyers can be dealt with, but first the rest of the story, on increasing consumer spending without credit abuse:

One: Reduce the interest rate on all mortgages at least twenty-five basis points, and adjust monthly payments accordingly. The banks owe us, and will make-up the difference from increased business activity.

Two: Bring the credit card mafia to its knees by enforcing reasonable usury laws (a 15% APR cap, for example) and include all fees, late charges and other debris in the calculation. Make minimum payments include a percentage of principal, and treat credit abuse like drug abuse.

Three: Eliminate all nuisance fees, taxes, surcharges, etc, forced on businesses and passed through to consumer statements. A $65 motel room should be a $65 motel room.

Four: Reduce state and local property taxes 10% per year for all persons over age 65, and devise a way to prorate this into rents paid by seniors— i.e., require landlords to pass through their savings.

Five: Eliminate all toll collections on highways, bridges, tunnels, subways etc.— everyone benefits from our transportation resources, the green impact is obvious, and demand for gasoline would be reduced significantly.

Six: Establish a combined federal/state/local $1,000 per month tax-free program for all workers. (The first $12,000 of each person’s income is untaxed). Workers earning less than $12K annually receive the difference in bank account debit cards. Usage could be restricted to essentials (no alcohol, gambling, tobacco, guns, jet skis, etc.)

Seven: Establish a $750 per month workfare program for the unemployed actually seeking work, but requiring no less than twenty hours of community service per week. Offset would be reduced numbers of government workers, shorter unemployment lines, and lower employer overhead expenses.

Thank you again for participating. I hope you all appreciate how important it is for you to help get simple ideas like these into the legislative arena. Find the time to address some of them aggressively in blogs, networks, and communications with elected officials.

Wall Street’s “Emperors New Clothes” game plan has infiltrated the federal government. The financial community has no interest in protecting investors from speculation and our elected representatives seem interested only in expanding their power by catering to the most generous special interests.

Do I hear congressional term limits as a “write-in” candidate for number eight?

About the author

Frankly, the drafters of the insurance reforms have little, if any, understanding of insurance, risk assessment, or underwriting— and nary a clue about running a business. But why should they care? This is Robin Hood politics, not business. Why do we continue to re-elect them is a far better question.

Incidentally, I am not a health insurance salesman or healthcare professional— just a payer of far too much in small-group insurance premiums in spite of a crazy-high deductible!

Insurance is neither a cost of obtaining healthcare services nor an expense associated with those services. Insurance is an agreement in which a private company agrees to pay part of someone else’s medical expenses in exchange for premiums it collects in advance from all of its insureds.

If President Obama owned the New World Order Health Insurance Company, he would not be willing to insure an applicant with brain cancer nor would he be willing to pay an unlimited lifetime benefit to all insureds— not without a premium that reflects the risks to his personal bank account.

Theoretically, insurance companies collect enough in premiums to operate profitably while paying all the claims they have agreed to pay under contracts with the individuals and groups that they insure. If we add more risk, the insurance company has no choice but to increase premiums.

The persons who own the insurance companies (you and me, pal) expect them to operate profitably. The companies employ thousands of actuaries, healthcare industry expense analysts, claims adjusters, fraud inspectors, service personnel, underwriters, risk assessors, etc. to assure that this happens.

Insurance companies protect us by standing ready to pay “covered” expenses over and above whatever deductions, exclusions, and limitations are agreed upon in advance. There is a viable legal contract between the parties— financial disasters are avoided if we get really sick.

Within the terms of their agreements, insurance companies determine who is insurable, and at what premium. Their job is to pay covered medical expenses— and they have a vested interest in keeping medical expenses as low as possible. But do they really?

Just as the financial crisis was partially caused by business conflicts of interest so too are there conflicting interests in the insurance-healthcare-drug-medical supply industries. These conflicts reduce the natural desire to control the costs of all healthcare services.

We can control the industry to eliminate the conflicts of interest. We can (and should) police the boardrooms of insurance companies to eliminate “abuse of shareholders” through excessive salary packages.

Perhaps we should require health care insurers to be “mutual” companies, or maybe “network” doctors should not be allowed to bill patients for amounts above what the insurance actually pays. Maybe the annual deductible could be dealt with differently without increasing premiums.

We can tax for-profit hospitals higher to encourage more non-profit care facilities; we can keep doctors, insurance and drug companies from owning hospitals; we can cap jury awards for medical malpractice or error, and we can give tax relief to medical practitioners who provide free health services to the indigent and uninsurable.

But the government’s efforts to redefine insurance are counter-productive. As cold as it may sound, if we make insurance companies cover pre-existing brain tumors, the expense is coming out of your pocket in the form of higher insurance premiums or higher taxes— and it’s likely that the healthiest among us will be the ones paying the increased taxes.

The White House list of reforms, every one of them, would increase insurance company costs and our premiums while doing nothing to reduce the price of the medical services we receive. They only sound good to those who do not understand insurance.

Insurance is designed to pay the bills— reforms need to make the bills smaller for everyone. Does this plan cut any costs, or just increase insurance premiums for those who will still be able to pay them?

Group health (and even dental) insurance is a benefit used by many employers to attract and retain employees. I’ve heard rumors that the reform plan will tax employers who don’t provide insurance and tax those employees who receive the benefits. True or not, neither approach helps the economy or reduces health care expenses— both raise taxes for everyone.

Insurance can only be made more affordable by reducing the costs of the healthcare that is provided. Let’s focus on streamlined record keeping, controlling ambulance chasers, jury awards, drug company advertising, an army of lobbyists, and industry conflicts of interest.

We should also make all government employees, from the top down, dance to the same tune as the rest of us— that’ll do away with the tax on benefits. Then, next chance you get, do away with an incumbent.

About the author

Story Number 1i: Neverland

Neverland Valley Ranch, is situated in Santa Barbara County, California and was the home of Michael Jackson from 1988-2005. Neverland was named so after the make-believe land in Peter Pan – a figure or idea that Michael was thought to have idolized. He turned Neverland into his home and a private amusement park. There was a zoo, theme park, two railroads, a ferris wheel, carousel, zipper, spider, sea dragon, wave swinger, super slide, dragon wagon kiddie roller coaster and bumper cars.

Michael Jackson’s Neverland, it was initally reported, would be turned into “Foreverland” a permanent memorial to the King of Pop – a bit like Presley’s Graceland – so that fans and tourists from all over the world could travel to see the singers former home and a glimpse into his life.

Story Number 2i: The changing faces of Michael Jackson

The story of Michael Jackson’s plastic surgery is no secret and it has been incredibly well documented by the media.

Initially, Michael’s changing appearance was put down to puberty and adolescence, and weight loss. Michael first started to become slimmer in the early 1980’s following his desire to have a ‘dancers body’. After accusations of child abuse in 1993 and 2005 MJ underwent massive weight loss and was hospitalized on more than one occasion. However, eventually the press cottoned onto the idea that it was more than natural growth that was changing the way that he looked.

By the mid-1980’s it was noticeable that Jackson’s skin was gradually getting lighter his nose and his chin were changing and the shape of his body had changed. Some professionals suggest that Michael suffered from ‘body dysmorphic disorder’ as a result of the verbal ‘bullying’ and abuse that he had suffered at the hands of his father.

In 1986 Jackson was reportedly diagnosed with Vitiligo and Lupus. Jackson’s make-up artist suggested that initially Jackson tried to cover the lighter patches of his skin with make-up but eventually the condition became too extensive. Gradually, as a result of the treatment his skin lightened even further until he looked almost porcelain white.

However, it was not only Michael’s skin that appeared to be changing, it was also the shape of his face. Apparently, by 1990 sources close to the singer suggested that he had had 10 operations on his face in total. Michael had his first rhinoplasty in 1979 after damaging his nose in a dance routine. In his Biography MJ suggested that he had had two bits of plastic surgery on his nose and one on his chin. Any other changes to his face Michael insisted were due to adolescence, change of diet, weight loss, a change of hair style and performance lighting that was used and not extensive surgery.

Story 3i: Earth Song

Earthsong was the third single from the album HIStory and it was released on November 27, 1995. Although Jackson had written other songs that dealt with different issues this was the first that specifially dealt with the environment and animal welfare- which is what made it such an interesting record. It supported Jackson’s work as a humanitarian which was first noticed with the release of “We are the World” with Lionel Richie in 1985 and with the initiation of the “Heal the World Foundation” in 1992. He received the Genesis award for the song in 1995 which was an award given each year for animal sensitivity.

The song received a Grammy nomination in 1997 and was a top five hit in most European countries, while in the UK it still remains Jackson’s best selling single, having sold over 1 million copies. It debuted at number one where it stayed for six weeks in December 1995.

Story 4i: Child Abuse Allegations

1993 was the first time that Michael Jackson was accused of child abuse by the father of 13-year-old Jordan Chandler. Evan Chandler, had supposedly administered Jordan with a powerful sedative and under this influence his son reportedly admitted that the star and he had engaged in sexual acts. Experts later said, that the drug used makes patients highly susceptible to suggestion. Apparently, Jordan’s mother did not believe Jackson had molested her son and further investigations into his home found no evidence to support a criminal filing. Jordan refused to testify against Jackson after he had received an out of court settlement of 22 million pounds, Michael justified the pay out saying “I didn’t want to do a long drawn-out thing”.

Jackson was again accused of child abuse later in 2005 by Gavin Arvizo, a 13-year-old cancer survivor who had become close friends of Jackson. In a documentary both Michael and Gavin had spoken about sharing a room and bed which Michael had described as a “beautiful, charming and sweet thing”.

MJ was branded a ’serial child molester’ during the 16 week trial in 2005. Jackson was accused of four counts of molestation including molesting a minor, intoxicating a minor, abduction and kidnapping.

Further allegations were then brought up that proposed Jackson had been groping five other young boys in the 1990’s including Macaulay Culkin. However, Culkin defended Jackson on the stand denying all charges that were held against him.

The verdict of the case found Michael Jackson to be not guilty on all charges; after assessment the jurors had thought the brothers stories to ‘not add up’.

Story 5i: Death

On June 25 2009 at 2:26pm Michael Joseph Jackson was pronounced dead, after he was found in a coma at his Bel-Air mansion.

Exactly how Michael Jackson died and the circumstances in which he did are still unclear. Reportedly homicide investigations are being made into his death, although it is thought that at present there is no evidence of criminal wrong doing.

Several media sources have reported that Propofol, a powerful anesthesia, was found in Jackson’s house after he died. Apparently the drug is a prescription drug, only used in hospitals and administered by IV to send people to sleep before surgery. Several medical experts have suggested there was no reason for Jackson to have had this drug in his home; although he reportedly begged for such drugs to help him sleep having suffered chronic insomnia before his death.

Supposedly, a coroners report suggested that MJ was actually in surprisingly good health and despite scarring on his face, several injection sites all over his body and bruises on his chest (due to CPR) there seemed to be no signs of a heart attack but it looked more likely that drugs had caused the heart to stop beating or the lungs to stop breathing. However, reportedly, the coroners office has ordered more tests to determine the Jackson’s Cause of Death. The office won’t rule on his death until toxicology and other additional testing has been completed.

Sources suggest that a memorial service will be held for Michael Jackson on Tuesday at the Staples Centre in Los Angeles where he had been rehearsing for his O2 London concerts.

End:

There is no doubt that Michael Jackson was the King of Pop despite his controversial lifestyle and person. He, his music and performances will undoubtedly be remembered forever.

About the author

The Harry Potter phenomenon started in June 1997, with the release of JK Rowling’s first installment of the seven books: ‘The Philosophers Stone’.

To this day, I remember picking the book from the shelf, reading the back cover intently and immediately wanting to take it home. I was eleven, and so the same age as Harry, Ron and Hermione – which obviously made the whole thing much more exciting! I instantly fell in love with it; the storyline, the characters, the magic and the idea of a school for witches and wizards – I literally couldn’t put the book down.

I wanted to be magic, I wanted a broomstick! (imagine that! Forget the car journey to the airport, the airport parking, the plane journey, the irritating coach trip on the other side – we’ll just take the broomstick!)

I wanted Ron and Hermione to be MY best friends and, of course, I wanted to be part of the Quidditch team. I even went to Waterstones for an evening with J.K Rowling, at which she said she would consider putting triplets in one of the books, because my younger siblings who are triplets were also in attendance, unfortunately, she never did.

It seemed that I, and my family, weren’t the only ones who caught the Harry Potter bug; from then on the book just seemed to spiral into a whole new world of popularity. Suddenly it was everywhere, and then came the films.

The first film, ‘Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone’ was released on 16 November 2001, was directed by Chris Columbus and in total generated $976,475,550. Four more films have followed the first, based on the books, in the same order, with changing directors and additional cast members as new characters are introduced. Statistically they have all proved to have been incredibly popular; although apparently not to everybody’s liking.

There has been some controversy over the films and how much they actually follow the the books. Critics and avid fans have suggested that, despite directors best efforts, the films do not stick rigidly enough to the book’s story lines and that too many details are left overlooked.

In fact, when I was at University, yes I still insisted on seeing the films even then. Two of my housemates, after seeing ‘The Goblet of Fire’ announced that they would not watch the remainder of the films due to their apparent inability to ‘be true’ to the books.

Like my housemates did, I love the books, they’re the kind that once you start reading them you just can’t put down. However, to go so far as to refuse to watch the remainder of the films just seems a ‘little’ over the top. I think that the films are well made and fun to watch, whether they follow the books entirely or not.

To a certain extent, you have to try and separate the film experience from the reading of a book. If you marry the two together too much it is easy to end up disliking most films made this way. When you read, you create your own images of the story in your head; of the characters, of the places, of the personalities etc. These will inevitably be, in your opinion, the best representation of the book as you are the one reading it.

Therefore, if you choose to watch a film based on a book, give the director, crew and cast some credit – their vision and the restraints a film puts on a it can’t appeal to everybody.

I find it easier to separate the films from the books and try to ignore the discrepancies, because I don’t think that they can match up perfectly.

You have to take the Potter films as they are; being aimed at the younger generation, they are fun to watch and simply based around the story lines of the books. Lets be honest, the books are all pretty exciting – so surely the films can’t go that wrong. Also, lets not forget, we wouldn’t have the films if they weren’t based on the books, so why not just enjoy them for what they are?

The sixth film, ‘Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince’ looks set to be a pretty good one; if the book is anything to go by. The trailer looks fast paced and even more edgy than the last. It appears that the films are getting darker and darker, just as the books did as the series progressed.

Something that is quite amazing about the films is that, where possible, the same core characters have been used throughout. The actors chosen when they were mere eleven year olds, have grown up on the screen giving the films that endearing edge. It makes the relationships portrayed by the films and the growth of the characters that little bit more believable, as the actors grow closer together and to their respective characters.

It is also be helpful to some (no names mentioned) that as the younger actors themselves have grown up the Harry Potter movies have ended up with, lets face it, not a bad looking cast.

The only worry about the growing darkness, relationship based story lines and, quite frankly fairly scary scenes is that the films may be being made less accessible to the younger audience, at which the films were initially aimed? Although, if this is the case, they always have something to look forward when they are old enough to watch them!

I, myself, already have my ticket to the opening night of ‘The Half Blood Prince’ and am very excited about seeing it, despite other’s fears that it will not stick precisely to the story line of the books. I’ll be the first in the queue, the first out of my hotel room next to the cinema (which was booked months in advance), the first to be parked in the car/broomstick park right next to the cinema ready to get in there first.

I’ll see the film no matter what, and maybe, if you’re lucky, I might even let you know what I think about it.

About the author

Michael Joseph Jackson was born August 29, 1958. He had started performing at the age of 5 and by the age of 8 he was touring the Midwest extensively with the Jackson 5. He finally made his debut on the major music scene in 1968 as a member of the Jackson 5 at the age of 10.

Story Number 1: Childhood

It was in the first television interview that Michael Jackson had given since 1979 that he first spoke of the stories of his alleged childhood abuse. Michael Jackson admitted that he had often felt lonely and persecuted as a child and cried as a result of this. He revealed that he was physically and emotionally abused by his father in several different ways; enduring incessant rehearsals, beatings and verbal abuse.

On one occasion their father, had apparently, climbed into Michael’s room wearing a scary mask and proceeded to scream and shout. Their father’s reasoning for this behavior is that he wanted to teach his children not to leave their windows open whilst they were sleeping.

However, this quite obviously did more to damage Michael than teach him a simple lesson. The singer revealed in an interview that this incident resulted in nightmares centered around kidnapping for years after.

In an interview with Martin Bashir, which was released in 2003, Michael said: “i didn’t have it that hard, he used me as the example, “do it like Michael” … he practiced us with a belt in his hand and if you missed a step then expect to be hit…he would tear you up if you missed… really get you”. Although Michael did admit he had been abused by his father, in extra footage he suggested that ‘he hurt me with his love, be he is a genius, the man is a genius”.

Story Number 2: Thriller

On November 30 1982, Jackson released his sixth studio album produced by Epic Records; Thriller. Thriller was the follow up album to ‘Off the Wall’, 9 of the tracks were written by MJ himself and it explored several different genres including funk, disco, soul, soft rock, R&B and pop.

At its best the album was selling a million copies a week worldwide, and in just over a year it became, and still remains, the best selling album of all time. It is estimated that the album sold an excess of 60 million copies around the globe. Seven of the songs were released as singles and all reached the top 10 on the Billboard Hot 100.

The album broke records, winning eight Grammy Awards in 1984 in three different genres – pop, R&B and rock. It was Thriller that sent Jackson soaring into super-stardom and cemented him as one of, if not the, predominant pop star of the late 20th Century.

The album ranked number 20 in the Rolling Stone magazine’s 500 greatest albums of all time in 2003 and was also listed by the National Association of Recording Merchandisers at number three in their ‘Definitive 200 Albums of All Time’.

Story Number 3: The Moonwalk

The ‘Moonwalk’ or ‘backslide’ is a dance technique that presents the illusion that the dancer is stepping forward while actually moving backward.

Michael Jackson’s first ever public moonwalk was supposedly in 1983 at the Motown 25th Anniversary whilst performing “Billie Jean”.

Jackson was not the first person to perform the moonwalk and older stars have claimed that they taught him the move, but there is no doubt that he popularized the moonwalk and the robot dance moves and made them his own. The dance gained worldwide popularity after Michael Jackson performed it and soon became considered his signature move. The moonwalk has since become one of the best known dance moves in the world.

Story Number 4: Bad

In his autobiography Jackson said that the song was about the street. A kid from a bad neighborhood who goes away to a private school. He comes back and the kids from the neighborhood start to tease him. He sings “I’m bad, you’re bad, who’s bad… etc”. Michael paradoxically suggests that when you are strong and good, you are bad.

Michael Jackson’s album ‘Bad’ was released on 31st August 1987 followed closely by the single ‘Bad’ which was released on September 7 1987, which was MJ’s seventh number one hit single over all. Bad remained in the top spot for two consecutive weeks from October 24th 1987.

Twenty years after the album was released it had sold over 30 million copies worldwide and shipped 8 million units in the United States. It was the first and currently only album ever to feature five songs in the Billboard Hot 100 number 1 singles.

In the late 80’s the album won two Grammy’s, one for Best Music Video for Leave Me Alone and one for Best Engineered Album. Bad was also ranked number 43 in the 100 Greatest Albums of All Time of the MTV Generation in 2009 listed by VH1. It was also ranked number 202 on the Rolling Stone magazine 500 Greatest Albums of All Time.

Bad became the first of Jackson’s albums to debut at number-one on the Billboard 200 where it remained for the next six consecutive weeks. In the UK the album sold 500,000 copies in just five days and is currently certified 13x platinum, for sales of 3.9 million making it Jackson’s biggest-selling album in the UK.

Globally, it is Jackson’s overall third best-selling recording, with 30 million copies sold. Five of the album’s songs hit number one, which was a record in itself. Bad was the 9th best selling album in British History and this was announced in 2006.

Story Number 5: Bubbles and Pets

Bubbles is the name of the chimpanzee that became associated with Michael Jackson. He rescued the chimp from a Cancer research clinic in Texas in 1985.

Michael Jackson was reportedly quite close to the chimp but the media mocked this friendship; as they mocked many aspects of his life. The relationship was portrayed as weird and Jackson as a ‘bizarre eccentric’, obsessed with recapturing his lost childhood. It was this incident that lead the star to be named ‘Wacko Jacko’.

Bubbles sat in with Jackson when he recorded Bad, and was obviously a big part of his life for a while; Bubbles even made a cameo appearance in “Liberian Girl” a track from the album. The chimp was moved to the Neverland ranch with ‘Jacko’ in 1988 and he slept in a crib in his bedroom. Sometimes the Chimp wore a diaper and on other occasions he was allowed to use Michael Jackson’s private toilet – something which the star was also scrutinized for.

Jackson has been reported as once said “My chimp bubbles is a constant delight.” Kenny Rogers once said of Bubbles: “..[he] was so human it was almost frightening. He would take Christopher [Rogers' son] by the hand, walk over to the refrigerator, open it, take out a banana, and hand it to him. Christopher was amazed…we all were.”

Bubbles is reported to still be alive today after he was removed to an animal century because there were fears he may attack Jackson’s newborn son, Prince Michael II.

About the author