| Author |
Message |
    
Jack Green
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2005 - 4:05 am: | 
|
Ok I will play Devils Advocate,
D'ONSTON AS RIPPER
LIST OF POSSIBLE LINKS TO HIS POSSIBLE CULPABILITY
1. Undeniably the man was in the area at the right time.
2. Ummm.
3.
No that’s it I have run out, every other so called link is nothing more than speculation based on further speculation
|
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 275
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2005 - 8:01 pm: |
|
Hey Jack:
Once again,my man,I reiterate[ of course I'm not alone in saying this..]....
Every suspect or suspect-based thread here or elsewhere is based on speculation. Maybrick..RDS...Kosminski..Kelly..you name 'em.
The "lists" of possible clues to culpability provide food for thought at most and derision by others,at least.
Its true to some extent,Jack,that some people go with their gut on a suspect. I do that myself regarding RDS, no question about it. I just think that he has some traits,among other things,that are "attractive". He certainly is not attractive. The Ripper was a bad egg.
All we can do,those who favor a particular suspect or cadre of killers,is pose questions. From the questions,often we will segue into other areas that open up possibilities or new avenues of thought. Often times,I've noticed that the antagonism toward a specific detail in this Case has been beneficial. This may be true even with RDS..as well as any other detail,or suspect,or assumption. Its all good,daddy !
I see no wrong or flaw in pursuing suspects,despite the protestations of Dave Radka, for instance. Thats Dave's opinion and he is entitled to it. I don't think it "hurts" anything. And in the long run,we all learn a little about the person in question,if we so desire. Its a win-win situation.
Sir Robert.....In what way do you think the Patristic Gospels forward may be incriminating to RDS....Or were you joshing,old man?
How Brown
JTRForums
www.jtrforums.co.uk
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 269
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 12:30 am: |
|
"In what way do you think the Patristic Gospels forward may be incriminating to RDS."
I josh not. Lemme put out my copy over the weekend and cite the passage that intrigues me. Mind you, like everything else in this Case, it's speculation built on gossamer.
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
ASD
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2005 - 4:49 pm: |
|
D'Onston as the Ripper, possible links?
1. His letter to the City Police about the murders in 1888.
2. His Pall Mall Gazette article in December 1888.
3. George Marsh's statement to the police in December 1888 that he thought D'Onston was the Ripper.
4. W. T. Stead's 1896 statement that he once thought D'Onston was the Ripper. |
Tee@jtrforums
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, March 19, 2005 - 4:41 pm: |
|
This is and IMHO the small things that help me to believe that Donston could be a very likely Ripper supsect.
Donston was in London at the time of the Murders. Whitechapel even.
He did use prostitutes. And in so doing so had caught an STD.
He had also trained and became a Military Surgeon giving him anotomical knowledge.
He also applied for two jobs one in the Metropolitan area and one in the City.
He was denied both these posts. (Thomas Hamilton ring any bells??)
He was also a follower of the Occult, and gives us more than any of the other suspects(barr Maybrick;)) the tools to find out the answer to this puzzle. (see letters and articles as above)
He also was questioned twice in connection to the Whitechapel murders.
And this does go on ...
And again I`ll just add that I`m not here to change anyones opinions or to have a tit for tat over whats there and whats not.
If I can help I will. If not I prefer to stay quiet.
All the best.
Tee. |
k.a
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 - 10:55 pm: |
|
could Melville Leslie Macnaghten be the ripper? |
Tee@jtrforums
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, March 27, 2005 - 9:56 am: |
|
As far as D'Onston is concerned it is no secret that there were personality clashes between Harris and various posters who used this site and It was because of these personal clashes that D'Onston became a target of ridicule for some. Another D'Onston author was banned from this site on several occasions for the most ridiculious reasons.... one being that he mentioned the name of a poster who had already been banned !!!!! Then when he retaliated because of liable attacks he was banned on a permanent basis. Jack Green is anti D'Onston and it is well known that he has a certain amount of animosity towards a D'Onston author as was evident by a post he placed on the forums. These personal attacks and personality clashes do the subject more harm than good. A lot of misinformation is peddled about D'Onston and certain research into him for the purpose of undermining reliable and honest research.Many of us all know what the true situation is so let us not fool ourselves or others over it. A particular ripper book has been banned from debate on this site..allegedly because it caused arguments. It certainly never caused more arguments than the Maybrick Diary or the Sickert saga....or other petty squabbles which have taken place since. Many people see a clash of personality as the reason for this ban....and most of us are aware of the reasons which lie behind that clash of personality.Human nature being what it is.... certain individuals will deny that anything is amiss because they don't have the courage of their convictions and the truth won't help their credibility. You can fool some of the people some of the time...but not all of the people all of the time.The truth of the matter is that some posters here are being mislead by others who have an axe to grind and the former should be made aware of that fact.
All the best.
Tee |
name unknown
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, March 25, 2005 - 1:41 pm: |
|
Well..no replies to my call for a high res map so far, but here are some thoughts on the 'glyph'. It's actually quite a clever pattern - after the 'first three' murders (arranged in a triangle) the fourth could be in any of four locations to provide symmetry - although only one gives the 'S'-rune pattern. The fifth can either be in the centre (did anyone think of this at the time?) or on one of the arcs of the VP. Anyway, I'm off to London on Tuesday and will poke around the Green Dragon Yard area.
Regards |
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 594
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 01, 2005 - 6:52 am: |
|
Tee,
Speaking of people misleading other posters... Those of us who saw the posts know exactly why Ivor was banned. Were you even here at the time, or are you just following what Ivor tells you happened? Your version is extremely lopsided.
The fact of the matter is that a Jack the Ripper suspect gets support based on his (or her) own merits and not for the kind of conspiracy reasons you claim. You sound exactly like the Diary supporters who complain about people not believing Maybrick did it just because they supposedly don't want the case solved, or Patricia Cornwell claiming that people don't believe her theory just because she's American and a woman. It's all just sour grapes.
Try to support your case for Stephenson here or don't, but please don't whine about how persecuted you think you are... especially when the messageboard you and Ivor run is banning people left and right for reasons far, far less severe than what led to Ivor being banned from here.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website
|
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 612
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, April 07, 2005 - 5:29 pm: |
|
Oh, this one is funny.
Apparently now Ivor and Tee have tried to prove that they don't hypocritically ban people left and right by banning a number of people this past week, despite the fact that Howard (another admin there) told them they were acting juvenile and opposed them on it, removing one of their threads there where they were insulting this board. I suspect there will be some more bannings coming soon as people find out about the more recent ones and complain.
So, yeah, when Tee (or, according to what Howard said anyway, Ivor posting as Tee to get around his being banned here) whines about the Casebook message boards you know not to take him seriously.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Profile Email Dissertations Website
|
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 308
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 08, 2005 - 4:33 pm: |
|
Dan.......
If you had read the post I placed up there afterwards,you'll remember that I opposed bringing up "old stuff" as it is and was, to me at least, detrimental. This is 2005, not 2003.
Nowhere did I call anyone juvenile. Nowhere did I mention that the banning of members by the owners of the site was uncalled for. In fact, I stated that it was up to them to make the decision,not for anyone to go to another site to discuss the matter. Whether I object to it or not isn't relevant. In the case of the person most recently banned, I specifically stated that there were other reasons that could not be discussed....and they still can't.
I made an appeal to some sort of peace and defended you,as well as laying some of the blame upon Tee for a post that indirectly referred to Ivor. If you remember the post at the Forums,it stated that I felt you were in error to discuss Forums policy. In any event,its no one's business but the owners of a site,just as it is here, to make the call to do what they wish regarding posters,regardless of what we think we know to be the facts behind the move.
I see no reason to dredge this up on anyone's behalf,as no one from this site,of which I am also a member, has made any complaints. And they don't have cause to. The issue is a dead one.
I was simply angry that this atmosphere of bickering came up again and for it to escalate as it did is counterproductive to everyone.
How |
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 865
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 08, 2005 - 4:50 pm: |
|
ROFLMAO!! I love how people conveniently twist the facts of a situation to suit themselves.
But no matter. A certain author is flattering himself to think that he would be considered important enough to be banned for mere "personality conflicts". He holds himself in too high an esteem to consider himself worthy of any kind of singling out. But I suppose it has always been more fun to play the persecuted one than to accept responsibility for one's own actions.
I personally would welcome "the author" back if for no other reason than the arguments around here are repetitive, lame and boring. His return wouldn't change the nature but at least the subject matter would be different.
If he thinks there is an axe to grind, I am personally willing to bury it.
BTW..
Howard, I really look forward to meeting you at the Ripper Conference. And I mean that sincerely, no fooling. It'll be wicked.
(Message edited by Ally on April 08, 2005)
(Message edited by Ally on April 08, 2005)
|
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 613
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 08, 2005 - 5:09 pm: |
|
Howard,
Yes, you were opposed to bringing up "old stuff," but it's clear that Tee (or Ivor) is not, because he brought it up here (see above), which is why I had to respond to point out that it was complete nonsense.
"In the case of the person most recently banned, I specifically stated that there were other reasons that could not be discussed"
I remember you telling me that, but there were more bannings after that one and before I posted my second reply above. The person you think is the most recently banned is not. Apparently they don't even tell you when they ban people.
But then to use your example, what kind of board has secret reasons for banning people that they don't even tell the to the people they kick off? So far the person you are referring to is only told "you know why" when she asks why she was banned. She doesn't. I don't. Nobody does. Suddenly posters are gone, a large number of threads erased, and old posts are rewritten to get rid of anything that contradicts what Ivor claims in his book. The only way anyone knows what's going on there is to email each other and compare notes, or to try to save the posts as they appear on the forum and before they get erased or changed. This happens every couple of months there and recently more than ever.
Sorry, How, but the board you are associating yourself with is doing some pretty nasty things. It's not dredging up old complaints, it's about what Ivor and Tee are doing right now. If they didn't want it being discussed they shouldn't have whined on this board about Ivor being banned when people do in fact get banned left and right there for reasons far less serious (not even in the same ballpark) than what got Ivor kicked off here. Those are just the plain facts.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Profile Email Dissertations Website
|
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 866
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 08, 2005 - 5:17 pm: |
|
Hey I have an idea! As delighted as I am to hear someone bitching about someone else's moderating skills, especially when it is someone who well...you know...but anyway, here's my idea.
Let's not bitch about anyone's boards or their moderating in public, cause it's their boards and they do have the right to do with it as they please.
Even if I do love to see someone else on the end of the "You suck and are so unfair as a moderator" stick especially when it is someone who ...you know...
Moderating sucks, doesn't it?
Tee hee..tee hee...tee hee...
|
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 867
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 08, 2005 - 5:45 pm: |
|
 
And a 1, 2, 3, FOUR!!
If I listen to your lies would you say
I'm a man without conviction
I'm a man who doesn't know
How to sell a contradiction
You come and go
You come and go
Karma Karma Karma Karma
Karma Chameleon
You come and go
YOu come and go
|
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 614
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 08, 2005 - 6:15 pm: |
|
Hi Ally,
Yup, I would agree with you that it's their site and they can do anything they please. But then if they go onto someone else's boards to complain about a banning from years back and claiming it's because people are afraid of the facts at the exact same time they are kicking people off their boards and erasing posts with facts they find inconvenient, well, you know...
It's hard to just accept it when someone is accusing other people of stealing some cookies when his pudgy hand is stuck in the neighbor's cookie jar and he has crumbs all over his face and shirt. If he'd just had his own cookies in his own little room and not tried to blame other people for it, who would have cared?
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Profile Email Dissertations Website
|
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 868
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 08, 2005 - 6:45 pm: |
|
Oh Dan...there is so much of the humor in the situation if you could only see it! I mean it's funny. For instance. There is another site. We will call it site A and site I (mentioned above) used to be bosom buddies and share many vitriolic threads about site C and how the evil moderator did evil things. But then site A apparently had a bashing falling out with site I and now site I talks about all the lies site A says about site I (but of course still believes everything A said about C) and site A says nasty things about what liars site I is (but still believes everything they said about site C) and both talk about how evil site C is! And now when site I and Site A have forever been saying about how rudely they were treated on site C and how unfair the policies were, now they get a taste of running their own site and people saying the exact same thing about them! And of course, their reasons for banning people are totally rational and justified and in the spirit of brotherhood and harmony. And they have each banned more people than C! Oh the love. It is GREEEEAT! I am only glad a little piece of the carnivale has finally spilled over to here. I mean no one here talks about site A or I so we never get to be part of the fun! Sometimes the glee is just overwhelming.
Did anyone follow that?
|
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 309
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 08, 2005 - 7:07 pm: |
|
Dan...
Once again,the member who was booted [ for want of a word here...] at the Forums was booted not so much for arguing with Ivor or anyone in particular. Thats all I can say. I don't want to exacerbate the situation. Its that simple. Maybe one day that former member will come back. Thats cool with me. Bottom line is this...thats up to the owners,not me. I don't know what sort of conversation you have had with the person and its none of my business. From what I have heard its not an issue to place here,again,at another site.
As far as I know,you aren't banned from the Forums. Someone e-mailed me and asked me why you were. I told the person if you were it would have to do with the repartee that began here and the eventual see-saw over at the Forums. I do know that the advertising of Ripper Notes came to a close because of this episode.
Tee sent the post in question,not anyone else. All Steve Ryder would have to do is check the I.P.... What I meant when I told you in private about the post in question coming from someone other than Tee was that the message itself was ,to me at least, an attempt to dredge up old crap and sounded as if it came from Ivor himself. Believe me,I told him that already.
I still don't understand why anyone other than the moderators of this site would have jumped in to the mix. No one takes Paul Begg,as an example,to task for what stories he doesn't include in his magazine...or you for that matter. Thats your business.
The Forums doesn't ban people "left and right". The only person I ever banned was a person who kept hassling the recently banned person in question !!! Pete Wood is my great friend and I mean great friend,but he's history..and was also banned here...which is not my business as to why. Other than that,there may be one other person I can recall from the last 7 months who got the boot. Thats not very many people.
Ally....I agree with you that discussing how sites manage themselves be best left to those people in charge. As to convieniently twisting facts,I hope that doesn't refer to me. I came into the barfight after the shotglasses were already being thrown and had to wait until people chilled out before I made an appeal to cool off.
The irony isn't lost on me at all,Ally.. I wind up possibly being mistrusted for defending Dan by the Forums' owners against personal digs...which I did....and then seen as a backslider for defending the position of the Forums to ban that particular person after criticizing Dan's input to the situation.
I may have to send my 10 year old to kick everyone's ass after this is over.....or have I already said that somewhere before?
|
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 310
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 08, 2005 - 7:27 pm: |
|
Dan.....
No one removed posts from the Forums because they were filled with facts or ideas that didn't coincide with mine or Ivor's. Thats bullshit and something I would not have expected from a guy who profitted from the competitions I ran on the site...You have to pay to advertise on Casebook...but you didn't with the Forums or at least I am told....You have had more adversity from Casebookers than Forumites for posts and counter arguments by a wide margin. Thats not a slam....thats a fact.
The facts are that the recent posts were removed because the person who was banned demanded that the posts be moved. Ask her or him. Don't just speculate,sir !!!
In regard to Stan Russo [ another friend of mine ], who was banned and his posts, Stan set up a thread to denigrate Stephenson as a viable suspect based on Stan's ideas. Since Ivor at the time had no way of discussing Stephenson at other sites,he was naturally irate.
If you owned a site that promoted Ripper Notes,would you allow a poster to set up a thread stating that your magazine was inferior to all others and was edited by a loser? Seriously...would you?
Ally...No one gets their balls in a bunch more than I do about "site blasting". |
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 869
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 08, 2005 - 7:44 pm: |
|
Here's the thing that is interesting to me. Site C gets bashed about the tone of the posts (we're mean and lack the proper respect) but you can pretty much say whatever you want to here. Freedom of speech actually does apply to almost all things that aren't illegal or obsene.
There is NOTHING that is currently prohibited from being discussed and there is no one who is permanently banned. No one.
Ponder that my little sweetlings if you will. Posts on sites where everyone is sweet (because they have to be) or post where you don't have to worry about your next post getting you tossed if you run afoul of the belief system.
I believe in freedom of speech but very few do. It's amazing how many people complain that site C allows it.
P.S. Out of respect, I am not going to discuss this topic anymore in the open. If anyone wants to chat further, meet me in the chat sometime or send me an email.
(Message edited by Ally on April 08, 2005)
|
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 615
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 08, 2005 - 11:56 pm: |
|
Hi Ally,
I know just who you mean in that A C I stuff. It is amusing when A and I go at each other.
And if you'll pardon the next long bit...
How,
I do not pay for advertising on any sites. Stephen lets magazine editors post threads here for free when an issue comes out to let people know about it. I'm sure if we abused that and got spammy he'd reign us back. He puts up pages inside the site itself with descriptions, cover images and so forth, plus a sample issue. That's not paid, it's just him publishing info about the latest Ripper releases, which he does for books too. Now if I'd been in one of the actual advertising areas of this site -- featured on the front page, links on the left, etc. -- yes, that would have cost money. Frankly I don't have the budget for that.
I was asked on JTRForums to post info about upcoming issues, so I did. They created folders for discussion of each of the publications, so the others can too (and most do). If JTRForums wants to complain about "advertising" that I supposedly didn't pay for, that's pretty silly. If there was ever a hint that I would have had to pay anything I certainly wouldn't have, when most of the people posting there could see the same info here anyway.
If you think nobody criticizes me (or Paul Begg and so forth) about what we do or don't print in our publications and how we handle ourselves, well, let me just assure you that you're wrong on that point.
And as far as if I would let people post on my site putting down Ripper Notes, it depends upon what the site was supposed to be. If it was solely a promotional site, like the one I have now, then, no. Nobody posts on www.RipperNotes.com but me right now. If it were supposed to be for anyone to talk about whatever they want in the field, and someone posted why they didn't like such and such about my magazine, hey, that's fine. I don't expect everybody to like everything about it. I'm more of the opinion that feedback is good, it keeps me on my toes and helps me improve things.
So you know I'm not just saying that, I do run a message board on my mythology site. People can post there and disagree with me. Just today someone claimed my site and my upcoming book promotes occultism and was damaging to kids. The post is still there. I just replied that I disagree strongly and think it's healthy for kids. I regularly have Jungians and Walkerians post about their theories, which are drastically different from mine. Half the time I don't even react in any way, the other half of the time I'll say why I disagree. I figure it's better to attract new posters than to run them off and better to have more conversations than fewer.
Regarding posts being removed at JTRForums, it's simply untrue that only ones the poster asked to be removed have been removed. Some recent posts were removed because the banned person wanted them to be, but I've seen many more disappear. When Tom Wescott went through and pointed out why Ivor's list of "myths" about the case includes factual errors, pow, they disappeared (and he did too for a while). Jennifer Pegg had some posts disappear this week. I've had plenty of mine disappear, some recently, but some over the past year too. And I don't get how you can claim that nobody's posts were removed for disagreeing with Ivor and then admit a couple paragraphs later that Stan's posts were removed and he was banned for apparently exactly that reason. What the heck?
Well, whatever. Apparently I have been banned, not just that my "advertising" was erased, because when I try to sign in I'm not even allowed to see any posts (even guests can do that!). I'm also told I'm not an active user, which in message board configuration speak means my account is, in fact, banned.
No skin off my teeth, but certainly not a ringing endorsement for their supposed fairness.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Profile Email Dissertations Website
|
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 870
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 7:47 am: |
|
Hey..anyone watching the Royal Wedding? No..probably not. Anyway. I like the hats. I wish more people wore hats. Maybe I will start to wear hats. Wonder if there is a buyahat.com site?
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3364
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 9:46 am: |
|
I love hats, and I sometimes wear them.
I wish people would start to wear more hats too, especially men -- could be a nice change to those awful, silly baseball caps everyone is running around with these days, which makes a man look like a child of 13.
Hats rule.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 356
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 9:52 am: |
|
Ally,
I'm sure that hats are making a valiant comeback and I am happy to be at the forefront of that movement.
Go for it, especially now that summer is coming.
Your pale friend, Maria
Mags
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4364
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 10:51 am: |
|
Glenn
Swedish Air Force green winter hat with earflaps.
courtesy http://www.tridentmilitary.com/Helmets.htm
Robert |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3365
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 10:59 am: |
|
Robert,
Hmmmm... 
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 871
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 11:03 am: |
|
Now I thought the hat that Camilla wore to the civil ceremony was just smashing but the feather bit for the blessing looked terrible. Perhaps the color picked up the embroidered bits in her dress (on TV you really couldn't tell) but I thought the color clashed horribly with her silvery dress (which I thought looked very cool). Anyhoo..I have decided to go buy a hat. A nice straw job I think. Sans feathers.
I bet D'Onston wore hats. I wonder if when he worked the invisibility spell he had to be nekkid or did his clothes go invisible too. If his clothes went invisible, did that extend to his hat? What happened if the hat fell off during the attack? Did it stay invisible? If it stayed invisible, maybe there is an invisible hat out there somewhere.
Things that make me go hmmmmmmmm....
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4365
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 11:08 am: |
|
Ally, there is indeed an invisible hat and here is a picture of it :
Robert |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2091
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 12:02 pm: |
|
Anyway,
I hear Princess Cam looked lovely
Jenni
ps nah! forget it!
"All you need is positivity"
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4366
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 12:13 pm: |
|
She looked lovely? It really was a fairy tale wedding, then....
Robert |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3366
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 1:22 pm: |
|
Robert,
OUCH!
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2303
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 1:24 pm: |
|
I LOVED that hat thing!!!!!! Looked VERY 'CERES' verrrrry roman godess thought she looked great! SHAME ABOUT THE HUSBAND THO!!!!!
Suzix |
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 332
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 1:38 pm: |
|
"could be a nice change to those awful, silly baseball caps everyone is running around with these days, which makes a man look like a child of 13. "
Glenn, I think the moderator must have altered your post, because the part about 'with the exception, of course, of New York Yankee caps, which are a world wide sign of intellectual maturity and sexual virility ' appears to have been snipped.
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3367
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 1:45 pm: |
|
Sir Robert,
Hahaha. Good one.
All the best
(P.S. Besides, I wouldn't know; I am as interested in sports as I am in getting my my back waxed.)
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 357
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 2:03 pm: |
|
How right you are, Sir Robert, although I thought men didn't like to talk about getting snipped.
Mags
|
Lindsey Millar
Inspector
Username: Lindsey
Post Number: 374
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 9:58 pm: |
|
P.S. Besides, I wouldn't know; I am as interested in sports as I am in getting my my back waxed.
...Trying to fight off that vision, Glenn
Love,
Lyn
"When a man grows tired of London, he grows tired of life" (or summat like that)
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2305
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 10, 2005 - 6:27 am: |
|
GOD GLENN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cant shake that image either!!!!! CRIKEY!!!!!!!!!!!!
You Swedes know how to live!!!!!!!!!!
Eeeeeek
Suzi x |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4367
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 10, 2005 - 6:32 am: |
|
"...getting my back waxed."
Glenn, that's a funny place to have a moustache.
Robert |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3371
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 10, 2005 - 7:31 am: |
|
Robert,
I use it as an area for practice and experiments.
My oh my, did the thread get lost here or what?
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on April 10, 2005)
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 358
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, April 10, 2005 - 10:26 am: |
|
Wasn't that the point,then?
Camilla's daughter looked like a dead tree fell on her head.
Mags
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2310
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 10, 2005 - 5:14 pm: |
|
Glenn
Still an image to be dealy with you old smoothie!!!!!!!! Anyway R D'O must be turning in his whatever at what this thread's turning into!!!!!!!!
LOL
Suzix |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2311
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 10, 2005 - 5:16 pm: |
|
Or dealt with even................. anyway where were we ????
Suzi x
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3375
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 10, 2005 - 5:48 pm: |
|
Suzi,
"................. anyway where were we ????"
Where the D'Onston theory belongs: in the dustbin.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Lindsey Millar
Inspector
Username: Lindsey
Post Number: 378
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, April 10, 2005 - 7:11 pm: |
|
"................. anyway where were we ????"
Where the D'Onston theory belongs: in the dustbin.
Ooohh, Glenn.. cutting words, my friend!
Might I just add my 'amen' to that?
Lyn
"When a man grows tired of London, he grows tired of life" (or summat like that)
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2315
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2005 - 9:52 am: |
|
He he! Lets make it disappear then....Izzy Wizzy * Taken from a little seen Ripper Letter Sooty the Ripper............AH! NOW you're talking!!!!!......
Suzixxxxxxxxxx (Soo) |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1590
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2005 - 12:29 pm: |
|
D'onston theory in the dustbin?
Forgive them...for they do not know....
Monty
I'm funny how, I mean funny, like I'm a clown? I amuse you. I make you laugh? I'm here to f**kin' amuse you? Whattya you mean funny? Funny how? How am I funny?
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2097
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2005 - 12:31 pm: |
|
Was that the most offensive thing about it?
lots of things belong in the dustbin, i dont know if the donston theorys one of them!
(Message edited by jdpegg on April 11, 2005)
"All you need is positivity"
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3380
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2005 - 1:57 pm: |
|
As far as I am concerned, it certainly does, Jen.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2317
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2005 - 5:56 pm: |
|
He He....HE was a bit of fun and got us all going while it (he!) lasted tho 'eh?
Suzix |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2318
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2005 - 6:00 pm: |
|
 DONT belive what you read in the papers eh......................
Suzixxxx |
J.Smith
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, July 31, 2005 - 10:49 am: |
|
HOWARD BROWN
I am just knew and learning slowly about this case. There is one thing I am keen to know about RDS. In his suspect file, it only briefly touches on the subject of him being involved in black magic and rituals. Not having read his book yet, could you please tell me exactly what black magic and occult he practised. Was it related to Satanism or freemasonry or similar?
Greatful for any help. Thanks Jason. |
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 768
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 03, 2005 - 7:20 pm: |
|
Hello Jason...
Stephenson met with Sir Edward Bulwer/Lytton,when Stephenson [ RDS ] was 19 years old in London...in early 1860.
According to material that was in the book, The True Face of JTR, RDS was initiated as a "neophyte" or newcomer, to the Hermetic Lodge of Alexandria.
Stephenson was also aware of the occult teachings of Eliphaz Levi, who wrote the Dogme et Rituel de la haute magic [ dogma and ritual of the high magic,in English ]and mentions Levi in a letter RDS sent to the Pall Mall Gazette on December 1st,where he offers an explanation for the second word [ commonly accepted as "Juwes" ] being misinterpreted as "Juives", indicating a French hand behind the Goulston Street Graffiti.
The only problem is that "Juives" in French means "Jews" in a feminine sense and is not genderless.
As to your original question, RDS appears to have been well versed in a wide variety of occult practices, from the African continent and beyond. In case you didn't know,he wrote a few articles on his experiences in Africa,ostensibly witnessing "black magic" being practiced on a trip to the Cameroons,West Africa.
As to whether the possibility RDS,assuming he could have been the Ripper, used a specific ritual,thats a good question.
Hope some of this helps....
(Message edited by howard on August 03, 2005) |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page