Bruce Robinson ' s theory. ..what do we think?

[spyglass]

Hello packers stem,

I know... I was just trying to cut through the rubbish to get to the nitty gritty. The actual websites are kosher.

Like I stated in post No. 22. I don't believe a word of all this for a minute. Havent in 40 years either.. but the point is..bottom line..
IF Grand Lodge of England want to say something about the book... and they might..positive or negative.. then that is the only thing we can accept without documentary proof.

As far as the Juwes connection to the wall writing goes...
it has NOTHING to do with common all garden English Freemasonary.

The links are to Scottish and American Freemason rituals.

And no.. I do not mean the writer was an American or a Scot. LOL :-)


(N.B. Stephen Knight based much of his knowledge of Freemasonary on the American system of ritual, and the Scottish for that matter. )





Phil

Hi,
Still reading it, but the author isn't going down the Stephen Knight route , he also makes it clear that concealing the Ripper was not A Masonic conspiracy, but a conspiracy of her Majesty's executive...A conspiracy of the system.
What is clear is that Mr Robinson has done a huge amount of research into Masonry, and it would seem there was a few trying to push him off course .
He has made it clear that he looks forward to arguing his points with anyone on this subject...so how about getting him on the podcast?

Regards.

[Phil Carter]

Hi,
Still reading it, but the author isn't going down the Stephen Knight route , he also makes it clear that concealing the Ripper was not A Masonic conspiracy, but a conspiracy of her Majesty's executive...A conspiracy of the system.
What is clear is that Mr Robinson has done a huge amount of research into Masonry, and it would seem there was a few trying to push him off course .
He has made it clear that he looks forward to arguing his points with anyone on this subject...so how about getting him on the podcast?

Regards.

Hello spyglass,

I'm sure someone could ask him to do it. The people that produce these things I suppose.




Phil

[jmenges]

I'm sure that the people that produce these things are looking into it.

JM

[Phil Carter]

I'm sure that the people that produce these things are looking into it.

JM

Excellent ☺ Good luck.☺


Phil

[jmenges]

Thanks, Phil.

Fingers crossed.



JM

[spyglass]

I'm sure that the people that produce these things are looking into it.

JM

Let's hope....and soon, I'm sure Mr Robinson v Simon Woods and Paul Begg ( to name two ) would be a very intresting and lively debate.
Are you listening Admin?

Regards.

[jmenges]

Let's hope....and soon, I'm sure Mr Robinson v Simon Woods and Paul Begg ( to name two ) would be a very intresting and lively debate.

We desperately try, and mostly succeed, avoiding a guest versus panelists debate type of discussion. If an interview with Robinson occurs (in my opinion a long shot) it will be with participants who are both very well informed and courteous towards the guest (in no way am I suggesting Simon or Paul would be anything other than respectful). Disagreements and challenges arise of course, but we won't be hammering people over the head with an environment of staunch opposition, as much as some may view that approach to the show as me being a softie.

JM

[spyglass]

We desperately try, and mostly succeed, avoiding a guest versus panelists debate type of discussion. If an interview with Robinson occurs (in my opinion a long shot) it will be with participants who are both very well informed and courteous towards the guest (in no way am I suggesting Simon or Paul would be anything other than respectful). Disagreements and challenges arise of course, but we won't be hammering people over the head with an environment of staunch opposition, as much as some may view that approach to the show as me being a softie.

JM

Hi,
Whatever form it would take, it would be very enjoyable and welcome at least by me.
The only reason I suggested that format was reading an article where Mr Robinson stated he was expecting a backlash from many Ripper Historians and relished the verbal battle..

Regards.

[Shaggyrand]

I'd just like to see Robinson actually discuss with folks who can hold their own. All press I have seen on the book feels disturbingly sycophantic. Many seem completely swayed, at least three outright declared him correct and that all discussion should be put down, because of Robinson himself and not the content of the book.

[John G]

To be perfectly objective, I've read reviews that suggest this book is worth reading as a social history and on account of the extensive amount of research undertaken. Okay, Michael Maybrick doesn't sound like a very plausible candidate, but then not many suspects do. And as I understand it, Keith Skinner, who once acted with Robinson in a film, did much of the research, so it can't be all bad, can it?

[spyglass]

I'd just like to see Robinson actually discuss with folks who can hold their own. All press I have seen on the book feels disturbingly sycophantic. Many seem completely swayed, at least three outright declared him correct and that all discussion should be put down, because of Robinson himself and not the content of the book.

Hi,
I know what you mean, I am really enjoying the book and the style of the author.
I feel he makes some really intresting observations, especially the Millers court scene, including those photos, but not so sure about his suspect.
As this started as a ten pound bet with Keith Skinner, I would be intrested to know if Mr Skinner has payed up.

Regards

[All4One]

Having just read the review in The Times, I think Mr Robinson should stick to writing movies about unemployed actors on holiday in Penrith.

"Don't threaten me with a dead fish!"

[John G]

Just noticed that Bruce Robinson will be discussing his book with Will Self, at St Leonard's Church, Whitechapel, this Wednesday, 14th October. Tickets are apparently available via the Guardian website, £15.

[packers stem]

We desperately try, and mostly succeed, avoiding a guest versus panelists debate type of discussion. If an interview with Robinson occurs (in my opinion a long shot) it will be with participants who are both very well informed and courteous towards the guest (in no way am I suggesting Simon or Paul would be anything other than respectful). Disagreements and challenges arise of course, but we won't be hammering people over the head with an environment of staunch opposition, as much as some may view that approach to the show as me being a softie.

JM

After reading the magazine extracts, someone may have to prepare a bleeper machine for a podcast
Anyhow, just bit the bullet and put an order in... £17

[Shaggyrand]

Just noticed that Bruce Robinson will be discussing his book with Will Self, at St Leonard's Church, Whitechapel, this Wednesday, 14th October. Tickets are apparently available via the Guardian website, £15.

So Robinson's going to get a tongue bath from a writer who has been open in his gushing love and folks can watch that live for only £15? That's a deal! This is my problem, if he's open to discussing his book and challenges to his theory why is it him and a self proclaimed fanboy (think that was in the Independent article on The All Love Jack posted a couple weeks ago, might have been a different link though)?
For a man who claims he wants to actually discuss his theory the kid glove handling and sucking up is getting a bit too nauseating for me. I was going to get it from library instead of paying for it anyway. This approach just makes me feel better about not personally shelling out.