Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Historical Xmas present

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    To me the message reads as if it could be written by a Jew lashing out against the world for what he sees as perceived injustices against his people. And as if he is going to or gone and done something about it. Just my two pence worth.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
      To me the message reads as if it could be written by a Jew lashing out against the world for what he sees as perceived injustices against his people. And as if he is going to or gone and done something about it. Just my two pence worth.
      Why didn't he spell Jew correctly?
      Michael Richards

      Comment


      • #33
        [QUOTE=Patrick S;403727]

        Why would I be happy or unhappy? What are my thoughts on the matter? I'm not sure I've given them here. So, fill me in. Do you have some data from the historical sources that reveal what I'll think about it?
        It is a negation: "I do not expect"...So it says nothing about if I do actually think that you will be happy or unhappy. It is not a positive statement.

        You have no interest in promos or commercials....but you "want this to be a special event".....so you post a promo for it.
        You do not respect what I say here but you make your own definition. That does not change what I say. It only shows that you do not respect it.

        Okay. Well, the historical sources tell me that I am flat our breathless with anticipation, thanks to all the promoting you've done for your 'special event'!
        How interesting for you.

        Regards, Pierre

        Comment


        • #34
          I must say, I think there is a remarkable lack of Christmas spirit in this thread from posters towards the amazingly generous offer made by Pierre to share his opinion as to the meaning of the writing on the wall in the form of a special Christmas gift.

          One only has to cast one's mind back one year ago to 23 December 2015 when Pierre graciously shared his remarkable discovery that three days prior to the murder of Mary Jane Kelly, Jack the Ripper "wrote a letter to the editor in a paper not signing it “Jack the Ripper” where he gave the exact address to one of the murder sites". But there was more to it than even this. As Pierre had told us on 13 November 2015, a little over a month before the big reveal (after stating that 'letters predicting murder could have been written by the murderer'):

          'I have found such a letter (unknown by ripperology) in the press. He uses a metaphorical language and gives the address to Miller's Court, the name of Mary Jane Kelly, her room number and the date of the murder.'

          As I say, it was on 23 December that he posted the full text of this letter which turned out to be signed "Gogmagog".

          Now it's fair to say that things did not go so well for Pierre and that by close of business on 24 December the notion that 'Gogmagog' was Jack the Ripper, who had given the name and address of Mary Jane Kelly and date of her murder, lay in tatters.

          Yes, sadly, it didn't even survive to Christmas Day let alone Boxing Day (when many presents are destroyed).

          Whereas Pierre had told us on 13 November that this source was one with 'a low or medium high validity' (i.e. either rubbish or pretty amazing) it had, by the end of Christmas Eve, turned into a source with 'a very low validity'.

          Now, I can't promise that Pierre's official present from this year will be as good as the unofficial present he gave us last year in the form of the Gogmagog letter but his reputation precedes him and I for one feel sure he will live up to the standard which he set last Christmas.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by David Orsam View Post
            I must say, I think there is a remarkable lack of Christmas spirit in this thread from posters towards the amazingly generous offer made by Pierre to share his opinion as to the meaning of the writing on the wall in the form of a special Christmas gift.

            One only has to cast one's mind back one year ago to 23 December 2015 when Pierre graciously shared his remarkable discovery that three days prior to the murder of Mary Jane Kelly, Jack the Ripper "wrote a letter to the editor in a paper not signing it “Jack the Ripper” where he gave the exact address to one of the murder sites". But there was more to it than even this. As Pierre had told us on 13 November 2015, a little over a month before the big reveal (after stating that 'letters predicting murder could have been written by the murderer'):

            'I have found such a letter (unknown by ripperology) in the press. He uses a metaphorical language and gives the address to Miller's Court, the name of Mary Jane Kelly, her room number and the date of the murder.'

            As I say, it was on 23 December that he posted the full text of this letter which turned out to be signed "Gogmagog".

            Now it's fair to say that things did not go so well for Pierre and that by close of business on 24 December the notion that 'Gogmagog' was Jack the Ripper, who had given the name and address of Mary Jane Kelly and date of her murder, lay in tatters.

            Yes, sadly, it didn't even survive to Christmas Day let alone Boxing Day (when many presents are destroyed).

            Whereas Pierre had told us on 13 November that this source was one with 'a low or medium high validity' (i.e. either rubbish or pretty amazing) it had, by the end of Christmas Eve, turned into a source with 'a very low validity'.

            Now, I can't promise that Pierre's official present from this year will be as good as the unofficial present he gave us last year in the form of the Gogmagog letter but his reputation precedes him and I for one feel sure he will live up to the standard which he set last Christmas.
            It is not an item in a newspaper.

            Comment


            • #36
              I would like to add that I do hope that Pierre's present this year will not be an item in a newspaper.

              But he's such a tease he will probably never let us know if it is or isn't until Christmas.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Mayerling View Post
                \
                Hi Pierre,

                I suspect what you mean is a kind of "side-step" effect. Like cops are chasing somebody, pick up a clue (say that apron portion) and a bystander is asked, "Did you happen to see anyone dropped this?", and answers, "Yes, I saw a small man, in a hurry, wearing a trilby hat and he ran north up that block there!" Then, whenever the clue is discussed, it is referred to as "the trilby-hatted man" clue, after what the alleged witness to the running man said he saw. But we don't know if that "witness" was lying or not, nor why he or she said it. The dropped item (or written item) is interesting, but it is the possibility of someone on hand watching and passing it along that concerns us. Something like that?

                Jeff
                Hi Jeff,

                No, that is not the type of source or content. It is an identificatory source with specific data which is coherent with data in the case of the Whitechapel murders. It gives a specific ID, it is also coherent with the motive, and it also contains an important statement that confirms the meaning of the GSG. It also contains false statements and the false statements are explained by the data from the night of the double event and the whole case.

                Regards, Pierre

                Comment


                • #38
                  The other thing I hope for in Pierre's present for this year is that it will contain some false statements.

                  I do wonder if Santa will bring me such an extraordinary gift.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                    Why didn't he spell Jew correctly?
                    We are not 100% sure over what it said [ different people gave different sentences ] so perhaps the same can be said for the spelling.
                    Another explanation is that the writer could have been under the influence of alcohol at the time say and just spelt it wrong, adrenalin flowing and rushing, if it was the killer. My mind can go blank sometimes when i am writing in my diary on how to spell a simple word you have spelt correctly a thousand times before.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                      Why didn't he spell Jew correctly?
                      The good schoolboy didn´t spell "Jew" correctly.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Is no-one in this thread aware that the word was "Judges"?

                        I'm not sure anyone deserves a Christmas present this year to be honest.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by David Orsam View Post
                          Is no-one in this thread aware that the word was "Judges"?

                          I'm not sure anyone deserves a Christmas present this year to be honest.
                          I think everyone deserves it. Even you, David.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Pierre View Post
                            Hi Patrick,

                            it is not a "commercial" or a "promo". I have no interest in such things.

                            It is a source which is important for the case. Therefore, being able to give part of the content in this source to you is important. And therefore I also want this to be a special event.

                            I do not expect you to be happy when you get it and I do not expect everyone to understand it.

                            Regards, Pierre
                            A special event? Just out of interest, are we allowed to opt out of this momentous occasion?
                            Last edited by John G; 12-20-2016, 02:17 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by John G View Post
                              A special event? Just out of interest, are we allowed to opt out of this momentous occasion?
                              No more than one might opt of the rapture, I think.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
                                We are not 100% sure over what it said [ different people gave different sentences ] so perhaps the same can be said for the spelling.
                                Another explanation is that the writer could have been under the influence of alcohol at the time say and just spelt it wrong, adrenalin flowing and rushing, if it was the killer. My mind can go blank sometimes when i am writing in my diary on how to spell a simple word you have spelt correctly a thousand times before.
                                In no recorded version is Jew spelled correctly Darryl. I don't believe that if the police thought it supportive of Jews that they would order the erasure so quickly.
                                Michael Richards

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X