The meaning of the GSG wording

[moonbegger]

Hello,Hello,Hello

Before the infamous message .. there are a few words that i would like to draw your attention to ( 1 ) Mettle { courage , spirit } (2) Bled { draw blood / obtain money by extortion . (3) Jah-Bul-On { Freemason god of the highest degree } .

The message scrawled on the wall above Catherine Eddows blood soaked apron read ..

[ The Juwes are not the men that will be blamed for nothing ]

( the movable [ Not ] makes no difference )

Using the same 46 letters , just re-aranging them , this interesting anagram rears it's head ....

[ Jah Bu Lon , mettle within Freemason gent , that bled Whore ]

Happy days

moonbegger.

[The Good Michael]

Monty,

You see, there is the fantasy world of Ripperology that we all live in, and then there's the reality world of Ripperology that includes sailors and giant tampons and wandering organ thieves that only a few live in.

Mike

[Monty]

Because many are living in the fantasy world of ripperology and they cant escape.

The irony.

Monty

[Trevor Marriott]

And so it goes, on and on, ad infinitum. The solution was already presented some ago. Why do posters persist on creating fantasy scenarios time after time again?

Because many are living in the fantasy world of ripperology and they cant escape.

[Stephen Thomas]

And so it goes, on and on, ad infinitum. The solution was already presented some ago.

I must have missed that, Scott

What was the solution?

[SarahLee]

The solution was already presented some ago.

Really?
And this is genuinely not intended to be sarcastic.
At this remove in time, I'd say that it's impossible to absolutely, categorically come to a solution - all we're left with is possibilities and the ability to reason about which of them is the most probable. And even that is coloured by personal views about who the likely killer is and what his possible motives may have been.

You have piqued my curiosity though Scott as to which of the possible solutions you feel is most likely and why you're so sure of it.

Why do posters persist on creating fantasy scenarios time after time again?

Well, if we're talking about motive, by the very nature of that debate we're already well into the realms of fantasy and speculation. I can't speak for all posters, but personally and as somebody new to this I find it interesting to examine possible interpretations and follow them through to see where they may take me. Even if it's one that I don't necessarily believe in it's a useful mental exercise to throw it about and see what possible scenarios fall out. If the end result can then be dismissed in my mind, I'm at least one step closer to forming my own opinion.

Of course, those who have already formed their own conclusions are under no obligation to play along.

[Scott Nelson]

And so it goes, on and on, ad infinitum. The solution was already presented some ago. Why do posters persist on creating fantasy scenarios time after time again?

[SarahLee]

Of course that's, by it's nature, a pretty speculative post Sarah...but I really do like the originality behind the imagined conversation...

Dave

Absolutely pure fantasy Dave, and only to be taken with a large pinch of salt. The strange inclusion of the men that in the sentence is interesting and IMO does imply denial / a personal comparison . . . so if we believe that the killer wrote it, it's a reasonable speculation to make.

Outside of the constraints of this thread, I don't think it's a route that I would ever go down though - I just felt like playing with those words tonight and seeing where it took me.

[Cogidubnus]

Of course that's, by it's nature, a pretty speculative post Sarah...but I really do like the originality behind the imagined conversation...

Personally, I don't think the killer wrote the graffiti

No, nor do I...

Dave

[SarahLee]

Thank you for the welcome, Bridewell.

It was interesting because that is an integral part of the question. Who would be doing the blaming.

Welcome from me too fireskin. I agree that is a very interesting question and one that I've not considered. Perhaps by the reasoning above, there is a very specific person blaming him for something that he believes the Jews are at fault for.

I think it's dangerous to infer anything beyond what I've already said, but to take this to its final conclusion let's carry on playing with possibilities. A reasonable step from the above is that our writer/killer is somebody who has himself been accused (often enough to ingrain it in his mind) of failing to take responsibility for things. Based on possible interpretations, perhaps of not living up to his duties as a husband or provider and not furnishing a suitable standard of living.

"It's your fault that we're in this mess. Why can't you get out and earn more? Do better for us?"
"But I'm trying I really am. I can't help it. The Jews . . . "
"Yeah, yeah there's always an excuse isn't there? You're the perfect man and you're not to be blamed for anything."


And there I think I'll stop with that particular fantasy !!!
Personally, I don't think the killer wrote the graffiti, but if we were to assume that he did I wonder if that sort of argument, repeated over and over again could push someone over the edge and drive him to act out his hatred and aggression elsewhere.

[SarahLee]

OK - I'm going to have another play with this :

1) Meaning

No matter how many times I read this or think about it, the way I read it always comes back to Abby's option 3

"The killer was not Jewish-means-The Jews will not take the blame for anything. I read somwhere(can't remember where) that a language expert on the times says that this is probably the most accurate way to interpret it."

The Jews will not be blamed for anything / the Jews will not take responsibility for anything.
I'm not sure that it necessarily means that the writer was NOT Jewish. That would be the most likely inference, but I don't think we can absolutely, categorically say that he was not . . . but for now, let's make that assumption.


2) Interpretation

Taking the hypothesis above, the writer feels that the Jews are to blame for something that they will not take responsibility for. Abiding by the rules of the thread and assuming that the killer wrote it, possible interpretations that come to mind :

> Given that it's not unusual in times of economic hardship for immigrants, foreigners or ethnic minorities to be blamed for the situation, the killer blames the Jews for the social inequalities of the time and for putting so many unfortunates on the streets and in his path. (putting temptation in his way)

> As above, but he blames the Jews for bringing about the hardships that have put him in his own social situation - perhaps having to mix with what he perceives as the dregs of society who he resents and wants to be rid of.

> Or perhaps it's more personal than that, and he blames the Jews for his own inability to find work, to maintain his business, progress in his chosen profession or perhaps he has specifically lost a job to a Jew. Perhaps this would lead to frustration and resentment that he's taking out on anyone more vulnerable than himself.


3) The strange syntax

The most interesting part of the phrase IMO and far more interesting than the double negative.

"The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed for nothing"

Surely, it would have been far simpler just to write "The Juwes won't be blamed for nothing".
To me, the emphasis on "they're the men" implies a degree of denial and a comparison to himself. "It's not me, they're the ones who won't take responsibility for anything".

[fireskin]

Hi, Fireskin,

Welcome to the Boards.

An interesting thought from your Jewish friend. I don't recall seeing the matter of who the Jew(s) would be blamed by debated before.

Regards, Bridewell.

Thank you for the welcome, Bridewell.

It was interesting because that is an integral part of the question. Who would be doing the blaming.

[Bridewell]

Interesting

Heh.. and I'm surprised so many people here didn't get the reference to Young Frankenstein. (but then, I haven't read the ENTIRE thread yet... )


To the question, I was debating this with a Jewish friend of mine as I'm writing my screenplay.

His take was that it meant, the Jews would be blamed for nothing by God. That he felt he hadn't done anything wrong in killing these women.

An interesting perspective.

Hi, Fireskin,

Welcome to the Boards.

An interesting thought from your Jewish friend. I don't recall seeing the matter of who the Jew(s) would be blamed by debated before.

Regards, Bridewell.

[fireskin]

I am flattered that so many people thought I was female.

Heh.. and I'm surprised so many people here didn't get the reference to Young Frankenstein. (but then, I haven't read the ENTIRE thread yet... )


To the question, I was debating this with a Jewish friend of mine as I'm writing my screenplay.

His take was that it meant, the Jews would be blamed for nothing by God. That he felt he hadn't done anything wrong in killing these women.

An interesting perspective.

[Debra A]

The article is about the Pinchin Street murder, but I can't tell if this is a reference to Pinchin or a previous discovery.

Regards, Bridewell.

Hi Bridewell,
It's a reference to the Elizabeth Jackson murder of June 1889.
...Although Trev will try and convince you otherwise.