Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

writing on the wall

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

  • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post

    Call me "no-one" if it makes you feel better, but it was in my reply to you in post #196, "the corner of the apron was wet with blood".
    Call me "no-two" then, because I was also talking about wet blood, such as that seeping from a bleeding wound that is likely to become infected and require treatment at an infirmary.
    “Contrariwise,” continued Tweedledee, “if it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”
    If money can't buy happiness, explain motorcycles, malt whisky and pipe tobacco.
    Everybody lies - Greg House MD

    Comment


    • George,
      In answer to your post 197. Maybe.
      Having said that,I do not carry a medical kit when I venture forth,in case I am hit by a car.So maybe he didn't.

      Comment


      • hi
        so if Jack happened to cut himself or perhaps one of the victims as many show also in the newspapers at the time carry weapons, knifes to defend themselves.
        perhaps one cut our Jack back ?
        would he of used there knife also in rage once he has control.
        and took it as trophy.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by c.d. View Post
          Do people generally attempt to remove offending graffiti or do they tend to write a response (usually in the form of a **** you) right next to it?

          c.d.
          How common was graffiti in the East End in 1888? I'm serious about this question. I've studied a lot of photos and not really noticed much which I found quite astonishing. Of course I could be entirely wrong, but to me, this makes somewhat of a difference, at least in my mind, as to whether it was happenstance or if not, very possiby written deliberately by JtR post-murders.

          Comment


          • Common enough to be captured in random photo's.


            https://www.alamy.com/street-urchins...0&searchtype=0

            Graffiti is found as far back as Pompeii, it's been part of an urban society since man could write.
            Regards, Jon S.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
              Common enough to be captured in random photo's.


              https://www.alamy.com/street-urchins...0&searchtype=0

              Graffiti is found as far back as Pompeii, it's been part of an urban society since man could write.
              what grafitti? i dont see any in this pic. and if it was so common, why no police mention that in ref to the gsg?
              "Is all that we see or seem
              but a dream within a dream?"

              -Edgar Allan Poe


              "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
              quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

              -Frederick G. Abberline

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                what grafitti? i dont see any in this pic. and if it was so common, why no police mention that in ref to the gsg?
                Abby, graffiti is anything written or drawn. I'm sure you can see the chalk lines across those bricks.
                Precisely because things are so common, why would they talk about it.
                Regards, Jon S.

                Comment


                • thinking over the graffiti and apron i believe there connected ,
                  obviously local or man who new area very well to choose a residence of jewish mainly people.
                  that s the garden path in the clue, it,s not racism he is implying .
                  and the question why do it, as some have already said.
                  apron so big it could not be missed.
                  it was very deliberate.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post
                    Hi all,


                    The Juewes are not the men that will be blamed for nothing.
                    The Juewes are the men that will not be blamed for nothing.

                    Both are effectively saying that the Jews are to be blamed.
                    'Couldn't disagree more with this. I grew up in a working-class English environment, in a part of the country where old habits die harder than most other parts of the country. A lot of everyday vernacular in this part of the country has survived as the centuries have passed by, to the point that even Old Norse words that sound nothing like English to most other English speaking peoples remain in everyday existence and are spoken by large swathes of the people in this area. The point of saying that is much of the working-class language spoken in London in 1888 may mean little to most English speaking peoples, but that sort of sentence structure remains alive and well in this small part of the country.

                    In my neck of the woods, it remains commonplace to hear: "you're not getting wrong for nothing". Substitute 'wrong' for 'blamed' and it's the same thing. What this statement means is: you are being told off/blamed/getting wrong because your actions deserve it.

                    The former statement means: Jewish people will not accept responsibility for something which they haven't done.

                    The latter statement means: Jewish people are being blamed because they deserve it.

                    The former most likely written by someone who is Jewish; the latter most likely written by someone who is not Jewish.

                    The placing of the word "not" is of huge significance.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by erobitha View Post

                      you will get a sentence that makes sense.
                      Both sentences make perfect sense to someone from a working-class English background.

                      Comment


                      • So ..... Alamy the Ripper
                        My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

                        Comment


                        • going back to my post #84
                          Torah a set of five books
                          behind a veil
                          gods word.

                          conical five
                          apron
                          his written word.

                          graffiti
                          his becoming a god.

                          Comment


                          • perhaps he was standing in that entrance looking at the sky or moon completed in his ascension holdings his hands by his side dripping .

                            perhaps the victim told him "my names NOTHING " loudly & and hence the word in his riddle.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by milchmanuk View Post
                              ...

                              perhaps the victim told him "my names NOTHING " loudly & and hence the word in his riddle.
                              Although it's considered more likely that Eddowes actually gave no response to the question and therefore "nothing" was put down as meaning "she didn't say anything", you are the first time that I've seen anyone make the connection between BOTH Eddowes' response and the graffiti including the same word.

                              It's probably of absolutely no significance at all, but still is interesting.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by DJA View Post
                                So ..... Alamy the Ripper
                                It's a better suggestion than SOME of the ones people have seriously made.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X