Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

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

  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by miakaal4 View Post
    Well I personally do not believe a Nut would bother arranging bits of guts and making neat little piles of things. Of course the Freemasons would admit they were involved if asked! After all, they are nice blokes. Who are still assisting and hiding "brothers" no doubt. I have never heard of Osram and I do not believe every theory I read. But when I read an account of anything to do with JtR, sooner or later it's, "if, possibly, could of, maybe, etc.that.is not history that is story telling. Robinson told his story, bits are very good, but the truth is still out there and despite what this board say s, I am investigating a connection between the murders, the masons/golden dawn and any other weird brotherhood. Because one thing I am convinced of is that the murders were ritualistic.
    Serial killers don’t exactly act like normal people because they aren’t normal people. How do you know what a killer would or wouldn’t do?

    Your “after all they are nice blokes..” is certainly suggestive of an assumption that they aren’t which is a generalisation which has no basis in fact. Due to the level of secrecy involved in Freemasonry they are meat and drink to conspiracy theorists.

    Obviously you’re free to follow any line of research that you choose. We’ve had this kind of theorising before. The Knight story was shown to be nonsense. Edwards book on Black Magic Ritual was drivel. I read an ebook this year on the subject which was awful. The problem is that when no one takes these fantasies seriously the proposer starts talking about “closed minds.” Yes, I’ll freely confess, my mind is closed to baseless, evidence-free fairy stories.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by miakaal4 View Post
    Tom your title request still has not been fulfilled could I add, give a reasonable motivation the the diary (and the watch) being forgeries.? Why were they forged.
    title request was filled a long time ago. its not in maybricks hand. end of. anyone who dosnt acknowledge is either delusional or has alterior motives.

    i see the responses coming now... he disguised his handwriting. lol yeah right in a personal diary.

    why were they forged? seriously. ummm monetary gain?

    Leave a comment:


  • miakaal4
    replied
    Tom your title request still has not been fulfilled could I add, give a reasonable motivation the the diary (and the watch) being forgeries.? Why were they forged.
    Last edited by miakaal4; 08-31-2020, 11:57 AM. Reason: Clarify question.

    Leave a comment:


  • miakaal4
    replied
    Well I personally do not believe a Nut would bother arranging bits of guts and making neat little piles of things. Of course the Freemasons would admit they were involved if asked! After all, they are nice blokes. Who are still assisting and hiding "brothers" no doubt. I have never heard of Osram and I do not believe every theory I read. But when I read an account of anything to do with JtR, sooner or later it's, "if, possibly, could of, maybe, etc.that.is not history that is story telling. Robinson told his story, bits are very good, but the truth is still out there and despite what this board say s, I am investigating a connection between the murders, the masons/golden dawn and any other weird brotherhood. Because one thing I am convinced of is that the murders were ritualistic.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by miakaal4 View Post
    I must say I am truly amazed by the knowledge and true detective work above. The phrase didn't exist. Why didn't it exist?
    "Well I read it in some book didn't I". And it can't be a Mason because some other bloke says so. It was just some woman hating nut! Case solved.
    I’m not claiming any great detective work and I admitted that I can’t recall where the information came from (perhaps someone else can help?) But I can certainly recall modern day Freemasons being asked or researchers into Freemasonry and they were adamant that the three had never been referred to as ‘juwes.’ Have you ever seen the word ‘juwes’ used anywhere else.
    Now, as a conspiracy theorist, I’m sure that you will now use the classic CT phrase “well they would say that wouldn’t they?”
    If you claim that a theory is true then the burden of proof is on you. Show us evidence that the word was used by Freemasons (Stephen Knight doesn’t count by the way) Until then we should assume that the word is not Freemasonic.

    What is is wrong with the idea of a ‘woman hating nut?’ It’s pretty much a definition of a serial killer (which is what Jack was)

    . And it can’t be a Mason because some other bloke says so.
    And it can’t be a conspiracy just because a looney like Robinson says so either.
    Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 08-31-2020, 10:16 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • miakaal4
    replied
    I must say I am truly amazed by the knowledge and true detective work above. The phrase didn't exist. Why didn't it exist?
    "Well I read it in some book didn't I". And it can't be a Mason because some other bloke says so. It was just some woman hating nut! Case solved.

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    That could certainly be the case GUT.
    For what it’s worth I just think he may have simply been a gutless b who had a desire to kill. Whilst I think he probably targeted women in particular and prostitutes were an easy target I am still looking if there were any disabled people killed around the right times,

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by GUT View Post

    Not even persuaded by “specifically prostitutes” they were just an easy target is certainly an alternate that is open on the known facts.
    That could certainly be the case GUT.

    Leave a comment:


  • GUT
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    But there couldn’t have been ‘old boy’ gossip about a phrase that didn’t exist in the first place and the piece that Yabs posted isn’t the only time that this has been said. Therefore the only possible reason for the erasure of the graffito was the one stated. To be honest, after reading Robinson’s book when it came out, if he told me JTR was a human being I’d start investigating the wildlife. You can find a conspiracy anywhere if you’re intent on finding one and Robinson certainly was. Even his language shows him to have an ‘all those corrupt posh bastards’ attitude. The ripper was just an unpleasant, deeply disturbed man with an issue with women or specifically prostitutes.
    Not even persuaded by “specifically prostitutes” they were just an easy target is certainly an alternate that is open on the known facts.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by Harry D View Post
    Bruce Robinson's book is hilarious.

    Spends the prologue trashing the reputation of Ripperology.

    Then peddles the same old Masonic twaddle.
    Hello H,

    Hope you’re well?

    Couldnt agree more. He’s basically saying “how can you believe something as ridiculous as Jack The Ripper was just a serial killer when it’s obviously a complex Masonic conspiracy.” Just like the Knight story it’s laughable nonsense. David Orsam did a great job shredding the whole farce on his website. Robinson’s book can sit alongside Knight and Fairclough on the shelf with a sign saying ‘good for a giggle.’

    Leave a comment:


  • Harry D
    replied
    Bruce Robinson's book is hilarious.

    Spends the prologue trashing the reputation of Ripperology.

    Then peddles the same old Masonic twaddle.
    Last edited by Harry D; 08-30-2020, 09:12 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by miakaal4 View Post
    Interesting read. I'm not going to dispute it but I don't think academic work gives enough credence to "old boy" gossip Club chats or upper class boasters. He could have known the term. And it could have even come up in a Club chat. Someone, knowing of his work might have asked about the term or mentioned he had heard it. Warren had it quickly erased when he could easily have cordoned the area until it was photographed. His excuse was futile.
    But there couldn’t have been ‘old boy’ gossip about a phrase that didn’t exist in the first place and the piece that Yabs posted isn’t the only time that this has been said. Therefore the only possible reason for the erasure of the graffito was the one stated. To be honest, after reading Robinson’s book when it came out, if he told me JTR was a human being I’d start investigating the wildlife. You can find a conspiracy anywhere if you’re intent on finding one and Robinson certainly was. Even his language shows him to have an ‘all those corrupt posh bastards’ attitude. The ripper was just an unpleasant, deeply disturbed man with an issue with women or specifically prostitutes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Harry D
    replied
    I see silly season is here again.

    Leave a comment:


  • miakaal4
    replied
    Interesting read. I'm not going to dispute it but I don't think academic work gives enough credence to "old boy" gossip Club chats or upper class boasters. He could have known the term. And it could have even come up in a Club chat. Someone, knowing of his work might have asked about the term or mentioned he had heard it. Warren had it quickly erased when he could easily have cordoned the area until it was photographed. His excuse was futile.

    Leave a comment:


  • Yabs
    replied
    This is an informative read regarding the three ruffians

    https://freemasonry.bcy.ca/ritual/three_ruffians.html

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X