On The Trail Of The Forgers

[The Good Michael]

PS: I think the Diary is 100% genuine and that Maybrick done it.

Graham,

I am giving you the benefit of the doubt here and deciding that you tried a concise version of a sentence. I think you meant: I think the Diary is 100% genuine as a modern forgery, and that Maybrick done it (it meaning: had sex).

Is this correct? I feel my leg being pulled so much that I can only walk on sloped ground with the same leg always elevated.

Mike

[Victoria]

Yes Graham, it worked in my case .. but unfortunately no
summer slumbers here to be out lazing in the sun, enjoy it while
you can, you lot over there .. you know it won't last long!

It's grey, drizzly and cold here, only 16%, reminds me of London,
this is winter here .. and also good for slumbers.

cheers also,
Victoria

ps. How about Steven Park?

[Graham]

Hi Victoria,

I only wrote that to try and rouse people out of their summer slumbers! Worked in your case!

James Maybrick most definitely wasn't the author of the Diary. His brother wrote it....no, stop it, Graham.

Cheers,

G

[Victoria]

Hi Graham,

The lengths that some people will go to just to get
a response ...

nobody here believes .. that you believe, what you just
wrote .. "I think the Diary is 100% genuine and that Maybrick
done it."

We all know that you know, like the rest of us, that there is
no way in hell .. that the diary is genuine.
Anyone that thinks that, is crazy.

Maybe you are feeling a little responsible for 'encouraging'
downonwhores to post here for answers.
I think Maria is around, not sure about our experts .. Caz and
Omlor though.

Hi downonwhores,

the post that you wrote on that other thread, if you had repeated
that here .. you would probably have got all the answers ..
because this is the pub where the experts on that subject, often
call in for refreshment and 'a good time'.

Victoria

[Graham]

Quiet on this thread these days, isn't it?

Are Omlor and Maria on holiday, or what?

Graham

PS: I think the Diary is 100% genuine and that Maybrick done it.

[downonwhores]

Diary

Hey everybody,

Hope u are having a good time. I know that the Diary itself repeats alot of the newspaper mistakes like the "farthings" incidient but is there any source or website that "really" investigates the authenticity of the diary and points out all the mistakes. Most books I read maybe have 1 paragraph or 2. I would like a detailed analysis? Any pointers?

[dougie]

The embossed membership cards are in the mail?

[Victoria]

All you need is Love

Welcome back Caz,

hope you had a good holiday, and you obviously did
not forget us all here.
Thank you for this mornings entertainment, a nice start
to the day.

As a now 'certified' member of the Omlor fan club, I feel
it is ok to rewrite two of his quotes from yesterday, in
case any other would be members missed them.

"good and true men and women shall gather in the spirit of
circular craziness that is our wont ..."

"Here at Diary World we love all you people. Honestly, we do.
Even those with whom we fight and argue, even those we don't love,
we really love. Our lives would be just a bit emptier without you."

That last one reminds me of the Beatles, 'All you need is Love'

love to all,
Victoria

[Omlor]

"Well I'm back folks and I can see that Omlor now has at least three impressed fans (or should that be impressionable?): Maria, Victoria and Dougie, no less.
Wow.
Not bad going at all after only a few years."

As an opening to a post, the pettiness of this is not just remarkable but also, historically speaking, sadly typical. It is just the sort of comment that typifies Diary World and all that is a sad joke here.

The last bit of the post, addressed to me, is similarly goofy. It needs only a brief remark or two in response.

I'm certainly not going to rehash the whole McCrone fiasco yet again. Later, if it matters, when another testing process did reach the point of discussing prices I made it clear that I was willing to pay 100% of the costs.

But the raising of the issue here is fascinating. Why such a question is asked by Keith in response to a simple e-mail asking him about his public claim to have secret evidence concerning the diary's origins remains a mystery. However, it is a perfect example of just how discussions around here so often work. I send Keith an email asking three or four simple, direct questions. Not only are they not answered, but instead you get talk of everything else -- past e-mail histories from years ago having nothing to do with that evidence, questions about finances for tests that never took place and all the rest -- a boatload of irrelevancies that all serve only to muddy up the fact that, as everyone who reads the exchange can still see, the questions asked were simply not answered.

Then, of course, we get more vague warnings from Caroline about the alleged "ongoing investigation" (my, how the years do pass) being somehow "compromised" if anyone were even to dare to breathe a word of even why no one should breathe a word.

It's enough to make even the most jaded secret agent cackle, amused at the pompous self-importance and the melodramatic language of whispered catastrophe.

Honestly, sometimes the lengths people go here to defend all the secrecy (while at the same time blabbing in public and online about the alleged secret goods anyway) is staggering.

It's a strange game. It's been going on for over a decade.

I doubt it is going to end any time soon.

Never surprised,

--John

[caz]

Well I'm back folks and I can see that Omlor now has at least three impressed fans (or should that be impressionable?): Maria, Victoria and Dougie, no less.

Wow.

Not bad going at all after only a few years.

Caz,

Does Keith say precisely when he came by the information he claims links the Diary to Battlecrease? Maybe this has been stated on these boards in the past, but if so I missed it.

Cheers,

Graham

Hi Graham,

No, this would not have been stated on the boards and Keith has not said publicly when he came by his Battlecrease information.

Victoria:

The trouble with this, is that at the time of the Liverpool trial, Keith claimed to have incontrovertible evidence which proved that the diary came from Battlecrease.

Now he says that its " an ongoing investigation " so one statement contradicts the other completely.

Keith is now saying he doesn´t have the evidence which proves the diary came from Battlecrease and just like I thought, that evidence does not exist.

Maria

Maria,

Firstly it would help if you didn't keep making up new versions of what you think Keith said each time you post.

Secondly, proof that the diary came from Battlecrease would not, in any way, shape or form stop this investigation from being an 'ongoing' one. The investigation is ongoing all the while the creator(s) of the diary and watch remain unidentified, and all the while no dates have been established for their creation. Why is this so hard for a modern hoax believer like yourself to grasp? Why do you keep equating the diary coming out of Battlecrease with 'game over'?

PS: "secret oath of silence" -- I like that phrase, it sounds so dramatic. Maria, I suspect Keith is saying he has the evidence but he just won't tell us what it is (despite already having told everyone what it says) because that would somehow "compromise" other parts of the so-called "ongoing investigation" (which has now been "ongoing" for more than a decade). It's a vague, oddly charming, and apparently endless way of talking about all of this that, like politician-speak, offers words but tells us nothing.

Maybe Steve Powell's Thespian bent is rubbing off on Victoria.

Omlor,

Your last sentence here is interesting in view of what you put in your own words before deciding to do precisely what Keith suggested, and copying and pasting the recent email exchange you had with him - a simple act that hardly kills any time at all, but at least offers everyone the opportunity to read what was actually said by both parties.

By the way, I notice you still dodge the questions about how much you were prepared to invest in the event that McCrone had come up with a testing proposal, and what percentage of the total cost that might have been. While I imagine that someone could be compromised if you responded openly and honestly, your failure to respond at all could leave the impression that you had no clue how much McCrone might have charged for their services, or they gave you a very good clue, which gave you cold feet about two minutes into proceedings.

While we are on the subject of diary testing awareness in general, why are you still in total denial concerning Dr Platt? Anyone would think you were blissfully unaware that he was invited to test the diary and it was agreed beforehand that his findings would be published.

One thing that really does surprise me is that you have such trouble with the concept of a live investigation being compromised by revealing too much information to the public too soon - or indeed by explaining precisely why the investigation would be compromised. Have you no imagination at all, beyond your 100% certainty that the truth has to involve hoaxers working after 1987?

What's done cannot be undone, and that applies as much to where the diary came from as it does to what Keith said about it at the trial.

It's a pity you display no curiosity about the former while remaining preoccupied with the latter to the point of obsession.

Love,

Caz
X

[dougie]

Although I freely admit I know almost nothing about the Diary or its provenance or authenticity (or non-authenticity),apart from reading the first chapter some years ago,I really cant help wondering why someone would inform others about the secret details they possess,and then not divulge those secrets.I mean why bring it up in the first place if its such a secret? if no-one is going to be allowed into the "inner sanctum", then it seems pretty pointless to me.Is it merely another example of the "I know something that you dont" syndrome...or what?
Having said that Im glad the "nuts havent been harvested" cos its such an entertaining thread....I particularly like Omlors dry sense of humour.....it doesnt seem to go down well with some here,but Ive enjoyed it.....for some strange reason,of late I keep finding myself humming that old song "here we go gathering nuts in may- nuts in may-nuts in may"....cant think why.

[Victoria]

Happy DITA Day ..

to all of us .. nuts and squirrels alike!

very enjoyable reading John, I thank you for the 'history' lesson of
this most important and prestigous event.

So many good bits .. here are just a couple that I especially liked ..

"good and true men and women shall gather in the spirit of circular
craziness that is our wont ..."

"Here at Diary World we love all you people. Honestly, we do. Even those
with whom we fight and argue, even those we don't love, we really love.
Our lives would be just a bit emptier without you."

"DITA Day incidentally, is proudly sponsored by Guinness"

Maybe some of those chestnuts that dougie suggested, would go
down well with the Guinness.

Enjoy your day everyone ..

Victoria
ps. It is a shame Caz is away on holiday, and missing the celebrations,
hopefully she will remember the day, and it will bring a smile to her face.

[Omlor]

Indeed. This place has long abounded in squirrels and nuts.

Perhaps that explains why so many little kernels of alleged knowledge and "investigation" are forever kept hidden, secreted away for a season that, as we can see by the passing of DITA Day after DITA day, never actually arrives.

Here's to a great sixth year,

--John

[steje73]

Of course there are loads of squirrels. Diary World is where all the nuts are.

[dougie]

A rousing chorus of "Auld lang syne" might be in order here...followed by a feast of chestnuts..or whatever it is squirrels eat.