Jack the Ripper was Sir.William Gull hired by the British Royals.

Originally posted by jeasahtheseer
In one of the degree rituals (and not everyone does the rituals the same) Hiram Abif was killed by the The Juwes. I cant rememeber what they respresent at this time.

Anyways, as far as I know thats the only time its uses in masonry. I may be wrong though because I was shot in iraq and have brain damage and tend to be forgetful

Anyways, thought that would help for anyone that doesnt know where that word came from.

I still dont really see a mason a connection. And if I did I'd admit it, sure there there have been some bad masons, but doesnt mean they are all bad.

[edit on 16-8-2009 by jeasahtheseer]

[edit on 16-8-2009 by jeasahtheseer]

I'm not trying to demonise masons as the masons in England during Victorian times were a completely different ball game from todays brotherhood. I'm just showing the fact that the prostitutes had their chests burst open and their innards placed on the shoulder just like in the masonic writtings.
By the way, sorry to hear about what happened to you in Iraq. Here's hoping you make a full recovery.

reply to post by Mintwithahole.


Believe what you will my friend, but that has already been debunked. I'm not sure where your info is coming from, but its inaccurate. They removed the graffitte because it may have started riots. Also whitechapel was full of immigrants, Russia had just thrown out their Jews from their country and thousands of Jews came from Russia to London. Kominski spoke english, how well I have no idea. I am not going to argue with you about the Mason part I am pretty sure the Mason that posted here made that clear and I am pretty sure I am that clear above as well. The killings clearly match that of Jewish Libel however.

Also lets be honest, Kominski moved to the Whitechapel area when he was around 17. He was young so it would have been no big deal for Aaron to have transferred his literacy skills from Polish to English. Come on now? You have to admit that makes sense. He would've had to learn after his arrival in England. Also if you ever been or go to Eastern Europe, and speak english their, MANY will have no idea what the hell you are syaing because learning english is only in universities or taught by parents.

I think its beyond obvious that Kominski could have and probably had an understanding of the English language.

Their is no evidence that Israel and Kosminski were angered with eachother. Their is evidence however, that Israel was in disagreement with a Maurice Kosminski. Elizabeth Stride has never been debunked as a victim, many are concerned because teh killer used his right hand instead of his left? or his left instead of his right. Something like that, but lets be honest, if their was a struggle as indicated by the two witnesses who stated that she was struggling. Than it would be no surprise for him to have used his other hand to cut her throat.

Also most Masons have debunked the so called claims against them, which wasn't much anyway. But they debunked that.

[edit on Aug 16th 2009 by TheMythLives]

reply to post by Mintwithahole.


Oh Iknow you arent . I was actually kinda trying to add to the conversation .

reply to post by TheMythLives

Nothing has, or can be debunked concerning the ripper murders as nobody knows the truth to begin with! We're all just groping in the dark trying to make sense of what little evidence there is concerning the murders. You seem to be quite prone to simply dismissing any evidence which doesn't support your theory. I was like that too when I chased down Maybrick and thought he was the ripper and we all know how quickly that fell apart.
Across the road from me are a Chinese family who have lived here for near on fifteen years yet only the children speak English. And that's in modern day England, imagine what it would have been like in Victorian times? I don't think Kosminski could speak a word of English, he certainly couldn't read or write it, and was most probably a sad pathetic creature who we should feel sorry for. He certainly wasn't the ripper.

What do you think about the theory that the police at the time confused the identities of Kosminski and Cohen? I think it may be possible considering the way the Met and city police kept vital information from one another in their quest to be the ones who captured the killer.

Like you said earlier, we all have are personal favourite theories when it comes to the identity of the ripper.

reply to post by Mintwithahole.


lol, you know what theory I always enjoyed. Jill the Ripper, I found that Extremely interesting, but I understand what you said. I also thought the Chinese immigrant man? Whoever, he was, was a good theory as well. So beside the Mason theory what is your second favorite?

Sorry didn't see this part before hand:

What do you think about the theory that the police at the time confused the identities of Kosminski and Cohen?

I actually think that Severin Antoniovich Klosowski or Cohen could have been mis-identified (Is that a word)?..lol.. Its certainly possible, but I personally do not think so.

[edit on Aug 16th 2009 by TheMythLives]

Originally posted by jeasahtheseer
reply to post by TheMythLives

 

DOnt worry, a mason would never ask you to join. You have to seek out membership yourself

.Peace

Maybe...but I've had three different Masons from three different lodges tell me that they would sponsor me if I chose to ask for membership...same thing.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


If they were just random people, they arent supposed to do that. If it was one of of your friends they may mention that, but if they are like asking and pressuring you to join they shouldnt be. Freemasons arent supposed to do that kind of stuff. We don't recruit you have to come to us on your own free will and accord.



[edit on 16-8-2009 by jeasahtheseer]

Walter Sickert is still the most likely ripper suspect in my opinion, It is by far the most believable story i think. I remember the watching the show where she ripped that painting to find DNA evidence and failed, still her theory has a lot of good points imo.

Here's the news article about the painting.
www.guardian.co.uk...

Walter Sickert had been tangentially implicated in the Ripper crimes as early as the 1970s, with the release of the now infamous "Royal Conspiracy" theory. But it wasn't until the early 1990s, with the release of Jean Overton Fuller's Sickert and the Ripper Crimes, that the peculiar artist became a Ripper suspect in his own right. More recently, Patricia Cornwell has claimed to have found DNA evidence linking Sickert to at least one "Ripper letter".

www.casebook.org...

reply to post by refuse_orders


Yea, but he was made famous by Patricia Cornwall who made wrong info:

Patricia Cornwell's upcoming book, Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper - Case Closed is without a doubt the single most publicized book ever released in the history of the genre. As such, it has the potential to impress the minds of millions worldwide with certain ideas about the Ripper crimes which are, unfortunately, largely inaccurate. The purpose of this primer is not necessarily to refute Ms. Cornwell's theory, but to provide an easy-to-follow factual guide for readers new to the subject who would like to know more about the facts presented in her book.

Those who have not yet read the book are hereby warned that the following primer may include spoilers.

Patricia Cornwell: Is it Factual?

Snickert Reviewed:

Cornwell claims to have spent $6 million of her own fortune researching this book. In the end, one wonders if it were worth it. Ms. Cornwell provides a tenuous link between Walter Sickert and one or two "Ripper letters" in the guise of a matching mtDNA sequence, but all that tells us is that Sickert can not be eliminated from the percentage of the population (ranging from 1% ro 10%) that could have written those letters. Considering the fact that the letters that provided mtDNA matches are all considered to be definite hoaxes, and Cornwell's theory falls apart like a house of cards.

Cornwell should certainly be praised for taking the initiative to fund modern forensic research on the few remaining scraps of Ripperana, but in the end, the results should have been more critically examined. Instead, it appears as though Cornwell decided who the Ripper was first, and then scrambled to find evidence to support it. When DNA matching fell short, she relied on watermark and handwriting analysis, as well as comparisons between drawings on the letters and those in Sickert's sketchbooks. All of this is meaningless, of course, as the Ripper letters she uses are all considered hoaxes.

The Evidence Reviewed



[edit on Aug 16th 2009 by TheMythLives]

reply to post by TheMythLives

My second favourite theory, and one that I let my heart rule my head because the accused lived right on my doorstep, is the case against James Maybrick. I really fell for that one hook, line and sinker.
It was all too true to be real right from the start. A guy in a pub gives a torn ledger to a guy he drinks with and tells him to do what he wants with it. . . Michael Barret's story was unbelievable right from the start, then it turned out that the book was something to do with his wife who's grandmother had worked for the Maybricks at Battlecrease House, the family home. Then the watch turned up, supposedly Maybricks with the initials of the five prostitutes and the line, "I Am Jack", etched on it's inside. And then to top it all the Maybricks family motto is "Time Reveals All. . ."
Even today I think there's more to it but how would you ever prove it considering that most ripperologists dismiss the story.
Whats the worst theory you've heard?

reply to post by Mintwithahole.

Whats the worst theory you've heard

lol... The absolute worst was that Jack was a Demon extra-dimensional traveler. That has to be the worst. Apparently during this exorcism:

The devil and Karen Kingston

Joyce reddened and looked away in disgust. She said nothing. Jeanne then continued her dissertation: “Who do you think controlled Jack the Ripper in London? He worked for me! You do know, of course, that Jack was a master at cut-throat murder! He did a grand job on Mary Nicholls in 1888. She was but one of six known victims who suffered the consequences of Jack’s sharp blade. I can tell you–there were a lot more, a whole lot more killings the police never knew Jack committed.”

The Devil and the Demon

Yea, I really do not like this theory...

reply to post by TheMythLives


It would be interesting considering that you're over in the States what you think about the theories that the Ripper may have fled to America via New York. The London police did pursue someone to New York and since the officers involved were key investigators on the ground in London then it can be assumed that it was the ripper they were chasing. Then there was the Carrie Brown murder in the East River Hotel on Manhattan which had all the tell tale mutilations so evident in the case.
It's always been thought that they were chasing Tumblety but why couldn't it have been someone like Gibson or some, as of yet unmasked suspect?
Was it a copycat or the Ripper? Be interested in your thoughts. . .

reply to post by Mintwithahole.

Was it a copycat or the Ripper?

Well their are many theories:

Gibson was named as Jack the Ripper by author Robert Graysmith in the book The Bell Tower. Graysmith makes the claim that Theo Durrant, a 24 year old medical student, who was arrested, found guilty and executed on 7 January 1898 for the murder of two women, Blanch Lamont 18, and Minnie Williams 21, in San Francisco's Baptist Church, was in fact innocent of the crime and that the real culprit was John George Gibson, the church pastor. Graysmith then goes on to claim that Gibson was also responsible for the Whitechapel murders. Graysmith claims Gibson was In London when the murders occurred, and suddenly left shortly after.

John George Gibson was born in Edinburgh on 14 August 1859, and at the time of the Whitechapel murders was 29 years of age, 5ft 9"tall, fair haired with a small sandy moustache, well built and broad shouldered. According to the San Francisco News, Gibson confessed on his deathbed to Charlie Floyd, in the spring of 1912, that it was he, and not Theo Durrant, who murdered Blanch Lamont and Minnie Williams. Unfortunately the person Gibson supposedly confessed to, Charlie Floyd, never actually existed and appears to be a hybrid of several different people. There is no evidence Gibson was in London at the time of the Ripper murders and it is believed he was serving at a church in Scotland at the time. While Graysmith produces no evidence that Gibson was responsible for the Whitechapel murders, he also provides no evidence that Gibson perpetrated the murders in San Francisco's Baptist church either, or that Theo Durrant was actually innocent of the crimes.

Pastor Gibson


The Ripper in America

Fitzgerald was a veteran of this establishment which the Morning Journal succinctly called a 'festering resort of vice and misery', and by the Spring of 1891 would certainly have settled into the interminable routine of brawls and debauchery, the nightly ebb and flow of wizened whores and rowdy, dissolute men. It must have been with benumbed resignation that, after another long night's work, he once more made his morning rounds of the seedy rooms, going mechanically from door to door, making certain that all the previous night's lodgers had cleared out. It was not a place that expected or encouraged lengthy stays.

The Ripper in America: The casebook investigates

Personally, I think their is a decent chance that he did. But I am unconvinced that he would actually do this. I like the theory, but I am not entirely convinced or near convinced. Still pretty interesting

reply to post by TheMythLives

There's certainly a lot more to be learnt about the Ripper. I think the one thing I always find myself coming back to time and time again is why both the Met and London City Police both stepped down their investigation of the murders at the same time shortly after the Mary Kelly attrocity. It seems there is, or was, a file somewhere within Scotland Yard which contained a name, a name which the police thought was the man responsible for the killings.
Since an awful lot of files about the case were destroyed during the May blitz it's doubtful we'll ever discover who they accussed!

reply to post by TheMythLives
Kosminski is an interesting suspect Myth but,I still don't see him as the main one I don't have one but as I and several other posters on the case review thread pointed out he had access to the underground and it's many maintenance tunnels and knew how to get outta WhiteChappel by foot.

originally posted by: ChemBreather
( Andrew L Morrison )

The Life and Possible Deaths of Sir William Gull

So , Jack gets his orders to create fear and panic by slaughtering these five women to cover up the pregnant whore situation.
Few knows this to be actual Masonic Murder Rituals, throut cut from ear to ear an intestence taken out and placed above left shoulder..

William Withey Gull was born on December 31st 1816 aboard the barge "The Dove" which was moored at St Osyth Mill in the parish of St Leonard, Colchester. He was the youngest of eight children and his father John Gull was a barge owner who died of cholera in London in 1827.

In 1837 Gull was accepted as a pupil at Guy's Hospital and this began a association with that establishment which was to continue for the rest of his life. In 1841 he graduated with a BA from the University of London, became a lecturer in Natural Philosophy in 1843 and received his MD in 1846. He was a medical tutor and lecturer at Guy's Hospital and Fullerian Professor of Physiology in 1847-1849. He married Susan Anne Dacre Lacy in 1848 and they had two children Cameron and Caroline.

Gull was made a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1869 and in 1871 he achieved national prominence when he treated the Prince of Wales for typhus. He was rewarded by being made a Baronet in 1872 and also became Physician Extraordinary and subsequently Physician-in-Ordinary to Queen Victoria. He became even more widely known due to his peripheral involvement with the Bravo poisoning case in 1896. This was probably not welcomed by Gull because a Dr Gully was much more deeply involved and the similarity of names may have given Gull an undeserved notoriety.

Gull died on January 29th 1890. His death certificate was signed by his son-in-law Theodore Dyke Ackland. This was rather unusual because relatives were not really supposed to sign death certificates as it was possible the could benefit from the death. What Dr Ackland did was not illegal but a bit improper especially as he was not the only doctor in attendance.

When Stephen Knight was researching "Jack the Ripper : The Final Solution" he visited Gull's grave at Thorpe-Le-Soken. Mr Downes the verger said to him "This is a large grave, about twelve feet by nine, too large for two people [Gull and his wife]. Some say more than two are buried there. It is big enough for three that grave." He added that "Burial places for two just aren't normally that big" and "of course, it's possible somebody else is buried there, without anyone knowing who".

Knight was also able to discover a pauper named Thomas Mason who was born in 1817 and would have been just a little younger than Gull. Mason died in 1902 and not in 1896 as Knight believed.

Sue and Andy Parlour while researching "The Jack the Ripper Whitechapel Murders" uncovered a strong oral tradition at Thorpe-Le-Soken that Gull did not die when it was stated that he had, the funeral which was held was a sham and that he was buried in the grave, at night, several years later.

Gull's will was probated in 1890 as would be expected but it was also probated again in 1897 even though nothing had apparently changed.

So did William Gull really die in 1890 as his death certificate stated or did he live on until 1897 or beyond? If his death was faked was it because this brilliant medical man had become the the insane killer Jack the Ripper or could there have been other reasons for the pretence?

Michael Harrison (who suggested J K Stephen as the killer) remembered hearing a story that the Ripper was a royal surgeon avenging his son who had died from venereal disease. Thomas Stowell (who suspected the Duke of Clarence) wrote that he saw in Gull's notes that he informed --- that his son was dying from syphilis of the brain. It is pure speculation but what if these are distortions of the truth and it was Gull that had contracted syphilis? His son-in-law could have signed the death certificate either to hide the fact that Gull had actually died from syphilis or to fake Gull's death and have him spirited away to some institution where he remained until his real death. The moral climate in the late Victorian period was such that had it become known that Gull had contracted syphilis there may have been a scandal and his family could have been excluded from polite society.

So it is perhaps just within the bounds of probability that Gull could have died in 1890 from syphilis or he could have died several years later from syphilis or from other causes. However, the most likely explanation is that he died from stroke in 1890 as his death certificate says. Later the rumours surrounding him became linked with the myth of Jack the Ripper but whatever else Gull may have done during the Autumn of Terror it is almost certainly did not include killing prostitutes in Whitechapel. If any conspiracy did surround his death it would have been for reasons which were in no way connected to Jack the Ripper.

William Withey Gull (1816-1890) Requiescant in Pace

Afterword
While writing this article I was struck by what is probably just a coincidence but which I found interesting never the less. Gull was involved with the Bravo poisoning case. In this a young wife, Florence Bravo, was suspected by some of poisoning her husband. In the 1970's Gull is caught up in the Jack the Ripper story and then in the early 1990's the "Maybrick" diary appears. In the Maybrick case a young wife called Florence was suspected, and in this case, found guilty of poisoning her husband. As I said just a coincidence...

Maybe not a Coincidence as you say?

Walter Sickert's self portrait ...
LAZARUS BREAKS HIS FAST

Apparently Walter may of made mention that the prunes in his porridge had been poisioned in an attempt to scare or indeed silence Him re his knowledge re The Royal Conspiracy.

Regards
Jackdaw 1888 :-)

Stanley Kubrick was distraught that his daughter ran off and joined Scientology and died of a heart attack while he was sleeping.

No conspiracy with Kubrick.

If Kubrick was murdered because of Eyes Wide Shut then TPTB failed miserably because Stanley's original cut for the film is available on Blu Ray now.

originally posted by: Jackdaw1888

originally posted by: ChemBreather
( Andrew L Morrison )

The Life and Possible Deaths of Sir William Gull

So , Jack gets his orders to create fear and panic by slaughtering these five women to cover up the pregnant whore situation.
Few knows this to be actual Masonic Murder Rituals, throut cut from ear to ear an intestence taken out and placed above left shoulder..

William Withey Gull was born on December 31st 1816 aboard the barge "The Dove" which was moored at St Osyth Mill in the parish of St Leonard, Colchester. He was the youngest of eight children and his father John Gull was a barge owner who died of cholera in London in 1827.

In 1837 Gull was accepted as a pupil at Guy's Hospital and this began a association with that establishment which was to continue for the rest of his life. In 1841 he graduated with a BA from the University of London, became a lecturer in Natural Philosophy in 1843 and received his MD in 1846. He was a medical tutor and lecturer at Guy's Hospital and Fullerian Professor of Physiology in 1847-1849. He married Susan Anne Dacre Lacy in 1848 and they had two children Cameron and Caroline.

Gull was made a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1869 and in 1871 he achieved national prominence when he treated the Prince of Wales for typhus. He was rewarded by being made a Baronet in 1872 and also became Physician Extraordinary and subsequently Physician-in-Ordinary to Queen Victoria. He became even more widely known due to his peripheral involvement with the Bravo poisoning case in 1896. This was probably not welcomed by Gull because a Dr Gully was much more deeply involved and the similarity of names may have given Gull an undeserved notoriety.

Gull died on January 29th 1890. His death certificate was signed by his son-in-law Theodore Dyke Ackland. This was rather unusual because relatives were not really supposed to sign death certificates as it was possible the could benefit from the death. What Dr Ackland did was not illegal but a bit improper especially as he was not the only doctor in attendance.

When Stephen Knight was researching "Jack the Ripper : The Final Solution" he visited Gull's grave at Thorpe-Le-Soken. Mr Downes the verger said to him "This is a large grave, about twelve feet by nine, too large for two people [Gull and his wife]. Some say more than two are buried there. It is big enough for three that grave." He added that "Burial places for two just aren't normally that big" and "of course, it's possible somebody else is buried there, without anyone knowing who".

Knight was also able to discover a pauper named Thomas Mason who was born in 1817 and would have been just a little younger than Gull. Mason died in 1902 and not in 1896 as Knight believed.

Sue and Andy Parlour while researching "The Jack the Ripper Whitechapel Murders" uncovered a strong oral tradition at Thorpe-Le-Soken that Gull did not die when it was stated that he had, the funeral which was held was a sham and that he was buried in the grave, at night, several years later.

Gull's will was probated in 1890 as would be expected but it was also probated again in 1897 even though nothing had apparently changed.

So did William Gull really die in 1890 as his death certificate stated or did he live on until 1897 or beyond? If his death was faked was it because this brilliant medical man had become the the insane killer Jack the Ripper or could there have been other reasons for the pretence?

Michael Harrison (who suggested J K Stephen as the killer) remembered hearing a story that the Ripper was a royal surgeon avenging his son who had died from venereal disease. Thomas Stowell (who suspected the Duke of Clarence) wrote that he saw in Gull's notes that he informed --- that his son was dying from syphilis of the brain. It is pure speculation but what if these are distortions of the truth and it was Gull that had contracted syphilis? His son-in-law could have signed the death certificate either to hide the fact that Gull had actually died from syphilis or to fake Gull's death and have him spirited away to some institution where he remained until his real death. The moral climate in the late Victorian period was such that had it become known that Gull had contracted syphilis there may have been a scandal and his family could have been excluded from polite society.

So it is perhaps just within the bounds of probability that Gull could have died in 1890 from syphilis or he could have died several years later from syphilis or from other causes. However, the most likely explanation is that he died from stroke in 1890 as his death certificate says. Later the rumours surrounding him became linked with the myth of Jack the Ripper but whatever else Gull may have done during the Autumn of Terror it is almost certainly did not include killing prostitutes in Whitechapel. If any conspiracy did surround his death it would have been for reasons which were in no way connected to Jack the Ripper.

William Withey Gull (1816-1890) Requiescant in Pace

Afterword
While writing this article I was struck by what is probably just a coincidence but which I found interesting never the less. Gull was involved with the Bravo poisoning case. In this a young wife, Florence Bravo, was suspected by some of poisoning her husband. In the 1970's Gull is caught up in the Jack the Ripper story and then in the early 1990's the "Maybrick" diary appears. In the Maybrick case a young wife called Florence was suspected, and in this case, found guilty of poisoning her husband. As I said just a coincidence...

Maybe not a Coincidence as you say?

Walter Sickert's self portrait ...
LAZARUS BREAKS HIS FAST

Apparently Walter may of made mention that the prunes in his porridge had been poisioned in an attempt to scare or indeed silence Him re his knowledge re The Royal Conspiracy.

Regards
Jackdaw 1888 :-)

But then again some have suggested that the actual fruit depicted by Sickert in the self portrait were in fact GRAPES ... ha ha

Jackdaw 1888 :-)