Maikai
New Member
read this, and tell me in l00 words or less what the h#ll he's talking about--I can't get past the first sentence:
http://www.wepin.com/store/books/MindMatters/V.htm
http://www.wepin.com/store/books/MindMatters/V.htm
Someone needs to get Easy Writer at FFJ to post here ...
- Thread starter Cherokee
- Start date
Barbara
New Member
Maikai said:
My my aren't we just better than others and holier than thou? I imagine if I did a search of your name, I would find that you have no background or credentials to be a credible commentator on this or any other murder case, but you post your theories don't you?
What makes him different than any of the rest of us? Because he works harder and writes to LE? Nothing stops anybody here from doing the same.
Let me explain how this works.
We READ the posts, and decide how we feel about the CONTENTS of the writings. Then we decide how much credence to give the POST.
What does it matter what his name is?
Barbara
New Member
Maikai said:
Maikai,
Delmar England is in fact, an intellectual and writes about many subjects, not limited to JBR.
What is the problem with that? I understand everything he says, although, I freely admit that despite my knowledge of the English language, which I think is pretty damn good, I resort to a dictionary when reading some of what he writes. It doesn't shame me to do so, especially if I want to comment with credibility.
Maikai said:
Did You actually have time to read Mind and Matters The World in a Mirror?
http://www.wepin.com/store/books/MindMatters/Index.html
His writings remind me of Ayn Rand and her Atlas Shrugged series.
Britt
New Member
Yeah, Maikai, God forbid we have a smart guy analyzing the Ramsey case... lol.Maikai said:
Delmar England and RiverRat... thank you
Britt
New Member
Okay, Maikai, let me translate that for you.Maikai said:
The first sentence: Since the dominant beliefs that underlie the official socio-economic system are in denial of the principles of epistemology, denial of the principles of language is a requirement to psychologically sustain the revered fallacies.
Translation: Since the standard Ramsey spin is not reality-based, the Ramseys must play fast and loose with semantics in order to continue their self-delusion.
IMO EasyWriter's Ramsey case analysis has some outstanding insights and observations.
tipper
Former Member
Whenever I read anything by Delmar England I am reminded of Mark Twain saying "If I'd had more time, I'd have written you a shorter letter."
BrotherMoon
Former Member
To debate the contents of the posts are fine to resort to name calling is not.
Please in the future refrain from such comments.
Please in the future refrain from such comments.
Maikai
New Member
do agree on something! There's hope for you afterall.
He's not exactly a bottom line kind of guy, is he? He wrote scads about the garotte, because he claims he is ALSO a knot expert. Some of that discussion makes sense to me. The bottom line on all of that is an amateur could have tied it accordibg to Delmar--and JR and LS are lying. If what he's saying is true, then any number of "amateurs" could have done it. How many "professional" garrotte makers are around, anyway?
BrotherMoon said:
He's not exactly a bottom line kind of guy, is he? He wrote scads about the garotte, because he claims he is ALSO a knot expert. Some of that discussion makes sense to me. The bottom line on all of that is an amateur could have tied it accordibg to Delmar--and JR and LS are lying. If what he's saying is true, then any number of "amateurs" could have done it. How many "professional" garrotte makers are around, anyway?
Britt
New Member
BrotherMoon... Chortle? lol... I like that word. Can I keep it?
As we Ramsey observers know, where this case is concerned the only relevant thing is the what, not the how.
As we Ramsey observers know, where this case is concerned the only relevant thing is the what, not the how.
BrotherMoon
Former Member
BrotherMoon said:
Oh come on. That's not name calling, anal retention is a description of psychological development, self involvement to the point of distraction from the larger world. My description is apt.
No, Britt you can't have chortle, it's mine, all mine!!!!!!!!!!!
But you can have your pick of EW's plastic bouquet, I don't think he values words as he seems to toss them off without much deliberation.
Shylock
Former Member
Maikai, I think you need to open your eyes. The Ramsey garrotte is NOT a "professional killing device" or any other nonsensical defination that the RST wants people to believe. It's a broken stick with a cord wrapped around it 7 times--then tied with the most basic knot any kid who can tie his own shoes knows. THAT'S ALL IT IS.Maikai said:
It's construction is so damn simple that a 9-year old could have created it--and for all you know, one might have. Furthermore, for all you know, that 9-year old might have constructed the thing well before the night of the murder. Just because there were wood chips on the floor near the paint tote does NOT mean it was constructed the night of the murder. The Ramsey basement was an unclean disaster - nobody knows for sure when the last time the floor was vaccuumed.
So I wouldn't be so quick to criticize Delmar England, Maikai. Since you are foolish enough to buy into the Ramsey "sophisticated device" crapola, it's obvious Delmar has more on then ball than you do.
Shylock
Former Member
Consider yourself lucky the guy chose not to mention the name "Jean Brodie" in that perticular essay, or you would be on your knees paying homage right now.BrotherMoon said:
Britt
New Member
Except that the cord in its "garrote" form is a staged prop, not an effective killing device, which implicates someone in the home who knew they'd have some 'splainin to do.Maikai said:
TLynn
New Member
Patsy Ramsey claims to know nothing about the pineapple.
Never bought it
Never brought it into the house
Never cut it up
Never served it
Never saw it
How in the heck can you even justify the hard evidence of the pineapple to be eaten during the afternoon?
You're suggesting that the pineapple was on that counter top all day and Patsy knowing nothing about it.
Scientific evidence states that pineapple was eaten after the Fleet White dinner.
The PINEAPPLE cannot be ignored.
JonBenet, the victim, is talking to you. And if you ignore the pineapple evidence, than you are ignoring the victim.
Isn't it all about the victim?!
Never bought it
Never brought it into the house
Never cut it up
Never served it
Never saw it
How in the heck can you even justify the hard evidence of the pineapple to be eaten during the afternoon?
You're suggesting that the pineapple was on that counter top all day and Patsy knowing nothing about it.
Scientific evidence states that pineapple was eaten after the Fleet White dinner.
The PINEAPPLE cannot be ignored.
JonBenet, the victim, is talking to you. And if you ignore the pineapple evidence, than you are ignoring the victim.
Isn't it all about the victim?!
tipper
Former Member
Why would one use 12 pt as a reasonable facsimile for the note? The first page averages about 5 words per line and I think it has 27 lines on the page. 22 pt would be more realistic. Also, pictures of that hallway are easily available on the internet. Delnar England doesn't have to "envision" it. If he wanted to he could have looked at the real thing. I wouldn't call it "narrow."
An expert from Canada spent 6 days examining the knot. He, quire rightly, has kept his opinion out of the newspapers.
An expert from Canada spent 6 days examining the knot. He, quire rightly, has kept his opinion out of the newspapers.
Shylock
Former Member
Probably because there was no opinion to be had:tipper said:
STEVE THOMAS: "Despite what has been out there publicly, this was not an elaborately fashioned or skillfully prepared instrument. In fact, it was a rather crude, homemade type device. It did not appear that any great skill was required to prepare this instrument."
STEVE THOMAS: "I have heard John Ramsey talk about this very elaborate killing tool. In fact, I disagree. There was nothing that I saw that was elaborate about it, a broken paintbrush handle (Patsy's) with some cord wrapped around it, does not equate to an "elaborate" killing tool to me. In fact, I found it quite elementary."
Shylock
Former Member
Maybe if you spread a little more of chicken blood in his direction and rattle the bones of your sacred lizzard he might have your same vision...BrotherMoon said:
And don't forget the eye of newt.
Jayelles
New Member
Maikai said:
I believe the pineapple is considered very relevant indeed AND it cannot be satisfactorily explained. The pineapple is important for establishing the time of her death.
If it was eaten late afternoon prior to going to the Whites, then JBR was killed very shortly after arriving home that night.
It it was eaten after her return from the Whites, then the Ramseys are lying about her being asleep (and Burke is telling the truth).
Lou Smit called it the "bugaboo" in his interview with John Ramsey.
I strongly believe there is evidence in the case which has not been made public. I also think the reason the investigators don't discuss the pineapple is because it may be considered very relevant indeed.
I question the motives of anyone who dismisses the pineapple as "irrelevant".
BrotherMoon
Former Member
Shylock said:
...it always seemed afterwards to Sandy that where there was a choice of various courses, the most economical was the best, and that the course to be taken was the most expedient and most suitable at the time for all the objects in hand. She acted on this principle when the time came for her to betray Miss Brodie. TPOMJB