Did You Know That Patsy Spelled Advise Wrong In The Sample RN?

[JMO8778]

Forgetting about the RN for a moment. Wouldn't an adversary to JR/PR be someone who is socially backward, politically left, and economicallly poor?

Gee, it just so happens that the RN reads like an adversary to their social position. It reads like someone who is socially inept (beheading children), politically left (not the country that it serves), and economically poor (fat cats).

Coincidence?

It's no coincidence that they both felt the need to write it that way in order to point away from themselves,and I do think both played a part in writing it.It wasn't just the lone housewife scenario you are touting,IMO JR absolutely had his .02 worth into that note,and that's why he repeatedly..not just once or twice,but many times..kept pointing Jeff Merrick out to LE.
It also makes sense of JR's 'this had to be an inside job' comment.He was already thinking ahead,same as he did when he helped write the note.

 

[Chrishope]

Consider that foreign male DNA showed up in sexual assault related places on the clothing JBR was wearing at the time she was murdered. That makes all your remarks, casually stated as fact, not really so factual at all. [/ Quote]

By foreign, of course you mean non-ramsey, though it's clever the way you say foreign to make a better fit with you small foreign faction theory.

You have no evidence that the dna belongs to the molester/killer, in fact you have no idea who the dna belongs to. It's quite possible it doesn't belong to the perpetrator. Therefore your claim that the dna is in "sexaul assault related places on the clothing", casually stated as fact, ins't so factual after all.

I buy parts of the RN, so when you say 'no one buys the ransom letter as legit' you're wrong.

How convenient, you get to pick and choose the parts of the RN that are true and those that are not. You buy some parts, reject others.

It doesn't take much to be a revolutionary you know. Anybody can be a revolutionary.

Are you saying that of the millions of revolutionaries throughout history, nobody has ever put "Victory!" as a closing salutation? Or threatened to execute or behead anyone in writing? Have you ever read any letters written by socialist revolutionaries? Even one? Which one? So how do you know what revolutionaries sound like, when anybody can be a revolutionary?

Would you please enlighten us with your vast knowledge of socialist revolutionary writings? Which socialist revolutionaries have used the term fat cat? Which have signed victory? Which have used S.B.T.C. ?

How do you know what revolutionaries sound like? You claim the note sounds like the rantings of left-wing revolutionaries, but you admit there is no particular "sound" that can be ascribed to them. You've undercut your own theory.

A conservative lawyer friend of mine uses the term fat cat. He used to apply it to me when I was a contractor. Maybe that indicates the note was actually written by a conservative lawyer?

You tell me, of all the people in the world, who really does threaten to execute or behead people in writing (and not simply 'kill,' as would be expected in a 'staged' ransom note)? If you suggest drugged or irritated or drunk housewives, how can I take that seriously?

Again, can you show us some writings of socialist revolutionaries where beheadings are threatened? The beheadings I'm aware of happen mostly in the middle east by people who can hardly be called left-wing. More like right-wing fundies. And of course you've never adequately explained why a small foreign faction would pick on an obscure 6 year old from Boulder.

You may as well suggest JBR was killed by the house cat. Thats how I see RDI.

You don't see RDI, you're afraid to look at it.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

How do you know what revolutionaries sound like? You claim the note sounds like the rantings of left-wing revolutionaries, but you admit there is no particular "sound" that can be ascribed to them.

Sure there is.

Its obvious from your post that you don't know much about socialism. I don't know much more, but even I can see there's no shortage of peculiar stuff in the RN. Stuff that RDI doesn't even have any explanation for, other than 'its 'bogus' which would be kind of a cheap discard of evidence from JBR's POV.

The RN expression "group of individuals" is practically a definition of socialism. The expression was beyond what was necessary for a ransom note. Why?

"Victory, with its revolutionary connotations, harks back to foreign powers." (FBI quote)

Fat cats, in the context it was used in the RN, was a derogatory expression directed at JR for no other reason than he has individual wealth. Individual wealth doesn't happen in socialism, by definition.

Even 'dont grow a brain' has socialist angle. The last thing you want to have as a socialist or a communist subject is an independent thought.

"You must follow our instructions to the letter.... Any deviation... "
Sounds kinda authoritative and commanding doncha think? This diatribe is beyond what was needed for a kidnapping, and a little closer to authoritarianism, IMO. Why?

Not only do I believe the author's a socialist, but probably would give lectures on it.

 

[JMO8778]

Consider that foreign male DNA showed up in sexual assault related places on the clothing JBR was wearing at the time she was murdered. That makes all your remarks, casually stated as fact, not really so factual at all.

By foreign, of course you mean non-ramsey, though it's clever the way you say foreign to make a better fit with you small foreign faction theory.

You have no evidence that the dna belongs to the molester/killer, in fact you have no idea who the dna belongs to. It's quite possible it doesn't belong to the perpetrator. Therefore your claim that the dna is in "sexaul assault related places on the clothing", casually stated as fact, ins't so factual after all.

I buy parts of the RN, so when you say 'no one buys the ransom letter as legit' you're wrong.

How convenient, you get to pick and choose the parts of the RN that are true and those that are not. You buy some parts, reject others.

Would you please enlighten us with your vast knowledge of socialist revolutionary writings? Which socialist revolutionaries have used the term fat cat? Which have signed victory? Which have used S.B.T.C. ?

How do you know what revolutionaries sound like? You claim the note sounds like the rantings of left-wing revolutionaries, but you admit there is no particular "sound" that can be ascribed to them. You've undercut your own theory.

A conservative lawyer friend of mine uses the term fat cat. He used to apply it to me when I was a contractor. Maybe that indicates the note was actually written by a conservative lawyer?



Again, can you show us some writings of socialist revolutionaries where beheadings are threatened? The beheadings I'm aware of happen mostly in the middle east by people who can hardly be called left-wing. More like right-wing fundies. And of course you've never adequately explained why a small foreign faction would pick on an obscure 6 year old from Boulder.

great post,Chrishope,all of it :clap:
And I agree,why on earth would a terrorist group be after an obscure businessman's daughter? Clinton was in office at the time,and no one was after his daughter.And when 911 occurred,she was just a few blocks away,but again,she wasn't a target.Al Qieda (sp) didn't give a rat's patoot about her.

You don't see RDI, you're afraid to look at it.

indeed,that much is obvious,this poster doesn't want the R's to appear guilty in the least;apparently there is something in it for Holdon.

 

[BBB167893]

With unknown male DNA sitting right there in the expected criminal sexual assault places, I'm not sure any rational theorist is going to paint themselves into a corner like you have. The idea that someone 'threw everything in the mix', 'real revolutionaries don't talk that way', are your opinion casually stated as fact to redirect attention from case facts.

Not JUST my opinion, sir. That was the feeling of someone who was there.

The RN is concise, very threatening, very left wing ranting.

I don't see how you can say it was any of those things. Concise? Since when is irrelevant rambling concise? As for threatening, it's all very passive. Left-wing ranting? I might buy that if it weren't for the thinly veiled references to Islamic terror, which is, by and large, a right-wing phenomenon.

From 'not the country that it serves' to 'fat cat' to 'Victory!' the underlying socialist diatribe can't be denied except by you or anyone who is already committed to RDI and can't look at anything else.

The hell it can't.

We're poles apart, you and me.

That's obvious.

And I'm STILL waiting.

 

[JMO8778]

"Victory, with its revolutionary connotations, harks back to foreign powers."

..more like HARK the Herald Angels sing,from Patsy's POV, as author of the RN;Victory in Christ/Jesus is a religious word used frequently by Christians,as is SBTC -meaning,'Saved By the Cross' ,but I'm sure you already know this by now.

 

[Solace]

Your personal attacks on me or my reasoning abilities won't make the DNA go away, wont make the R's liars, wont make the R's owners of the tape or cord, wont provide a motive for the R's to have murdered their child, won't provide 'smoking gun' evidence that RDI needed but never got. Even after 12 years of turning them and their house upside down and shaking, nothing spilled out that would even cause an arrest, let alone a trial.

My credibility in your eyes isn't significant. I rather doubt to win credibility over you or any other avid RDI fan (lol).

It is not a personal attack. It is a fact. As far credibility in my eyes, you are as closed-minded as one can get onthis subject. I have yet to see you opine about anything the Ramsey's did that may be considered negative. It is impossible for anyone to do everything right, but yet in your eyes, the Ramseys did just that, everything right.

I don't know why you are insulted by this. Unless I touched on a nerve.

 

[BBB167893]

Consider that foreign male DNA showed up in sexual assault related places on the clothing JBR was wearing at the time she was murdered. That makes all your remarks, casually stated as fact, not really so factual at all.

Oh, well, I've only got an army of experts who agree with me.

I buy parts of the RN, so when you say 'no one buys the ransom letter as legit' you're wrong.

You're right, I should be more specific. I should say that none of the investigators are buying it.

It doesn't take much to be a revolutionary you know. Anybody can be a revolutionary.

Or try to sound like one.

Are you saying that of the millions of revolutionaries throughout history, nobody has ever put "Victory!" as a closing salutation? Or threatened to execute or behead anyone in writing?

Wait for it.

Have you ever read any letters written by socialist revolutionaries? Even one? Which one?

Mister, how DO YOU THINK I know what revolutionaries sound like IN THE FIRST PLACE?! You want to see what REAL revolutionaries sound like? I'll accomodate you:

Let's start with Che Guevara:

"We will bring the war to the imperialist enemies' very home, to his places of work and recreation. We must never give him a minute of peace or tranquility. We'll attack him wherever we find him. The imperialist enemy must feel like a hunted animal wherever he moves. Thus we'll destroy him! These hyenas, are fit only for extermination. We must keep our hatred alive and fan it to paroxysm!"
"If the missiles had remained, we would have used them against the very heart of the U.S., including New York City."
"hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine.”

Mao Tse-tung:
"The revolution is not a dinner party. It is not a work of art. It cannot be advanced softly, gradually, carefully, considerately, respectfully, politely, plainly and modestly. The revolution is an act of violence by which one class overthrows another.”
“Communism is not love. Communism is a hammer which we use to crush the enemy.”

Josef Stalin:
"Death is the solution to all problems. No man - no problem."
"When we hang the capitalists they will sell us the rope we use."
"You cannot make a revolution with silk gloves."

Pol Pot of the Khmer Rouge:
"The only good bourgeois is a dead bourgeois.”

Maximilien Robespierre, of the French Revolution:
"Terror is nothing but swift, severe, inflexible justice."

Ho Chi Minh of Vietnam:
"You will kill 10 of our men, and we will kill 1 of yours, and in the end it will be you who tire of it."

So how do you know what revolutionaries sound like, when anybody can be a revolutionary?

As if the aforementioned quotes weren't enough, let me spell it out: none of them talked about "respecting" an enemies' business, none of them talked about being a "group of individuals." They never called themselves small. Indeed, Mao Tse-tung said that all he needed were 15 men of true faith to remake the world, and Stalin remarked that ideas were more powerful than guns. They were anything BUT passive, and made no attempts at compromise with their enemies, seeking only complete triumph and total destruction. Sadly, they got their way.

You tell me, of all the people in the world, who really does threaten to execute or behead people in writing (and not simply 'kill,' as would be expected in a 'staged' ransom note)?

What makes you an expert on what makes anything staged? Is there some kind of "ransom note for dummies" book out there? You have to know what to look for. And there are guys trained to know what to look for. You can read what they said in PMPT or ITRMI.

If you suggest drugged or irritated or drunk housewives, how can I take that seriously?

I'll be more than happy to EXPLAIN how you can take that seriously, Holdon:

1) Think about her background. She grew up in the Sixties. At the height of the protest movements, she was about 12-15 years old. The name Bill Ayers has become very popular today. We all know why. He and his Weather Underground were only one of several radical factions operating in the US at the time.

2) Think about where she lived. Boulder is like the 60's radical equivalent of a living wax museum. You can't go anywhere in Boulder without running into some kind of radical socialist. You can't spit without hitting the next Ward Churchill.

3) Think about who she married. Ever since my conversion, I've believed she didn't write it alone. I think he had a fair hand in it. Where was he during the 80s? He was in the Navy stationed in the Phillipines, which at the time was convulsed in the anti-Marcos uprising. A lot of groups participated, ranging from liberal democrats to communists like the New People's Army to right-wing Islamists like Abu Sayyef. I'm sure he remembered a little about them.

Thats how I see RDI.

You should keep a more open mind, Holdon.

 

[Solace]

should keep a more open mind, Holdon.[/quote]

Excellent post SD, as usual. I really cannot wait to read what you write. I cannot wait.

 

[Chrishope]

The RN expression "group of individuals" is practically a definition of socialism.

Wow, and you're telling others they don't know anything about socialism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

 

[DeeDee249]

Actually, the "INDIVIDUAL" is completely subjugated in a Socialist government.
"Group of Individuals" is an oxymoron anyway. Every group is made up of individual units, that's a given, whether it is a group of people (like a club or credit union or musical group) or group of animals (like a zoo or menagerie) or group of plants (like a garden).
But to equate Socialism with any mention of "individual" is simply incorrect.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Actually, the "INDIVIDUAL" is completely subjugated in a Socialist government.
"Group of Individuals" is an oxymoron anyway. Every group is made up of individual units, that's a given, whether it is a group of people (like a club or credit union or musical group) or group of animals (like a zoo or menagerie) or group of plants (like a garden).
But to equate Socialism with any mention of "individual" is simply incorrect.

Very interesting observation that I already made. The expression is completely superfluous in a ransom note, so why bring it up?

The individual IS supressed, replaced by what, a 'group of individuals'? LOL

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

You tell me, of all the people in the world, who really does threaten to execute or behead people in writing (and not simply 'kill,' as would be expected in a 'staged' ransom note)?

What makes you an expert on what makes anything staged? Is there some kind of "ransom note for dummies" book out there? You have to know what to look for. And there are guys trained to know what to look for. You can read what they said in PMPT or ITRMI.

My question was: who really does threaten to execute or behead in writing?

You answered by changing the subject to professional ransom note analysis.

Can I answer your previous post, to which you said you were waiting, by changing the subject and instead asking you why the RN author chose 'execute' and 'behead' instead of 'kill'?

Regarding your frequent quoting of an army of professionals, and how they're all on your side (not really evident in the media. Are they the quiet majority?), let me share a quote from one of the bigger pros:

I mean, the whole thing is totally bizarre. I've never in my 35 year career seen anything like this.

 

[BBB167893]

Very interesting observation that I already made. The expression is completely superfluous in a ransom note, so why bring it up?

Because the writer couldn't help herself.

 

[BBB167893]

My question was: who really does threaten to execute or behead in writing?

Exactly; the key word is "really." There was no real threat. JB was dead.

Can I answer your previous post, to which you said you were waiting, by changing the subject and instead asking you why the RN author chose 'execute' and 'behead' instead of 'kill'?

You already DID! That's WHY I'm waiting. My waiting refers to post #193.

Regarding your frequent quoting of an army of professionals, and how they're all on your side

Read the books, Holdon.

(not really evident in the media, are they the quiet majority?),

Yes, actually.

let me share a quote from one of the bigger pros:
I mean, the whole thing is totally bizarre. I've never in my 35 year career seen anything like this.

Yes, I'm familiar with Mr. Ressler. Apparently, you aren't, or you wouldn't mention him to me. Well, turnabout is fair play:

"it's absolutely phony. Usually, a ransom note just gives the basics. But this one was full of colorful language and mixed messages. Then there's the matter of why any kidnapper would demand money when the victim's dead body was left behind. There's an almost maternal quality to comments like, 'the delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. A hardened criminal would never use those terms. He also noted that the acronym at the bottom of the note was done with periods between each letter, as was "FBI." Putting periods between letters in acronyms is a grammatical touch that has not been standard since the late 1960s. Patsy was born on December 29, 1956 and would have been a kid learning her English lessons in school before then. In those turbulent times, many organizations came along with "alphabet soup" names, and none of them used periods. There was SDS--Students for Democratic Society; PLO--Palestinian Liberation Organization; NOI--Nation of Islam; SLA--Symbionese Liberation Army (the people who kidnapped Patty Hearst and made the term "Stockholm Syndrome" famous); and the list goes on and on. Patsy was known to sign her letters to friends with acronyms with periods in them. One that stood out was "To B.V.F.M.F.A. from P.P.R.B.S.J." That meant "To Barbara V. Fernie, Master of Fine Arts from Patricia Paugh Ramsey, Bachelor of Science in Journalism." Patsy Ramsey had graduated college as a journalism major. She knew how to write a good story, and the note, as written, contained an opening that was properly set off from the body of the ransom letter, the way we were all taught to compose a letter. "Mr. Ramsey" is set off in a way that "Dear John" would be. Also, the closing line "Victory! S.B.T.C." was set off the way "Yours truly" would be rather than contained in the block of writing. Patsy Ramsey's writings from before and after the killing contain a large number of exclamation points, as does the ransom note. Not only that, but the reference to John Ramsey being a "fat cat," is also interesting. Not only was it a popular way for lefties to refer to rich people they see as evil or corrupt in the Sixties (some of them still do it), but from what I can gather, it was a nickname for John Ramsey, a rich corporate executive, that was used by Patsy's mother and father. Ressler also notes that the letter tells John to use his "good Southern common sense." John Ramsey is not from the American South. He originally comes from Michigan, near the Canadian border. Patsy Ramsey was born in West Virginia, right on the Mason-Dixon line, and lived for a long time in Atlanta, Georgia. Patsy's mother Nedra was often heard to say that John had "good Southern common sense" as a joke because he was a great businessman and for marrying her daughter, Patsy. Isn't that a coincidence?
Ressler also pointed out the use of the word "attaché." It's a word with French origins. It is usually spelled with the accent over the "e" to denote the sound of an "a." Patsy had studied French and lived in Atlanta, which has a strong undercurrent of French heritage. JonBenet's own name is a pseudo-French version of her father's first and middle names, John Bennett. It is always spelled with the accent over the second "e." Who else would bother with something like that? Lastly, concerning the ransom letter, and Ressler and several others mentioned the $118,000 bonus that John Ramsey got at the end of the year. Who would know that except someone who was very familiar with John?

I'll see your Ressler and raise you:

If revenge on the father had been a motive, McCrary said, "the killer would have displayed the body; he wouldn't have hidden it in the basement."

The profiler said the body would have been placed in a manner "to shock and offend" John Ramsey if anger or hate or revenge had been the motive.

Additionally, he said that by assaulting JonBenet, killing her, taking her from an upper-floor bedroom to a far corner of the basement and writing a lengthy ransom note - all negated a revenge killing. --Gregg McCrary.

"The note appears to be an effort to obfuscate why she died."
"To kill a child and then write a note of that length suggests that either the killer was so bold that he was mentally deranged or that he was a member of the family and had no reason to be concerned. The killer even had the time to start a previous draft and discard it."
"Given John Ramsey's wealth, a legitimate kidnapper would have demanded at least $1 million for the return of his daughter. Even more interesting, the demand that John withdraw the money from his account suggests that the writer knew that he had that much money in a single account."
"The statement sounds caring, motherly. "That fits in with the relatively small amount of money demanded. The writer only wants John Ramsey's bonus, something he can part with easily. Interestingly, at this point the writer switches to the pronoun 'I.' The pretext of a group demanding money has been dropped."
"The writer is a well-educated, middle-aged female. The writer used the term 'fat cat,' suggesting that the person is middle aged. 'Fat cat' is a term used in the 1960s and 1970s."--Roger DePue.

"Victory, with its revolutionary connotations, harks back to foreign powers." (FBI quote)

Try the ENTIRE quote, Holdon:

With its connotations of revolution, the closing 'Victory!'-harks back to the connection to foreign powers. 'S.B.T.C' may be another attempt to sound foreign, says Van Zandt.

You didn't really think that one would slip past me, did you?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Try the ENTIRE quote, Holdon:

With its connotations of revolution, the closing 'Victory!'-harks back to the connection to foreign powers. 'S.B.T.C' may be another attempt to sound foreign, says Van Zandt.

You didn't really think that one would slip past me, did you?

That single word 'may' is what separates you and I from the pros, I think.

Its wise to leave yourself an out, just in case you're wrong.

The idea that all pros are in silent objection to IDI is ridiculous. What you need to be taken seriously are contemporary quotes from Ressler, McCrary, DePue, VanZandt from after the latest DNA findings.

 

[BBB167893]

That single word 'may' is what separates you and I from the pros, I think.

Its wise to leave yourself an out, just in case you're wrong.

Maybe so. But again, you're not looking at the big picture.

The idea that all pros are in silent objection to IDI is ridiculous.

The idea that they're in lockstep with IDI is also ridiculous.

What you need to be taken seriously are contemporary quotes from Ressler, McCrary, DePue, VanZandt from after the latest DNA findings.

You forget one important thing, Holdon: someone has to ask the question. These aren't people who make a habit out of charging at every camera they see. We wouldn't know about the CASKU findings if Schiller and Thomas hadn't told us what they said in what was clearly at the time a private meeting.

Holdon, if I knew how to get in touch with these pros, don't you think I would have done so by now? If for no other reason than to get interview snippets for the book?

Agh. It's just as I've always said: when you -u-me.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Maybe so. But again, you're not looking at the big picture.

Whose big picture, yours or mine?

In the real big picture, there's unexplained DNA and LE is non-prosecutorial and non-aggressive toward the R's. Those are the people responsible for the investigation, remember? You know, those are the people with the most information.

That VanZandt quote is probably the closest thing this investigation has ever had to being on track to the intruder. And it was made in 1997. Here in 2008 it seems to me he probably didn't know how right he was.

With its connotations of revolution, the closing 'Victory!'-harks back to the connection to foreign powers. 'S.B.T.C' may be another attempt to sound foreign, says Van Zandt.

 

[Solace]

Whose big picture, yours or mine?

In the real big picture, there's unexplained DNA and LE is non-prosecutorial and non-aggressive toward the R's. Those are the people responsible for the investigation, remember? You know, those are the people with the most information.

That VanZandt quote is probably the closest thing this investigation has ever had to being on track to the intruder. And it was made in 1997. Here in 2008 it seems to me he probably didn't know how right he was.

Holdon,

There you go taking things at face value again. Of course Patsy was trying to sound like an intruder. She was also no doubt ingesting a sizable amount of drugs - one can clearly see the ransom note writing as shaky in the beginnning and then leveling out - It seems she just could not stop herself - she just kept on writing - and you know what they say about people on drugs. They think no one knows they are stoned.

Three pages - the woman would not shut up. Wouldn't be surpised if she took most of the bottle that night. One would have to in order to get through it. Carrying JB alone to the basement would require a handful. And then the garrote and the sexual assault. She probably carried the xanax with her.

 

[BBB167893]

Whose big picture, yours or mine?

Maybe that's the problem. You say you see RDI as ridiculous, but I don't think you've ever really tried to understand it. I know you have it in you. Every now and then, you ask some really good questions in what seems like an honest attempt. Trouble is, every time you and I have one of those sessions, you always leave halfway through, like with post #193. I've been both, so I can sympathize, even if I don't agree.

In the real big picture, there's unexplained DNA and LE is non-prosecutorial and non-aggressive toward the R's.

As I've tried to point out to you, Holdon, Boulder LE is non-prosecutorial and non-aggressive in general. I'll ask again: doesn't that bother you at all?

Those are the people responsible for the investigation, remember? You know, those are the people with the most information.

Having it and USING it are two different things, Holdon.