Let's throw down, jams

OHMIGOD! I just used three nuts on my post on the other thread about wackadoodles, just like you did here! I've never used them before! I hadn't opened this thread and seen yours yet, either!

I'M PSYCHIC!

And by psychic I mean I hear voices. By voices I mean Evening2 is talking to me. By talking I mean she's in my head explaining why Santa deliberately didn't set the table properly! By properly, I mean in a manner that would insult the Ramseys so much they'd KNOW it was the killer leaving a message for them:

The message was

Eat pineapple fairy dust, you losers!​

Too bad only Evening2 had her tin foil hat attuned to the SBTC: Santa Bill Telecommunications Channel.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~​

 

Just goes to show how far remved jameson is from FACTs and reality.

Yesterday Miss Marple/DocWatson made a post stating that the Bonita Papers could probably be found at FFJ (NO LINK GIVEN) and then he posted a link to his Wiki saying that case papers could be found there. I wondered how long the link to the Wiki would last since jameson is clearly extremenly jealous of it.

This morning I see this post:-

Miss Marple/DocWatson is NOT Borg. He used to post at WS but spent most of his time there fighting with so called Borg posters but he was nasty and could never resist making snide remarks. He is RST to the bone - of that there is no doubt.

Clearly jameson wants readers to think Miss Marple/DocWatson posted a link to FFJ (another example of her use of semantics to lie).

The wiki looks good - STREETS ahead of jameson's pathetic little fact forum which she created as a wiki substitute for her members after she gave the order (albeit it indirect) for her members not to post at the wiki.

She has no good reason not to link to the wiki - it isn't BORG. She clearly doesn't want readers to visit the wiki and see how much better it is than her forum! Yet again we have proof that for jameson, this is all about jameson - and not about finding JonBenet's killer.

EDITED TO ADD:- I have never been particularly impressed with jameson's skills of analysis or deduction, but for her to call it BORG takes the biscuit. Her forum has been used for the vast majority of references. On the rare occasion he does refer to one of the "BORG" forums, it is in a negative way.

A wiki is supposed to be a factual reference (i.e. unbiased) but if DocWatson really wants thinking people to take his wiki seriously, he needs to stop using jameson as a source for 99% of his "facts".

 

It's great to see that jameson reads here. - she changed her comment to edit the lie which I exposed in my previous post.

HOWEVER - seems jameson has little confidence even in her own site. She says about the wiki that she will not link to a site of lies - when in fact the wiki is just a site full of links to her own website...

ROFL!

She really hates that the wiki is so much more professionally presented than her own site.

I'd like to add a few things to that wiki myself...

 

So...the wiki is pro-Ram and links mostly to jams' own webpages...and she's calling it full of lies?

hahahaha

Well, for ONCE, jams told the truth!

 

What jams has done by way of "correcting" her previous misstatement makes even less sense. She now claims Miss Marple "indirectly" linked to this site. Howzat? Another poster mentions the Bonita Papers being here at FFJ and clearly says one may find them here if one looks hard enough. No edit there.

But then jams has a link to the Bonita Papers AT HER WEBSITE. All the while pi$$ing and moaning about how wrong they are. I dont' get it. It's ok to read them, wrong as they are, as long as you read them at HER site? And if you mention FFJ...that's an "indirect link," but only if she decides so in your one post but not in others doing the same thing?

Believe me, I doubt that anyone at FFJ gives one hoot if anyone at the swamp reads here, comes here for references or sources or information, or knows up from down.

We just go there for the three ring circus! :curtsey:

 

And speaking of circus freaks...gutter candy wrote this little post:

Candy
unregistered user
04-07-06, 08:22 AM (EST)

9. "RE: The Bonita papers"
In response to message #0

The DA's office was very upset the gutter published those stolen police files.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My memory isn't what it used to be, but wasn't gutter candy once all aglow because SHE posted the portion of the Bonita Papers about the enhanced 911 tape at CyberSleuths FIRST?

I may be wrong, it's been so many years now, but I do remember gutter candy posting the section about that tape at CS, word for word, that ended up being part of the Bonita Papers. I don't have time to look it up now, but if anyone else remembers...feel free to set the record straight.

I mean, I sure want the guttah to get credit for every lowdown thing we do! irate:

 

In order to understand jameson's posts, we need to understand how her mind works.

1) Miss Marple/DocWatson posted a link to the wiki.
2) The wiki has "a" link to FFJ

"And hence" the wiki "indirectly" links to a BORG site!


jameson thinks that readers of her site are thick and won't ever know about the "borg" sites if she doesn't have links to them...

 

Here's another photo of Janet McReynolds for comparison with Louise Armstrong:-



CLICK HERE FOR OTHER PHOTO :-



It is true that Louise Armstrong seems difficult to contact but not everyone wants to have their details splashed all over the Internet. Some people don't even have computers and others utilise them for the application software only.

Mikie says she used to have a webpage but that it disappeared. I suggest that maybe she was getting hassled by people through her website and deleted it. I have a couple of Internet friends who removed their websites because of harassment from crazies. She's known as a feminist and an incest survivor so maybe she just doesn't want random people contacting her.

My point is that just because she doesn't have a website or contact details on the Internet - isn't further proof that she is Janet McReynolds!

 

Come on, now. Let's be fair.

They both HAVE a head. Sitting on a neck. Hair. Ears--can't see them? Two eyes. A nose. A mouth. Teeth. Can smile.

THEY'RE THE SAME PERSON!! I GET IT!! I DO!! ills:

 

Jayelles, are you suggesting that a woman who is a published author and victim advocate for sex abuse survivors wouldn't want to be contacted by E2 and Mikie, asking if she's a CHILD MOLESTING, MURDERING, PSYCHOPATH parading around as JANET MCREYNOLDS?

Gosh. SHE MUST BE JANET MCREYNOLDS!! ::shocked2

 

May I just bump in here to say that the title to this thread is one of my personal favorites out of the thousands here?! Just showing my appreciation for your continuous prefection, KK..... irate:

 

Add to that the fact that she's a globetrotting speaker on feminism whom E2 and others believe was content to lead a secret life hanging on the arm of Santa Claus. I just cannot see it. I don't know a lot of feminists but one of my very good friends is a feminist and there is just no way she'd do the little woman act - even for fun - so I have to throw that fact into the boiling pot and I just cannot see it. I think this is the stuff of fiction novels and I cannot see it going on in real life. Louise Armstrong has been speaking publicly right up until recent years and she has a solid fan base around the world. We don't know how old the photo is that we have and she didn't look terribly young in it - maybe she has retired? Maybe she's been ill? Maybe she's blissfully happy in a relationship with someone? Maybe she is caring for an elderly parent? There are lots of reasons why someone might disappear from a public life which AREN'T proof that they are hiding a big secret!

I've come across web pages where people have stated that she had a major impact on them - presumably from a personal POV through her writing. I understand that lots of writers have pseudonyms but I think that if Janet McReynolds and Louise Armstrong were the same person, it would have come out by now. When Janet was interviewed on tv folowing JonBenet's murder, I think someone would have recognised her. OR when she was being interviewed by police, she would surely have used her position as abuse victim's advocate in her own defence?

The burden of proof for Louise Armstrong being Janet McReynolds lies with E2, Mikie & Co. The burden of proving they AREN'T one and the same does not lie with everyone else.

 

Well, there it is. Mikie can just consult his astrological charts and E2 is a crime fighting wonderkind. Louise = Janet!! :beammeup:

 

I don't know what it matters if she is or if she isn't. :beersign:

 

Well, JC, I guess you just don't appreciate the master criminal mind like E2 does. Think of the LIFETIME of intrigues and switched identities and nefarious crimes and planning...all awaiting the Ramseys' move to Boulder after they produced their girl child, just so the McReynolds could perpetrate one of the most infamous murders in history! And ONLY E2 is the professional crime solver who can catch their "confessions" and 30 year crime spree!

And all she has to do is hook it all up with the Krebbies child sex ring dynasty, and we will have a full blown Wingnut Fusion of Big Bang proportions.

Stand back, I tell you! Get your shelters at the ready!! :beammeup:

 

I dont get why there is always argument about the audio tape. It's a catch 22 for the Ramsey's.

1) If it were me, I would rather admit I just lied, that Burke was awake, etc.

2) Because if not, then in means you let your son sleep, never checking his room to see if an intruder was in there, while your daughter was being murdered in the basement.

I think the 2nd case is a much stronger indication of guilt then if Burke was awake during the 911 call.

 

Oh, they have a better story than that, Stonewall. Burke WAS awake, they now all admit, but he was "pretending" to be asleep when his parents "checked" his room. Why, you ask, when hearing his parents screaming and running around, he wouldn't simply come out of his room and ask, What is going on? Why, you might wonder, would he not ask them what was going on when they came INTO his room "to check on him", even turning on the light, then turning it back off, in their "story"?

Good questions. Did anyone bother to ask him? Not unless the Grand Jury did, because until the his Grand Jury testimony, apparently Patsy and John didn't even know he was awake! He was "pretending" to be asleep. Makes sense, right? :no:

 

Just for you, Rat, since this is your favorite thread title, you say:

I saw this at the swamp yesterday and upon reflection, knowing jams says she's going to close the swamp, I thought it entirely appropriate to post one of her last thread-starters in which she lives up to the RST's devoted "magical thinking", always and forever leading to denying any incriminating evidence, quashing any questions which are "uncomfortable" to answer because the answers clearly MUST lead to looking again at that INNER CIRCLE of the Ramseys--and THAT is NOT ALLOWED in Ramseyland.

I have just ONE QUESTION regarding jams' repetition of her DENY DENY DENY stance on this issue: HOW DOES JAMS KNOW THAT THE PRIOR VAGINAL INJURIES WERE FROM BUBBLE BATH, CHEAP UNDERWEAR, or "wiping issues"? Who ever heard of such a thing destroying a six year old's hymen? Just HOW does she determine that? Was jams there? Living in the Ramsey home? Did Patsy say she still let JB USE bubble bath after prior bouts with vaginitis, treated by the pediatrician? At what point is jams SO DESPERATE to SHILL FOR THE RAMSEYS that she decided to FOREVER DENY DENY DENY clear evidence that the child was being sexually abused DAYS before she was sexually abused and murdered?

Oh well, let's let her explain herself...heh:

Oh, my. The littleheads went off book! Good thing jams was still around to instruct them, especially brilliant Dave, on what conclusions they may NOT draw from the autopsy. Ever. NEVER.

 

Heh, remember dear Nedthan's theory on why JB's hymen was pretty much gone before she died? Nedthan stated that JB's taking a shower "eroded" her hymen.

The hell you say, said I. What did JB do, stand on her head in the shower with her legs apart?

It had to be one of the most bizarre statements ever in the history of the JB forums, and it presented two great opportunities for giving old Ned what he'd been asking for. If water could erode a hymen by the age of 6, there would be no virgins ever to go to her husband intact on their wedding night. And, since most people stand on their feet in the shower, and not on their heads, I guess Nedthan was inferring the water got to JB's hymen through osmosis; or, perhaps, it went in her ears and found it's way to her hymen.

There are some really stupid people in this world, in case you hadn't already noticed. I had great fun letting Ned hang himself with that one.