Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lord Orsam's Blog

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hi Gary,

    Your Auntie Mary's canary: was it up the leg of her drawers?

    Stay safe.

    Simon

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
      Hi Gary,

      Your Auntie Mary's canary: was it up the leg of her drawers?

      Stay safe.

      Simon
      Hi Simon,

      Was she your auntie too?

      Gary

      Comment


      • Hi Gary,

        She sounds eerily like my Aunt Dorothy, right down to the buttered toast. But she preferred sherry to tea.

        Regards,

        Simon

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
          Hi Gary,

          She sounds eerily like my Aunt Dorothy, right down to the buttered toast. But she preferred sherry to tea.

          Regards,

          Simon
          Now that is a coincidence.

          But I was asking about auntie Mary, the lady with the hidden canary. ��

          Comment


          • Dorothy might have been Mary. Sherry made her flatulent. She had a canary up the leg of her drawers, and when she farted it departed with a round of applause.

            High tea was fun.

            Comment


            • August 22, 2020

              https://www.orsam.co.uk/news.htm
              To Join JTR Forums :
              Contact [email protected]

              Comment


              • September 19, 2020

                https://www.orsam.co.uk/news.htm
                To Join JTR Forums :
                Contact [email protected]

                Comment


                • October 10, 2020

                  https://www.orsam.co.uk/news.htm
                  To Join JTR Forums :
                  Contact [email protected]

                  Comment


                  • November 14, 2020

                    https://www.orsam.co.uk/news.htm
                    To Join JTR Forums :
                    Contact [email protected]

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Howard Brown View Post

                      Once again the silence is deafening from those researchers who have been brought to task. As it was in all the previous Lord Orsams blogs going back over the months.

                      No matter what peoples opinions of him are I personally think he is an excellent and thorough researcher and clearly spends a great deal of time in conducting his research.

                      The ball is firmly in the court of those who have been brought to task to either prove him wrong or accept their misgivings.

                      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                        Once again the silence is deafening from those researchers who have been brought to task. As it was in all the previous Lord Orsams blogs going back over the months.

                        No matter what peoples opinions of him are I personally think he is an excellent and thorough researcher and clearly spends a great deal of time in conducting his research.

                        The ball is firmly in the court of those who have been brought to task to either prove him wrong or accept their misgivings.

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                        Orsam’s rants aren’t worthy of a response.

                        However, I’m intrigued by the character Andrew Stevens who Orsam reckons was Kitty Roman’s landlord in 1909. I’m going to start a thread on him. Perhaps Orsam’s ‘Public Service Announcement?’ will prove have been valid. Perhaps not. Who knows?

                        Comment


                        • From what I've read of David's contributions to Ripperology and other subjects, the quality of his research is extremely high.

                          I gave up either writing anything or reading very much about the Diary long ago, but I think it would be very unwise for anyone to dismiss any of his conclusions without very careful consideration.

                          Obviously he has ruffled feathers, to put it mildly, but sadly that goes with the territory.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Chris Phillips View Post
                            From what I've read of David's contributions to Ripperology and other subjects, the quality of his research is extremely high.

                            I gave up either writing anything or reading very much about the Diary long ago, but I think it would be very unwise for anyone to dismiss any of his conclusions without very careful consideration.

                            Obviously he has ruffled feathers, to put it mildly, but sadly that goes with the territory.
                            Chris, you are someone I would consider an extremely competent researcher - perhaps you’d care to join me over on the Andrew Stevens thread to see if we can get to the truth of whether Seanb is guilty of having posted an ‘inaccurate droplet of information’ as Orsam so charmingly claims.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
                              Chris, you are someone I would consider an extremely competent researcher - perhaps you?d care to join me over on the Andrew Stevens thread to see if we can get to the truth of whether Seanb is guilty of having posted an ?inaccurate droplet of information? as Orsam so charmingly claims.

                              What I said was that David's contributions were of very high quality, amd that they shouldn't be dismissed without "very careful consideration". Of course that doesn't imply he's infallible or anything like that. Who is?



                              If one of his opinions has been carefully considered and rejected that's another matter - but I haven't looked into the one you mention, so I can't express an informed opinion about it.


                              But please let's not have "Orsam?s rants aren?t worthy of a response". Unless his "rants" have been rebutted with some proper evidence.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Chris Phillips View Post
                                What I said was that David's contributions were of very high quality, amd that they shouldn't be dismissed without "very careful consideration". Of course that doesn't imply he's infallible or anything like that. Who is?



                                If one of his opinions has been carefully considered and rejected that's another matter - but I haven't looked into the one you mention, so I can't express an informed opinion about it.


                                But please let's not have "Orsam?s rants aren?t worthy of a response". Unless his "rants" have been rebutted with some proper evidence.
                                If they are highly personalised attacks on individuals - which they invariably are - they don’t deserve a response. End of.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X