More (new) diary entries
RossG12345
"When I bought this pipe, I was wearing a bulky coat,
with a jacket inside, so I would appear heavier than I am;
silvered glasses; a cap with a visor that covered my
forehead; and kleenex inside my nostrils which expanded
them."
In the same letter Ted states that when he sees a
motorcycle tearing up the mountain meadows, he
wants to watch the bullet rip through his flesh and,
"I want to kick him in the face while he is dying ".
_________
Thanks to Mignarda and his buddy Rusconi for paying
to get the exhibits of the sentencing memo.
Esjeje1
Ross wrote:
>"When I bought this pipe, I was wearing a bulky coat,
>with a jacket inside, so I would appear heavier than I am;
>silvered glasses; a cap with a visor that covered my
>forehead; and kleenex inside my nostrils which expanded
>them."
>
>In the same letter Ted states that when he sees a
>motorcycle tearing up the mountain meadows, he
>wants to watch the bullet rip through his flesh and,
>"I want to kick him in the face while he is dying ".
>
Well, we all know that Ted was a master of disguise - was he a Sherlock Holmes
fan? Although, I must say, I never see any resemblence between most composite
drawings and the bad guys they end up catching:)
And we all know that Ted had a lot of anger.
But, I'll still read any diary entries you post. And hopefully, a few will
portray some other aspect of his character, which is certainly complicated, and
which might provide an interesting lesson or debate or such.
I heard a piece on my favorite radio station on my commute home this evening,
about depression in children, and its manifestations - specifically anger and
withdrawal. The story was about a kid whose mother found him one day in a
closet, curled up, with a toy gun pressed against his head - he told his mother
that if it were real, he would use it. He saw nothing but torment and hell in
his future. Other kids didn't like him, and he claimed not to care about
friendships. He's since been in therapy, and has made a lot of improvements.
One telling statement, "When I was depressed, I didn't want to be around other
kids, because they didn't like me; I don't know why they didn't." He has
friends and does normal kid things now, although he still has a bit of work to
do.
Well, no speculation about what could have been done for Ted, I'm no mental
health professional, but it's encouraging to know that the problem of mental
illness in children is being recognized. It wasn't always. If it were, I don't
doubt that Wanda would have done something for him. Did you know that children
(I don't mean teenagers by this) actually do commit suicide? It's
inconceivable, but that's the root of the problem. But then again, it's
inconceivable that children should kill or threaten to do so, and there's been
enough of that in the news lately.
-Susan
Mignarda
>Subject: Re: More (new) diary entries
>From: esj...@aol.com (Esjeje1)
>Date: Thu, May 28, 1998 02:01 EDT
>Message-id: <199805280601...@ladder03.news.aol.com>
>
>Ross wrote:
>
>>"When I bought this pipe, I was wearing a bulky coat,
>>with a jacket inside, so I would appear heavier than I am;
>>silvered glasses; a cap with a visor that covered my
>>forehead; and kleenex inside my nostrils which expanded
>>them."
>>
>>In the same letter Ted states that when he sees a
>>motorcycle tearing up the mountain meadows, he
>>wants to watch the bullet rip through his flesh and,
>>"I want to kick him in the face while he is dying ".
>>
>
>Well, we all know that Ted was a master of disguise - was he a Sherlock
>Holmes
>fan? Although, I must say, I never see any resemblence between most composite
>drawings and the bad guys they end up catching:)
>
purchased by me and Mike Rusconi from the Eastern District of California.
Within a few weeks I hope to have all 92 pages available for purchase on a
CD-ROM at a reasonable price for anyone interested.
For two years now one of the central objections to the Unabomber/Zodiac
hypothesis promulgated by Rusconi and me has been the notion that Zodiac was a
large, hulking "stocky" man, unlike the lean Kaczynski. This objection was
stated as one of only two objections given by author Robert Graysmith in his
recent Unabomber book (the other objection pertains to differences in writing
style). Based on conflicting reports by two eyewitnesses, definitive accounts
by two other eyewitnesses, a wristwatch with a 7-inch circumference, and the
words of Zodiac himself, it has been our contention, clearly stated since 1996,
that Zodiac disguised himself by adding layers of bulky clothing to mask a
moderate physique. This recent journal entry, contained in the exhibits, gives
direct support to that contention. It does not prove the hypothesis in and of
itself, but strikes down a key objection that has kept some people from taking
it more seriously.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
"Conformity is the Omnibus of Death"
http://members.aol.com/Mignarda/index.html
Unabomber/Zodiac
$11.99 on CD-ROM!
Shadow
Wasn't there also greater height? Did Ted clump around in 3 inch
platforms?
This recent journal entry, contained in the exhibits, gives
> direct support to that contention. It does not prove the hypothesis in and of
> itself, but strikes down a key objection that has kept some people from taking
> it more seriously.
By no means is that the only objection. The key objection to me is that
the Unabomber's anger/hatred is different. His anger is provoked by
MACHINES, not lovers on lovers' lanes. A second key objection is that in
1971 or so, Ted is just starting to work up the nerve to kill. Whereas
the Zodiac had been killing since 1966. A third objection, related to
the second, is the complete absence in the journals of any hints
relating to a Zodiac killing spree. Pretend for a moment that Ted and
Zodiac are one & the same. Possibly Ted wouldn't write of his Zodiac
murders in his diaries (although I'm not sure why not, since he's
forthright enough about his bombings). But would he be arguing with his
conscience & trying to work up the nerve to kill?? I think not.
The Unabomber is angry at something, and it is usually quite clear what
that something is. Whereas if I recall the Zodiac never really even
seemed angry... he just seemed egotistical & starved for recognition.
The key objection, therefore, doesn't have to do with something an extra
jacket can cover. It has to do with different PERSONALITIES.
ps. When I heard Mignarda had access to journal entries, I first wanted
to say "if you found anything that contradicts the tone of the
sentencing memo, would you post it in fairness?" But now I think that he
merely has the full sentencing memo, all of which bolsters the Feds'
case. No one as yet has released any information of any other type.
(call it "mitigating journal entries"). I guess it remains for Ted to
release those "facts" that he promised us. Better yet (in terms of
mainstream credibility) perhaps his family could be persuaded to do so.
--Shadow
RossG12345
Shadow suggests that the family might release other
portions that might cast TK in a nobler light. Certainly,
the advocate's job is to make a sow's ear look like a silk
purse (or vica versa). So we shouldn't rely on the
prosecution's selective choice of entries from many
hundreds of pages of entries in forming a final view
of TK's writings. If TK wants other entries or writings
published, all he has to do is drop them in the mail.
On the Zodiac subject, Mignarda and Rusconi should
write a letter to David asking if he can
provide some concrete alibi or other evidence that
would put their speculationthat TK is also the Zodiac
killer to rest. Absent such
a direct and obvious approach, there's no point
in spinning wheels or revisiting the matter.
David can answer the letter or not. I once
spoke to Attorney Bisceglie (David's attorney)
and asked him for copies of letters that would
give TK an alibi in 1970 and 1971 (because I thought the
speculation, which I thought was silly, was unfair to TK's right
to a fair trial). Actually, as I recall, I asked only
for a list of postmarks.
Attorney B. said there weren't any. He did not reveal anything
in his tone that indicated that he thought Mignarda's speculation
was crackpot.
I suspect that if David is contacted (and if he responds),
he won't be able to provide any documentary or other
compelling evidence that convinces Mignarda
that TK is not also the Zodiac. Mignarda, it won't
be offensive if you cast it in terms of giving him
the opportunity to put it to rest. If he doesn't put
to rest, that "Unsolved Mysteries" episode will show
in repeats.
Mignarda
>Subject: Re: More (new) diary entries
>Date: Thu, May 28, 1998 08:51 EDT
>Message-id: <199805281251...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
I'm going to take you up on your suggestion. I may also drop a line to Ted.
I've received unofficial word that his assessment of the connection is that it
is "ridiculous."
Even so, it seems to me that Dave has had ample time and opportunity to provide
an alibi for Ted. The Unsolved Mysteries episode has aired a number of times
since September of 1996; the AP and Reuters attempted to contact Ted's
attorneys in May of 1996 and our web page has been up since early last year.
Certainly Dave is aware of the connection, yet his only attempt to rebut it has
been in the form of two completely unprompted statements, one on 60 Minutes and
the other in an interview for the Sacramento Bee in which he made remarks to
the effect that he didn't think Ted could kill or slash anyone with a knife.
Other than that he has never addressed the topic by name, so far as I'm aware.
I have a feeling I know why, but that's just speculation, and we needn't pursue
it here and now. Maybe later.
Shadow
V
>
> Come on! Haven't you people ever heard of "innocent until proven guilty"?
> True, there do seem to be a lot of intriguing paralells between Ted and Zodiac.
> Of course, there are a lot of intriguing paralells between Ted and myself that
> I could list here if I cared to. If I did, it might just amaze you what he and
> I have in common.
Please do! You'd be surprised how many people have said the same thing.
(most of them on this newsgroup or aside of it in private e-mail.)
The Outcast! Page / Radical Fiction
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/2532
Esjeje1
Viktoria4 wrote:
> Of course, there are a lot of intriguing paralells between Ted and myself
>that
>I could list here if I cared to. If I did, it might just amaze you what he
>and
>I have in common.
<snip>
>And this is my point; we like to think that there is no such thing as
>coincidence (I certainly would), but sometimes, there simply is no other
>explanation, no matter how much we want there to be.
I think that there is a big difference between coincidence and having something
in common. I am reminded of Ionesco's "The Bald Soprano" (La cantatrice
chauve), where two people meet on a train, and are reminded of each other, and
keep finding coincidences - it is a quite absurb and hilarious piece - it
appears from their dialogue that they are a married couple who have a daughter
together - but at the last, it turns out that there is one miniscule difference
that rules out this possibility.
I think that humans are fascinated with coincidences as a way of finding
something in common with each other, or as a way to prove some theory in which
they believe. Coincidences can be ice-breakers, which can lead to having
something in common. Coincidences can also lead to research which may prove
something more substantial. But more often, coincidence is just about random
chance. Isn't this what is meant by circumstantial evidence?
Now, truly having something in common is much more interesting, it's more
feeling. As both rational and feeling beings, having something in common with a
person or a philosophy seems a world away from experiencing coincidences. The
one might be a wild goose chase, the other might change the world!
-Susan
"We are the hero of our own story." - Mary McCarthy
jo...@nine7.demon.co.uk
On 1998-05-29 vikt...@aol.com(Viktoria4) said:
vi>Xref: news.demon.co.uk alt.fan.unabomber:2251
vi>Path: news.demon.co.uk!demon!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!newsfeed.
vi>nacamar.de!feed2.news.erols.com!erols!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet
vi>Newsgroups: alt.fan.unabomber
vi>NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
vi>X-Admin: ne...@aol.com
vi>Date: 29 May 1998 00:33:11 GMT
vi>Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
vi>References: <199805281251...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
vi>Lines: 63
vi>>Shadow suggests that the family might release other
vi>>portions that might cast TK in a nobler light. Certainly,
vi>>the advocate's job is to make a sow's ear look like a silk
vi>>purse (or vica versa). So we shouldn't rely on the
vi>>prosecution's selective choice of entries from many
vi>>hundreds of pages of entries in forming a final view
vi>>of TK's writings. If TK wants other entries or writings
vi>>published, all he has to do is drop them in the mail.
vi>>On the Zodiac subject, Mignarda and Rusconi should
vi>>write a letter to David asking if he can
vi>>provide some concrete alibi or other evidence that
vi>>would put their speculationthat TK is also the Zodiac
vi>>killer to rest. Absent such
vi>>a direct and obvious approach, there's no point
vi>>in spinning wheels or revisiting the matter.
vi>>David can answer the letter or not. I once
vi>>spoke to Attorney Bisceglie (David's attorney)
vi>>and asked him for copies of letters that would
vi>>give TK an alibi in 1970 and 1971 (because I thought the
vi>>speculation, which I thought was silly, was unfair to TK's right
vi>>to a fair trial). Actually, as I recall, I asked only
vi>>for a list of postmarks.
vi>>Attorney B. said there weren't any. He did not reveal anything
vi>>in his tone that indicated that he thought Mignarda's speculation
vi>>was crackpot.
vi>>I suspect that if David is contacted (and if he responds),
vi>>he won't be able to provide any documentary or other
vi>>compelling evidence that convinces Mignarda
vi>>that TK is not also the Zodiac. Mignarda, it won't
vi>>be offensive if you cast it in terms of giving him
vi>>the opportunity to put it to rest. If he doesn't put
vi>>to rest, that "Unsolved Mysteries" episode will show
vi>>in repeats.
vi>Come on! Haven't you people ever heard of "innocent until proven
vi>guilty"? True, there do seem to be a lot of intriguing paralells
vi>between Ted and Zodiac. Of course, there are a lot of intriguing
vi>paralells between Ted and myself that I could list here if I cared
vi>to. If I did, it might just amaze you what he and I have in common.
vi>But when all is said and done, the only connection that I have to
vi>him is that I just happen to live down the street from Equinox (the
vi>place where David works). And this is my point; we like to think
vi>that there is no such thing as coincidence (I certainly would), but
vi>sometimes, there simply is no other explanation, no matter how much
vi>we want there to be. Wouldn't I love to beleive that with all Ted
vi>and I have in common that he and I are soulmates! But I live in the
vi>real world. Furthermore, we must remember that Ted is
vi>pathologically shy. It was only through the use of bombs and "
vi>poison pen" letters that he was able to express his angerand
vi>hatred at all. In other words, I don't think he would have had the
vi>cajones to attack people in the flesh, especially not when it would
vi>be two against one! I do not doubt that he would have liked to do
vi>what Zodiac did: there is a certain kind of hatred that people who
vi>have had no success in their love life (and crave it desperately)
vi>have for those that do and flaunt it. I can personally attest to
vi>this, and I am dead certain that this is why Ted broke off
vi>relations with his brother: he had found Love and Ted didn't.
I think, basicaly Ted was a nice guy and that this is supported by most
direct dealings with him.
But he did have more to show, without doubt, but couldn't.
This backlog of things to show evolved into a monster, with the help
of "a cool headed logian" inside himself to both protect him and supply
interesting articles.
I was thinking that, maybe his interest in chemistry wasn't confined
to explosives only and that maybe, like the story "Dr. Jekel and Mr. Hyde"
there could have been a Dr. Kaczynski and Mr. Zodiac in the one Ted.
So that maybe someone did meet the hate that Ted felt in person.
Any ideas as to what chemicals might allow an extremly shy person
"come out" without being stupid drunk?
John Biosicfix www.nine7.demon.co.uk Lots of links
*****Us neurons must trade in new problems, not old ones*****
Did you know computers double in power every 18 months?
Mignarda
>Subject: Re: More (new) diary entries
>Date: Mon, Jun 1, 1998 20:14 EDT
>Message-id: <896746457.2290.3...@news.demon.co.uk>
>I think, basicaly Ted was a nice guy and that this is supported by most
>direct dealings with him.
>But he did have more to show, without doubt, but couldn't.
>This backlog of things to show evolved into a monster, with the help
>of "a cool headed logian" inside himself to both protect him and supply
>interesting articles.
>
>I was thinking that, maybe his interest in chemistry wasn't confined
>to explosives only and that maybe, like the story "Dr. Jekel and Mr. Hyde"
>there could have been a Dr. Kaczynski and Mr. Zodiac in the one Ted.
>So that maybe someone did meet the hate that Ted felt in person.
>
>Any ideas as to what chemicals might allow an extremly shy person
>"come out" without being stupid drunk?
>
>
I've said this many times before as a matter of educated speculation, but now
it's perfectly borne out by the facts: Ted Kaczynski may not like people's
company but he's not especially shy. The only difference between the MO of
Zodiac and that of the Unabomber is that bombs made a much safer means of
delivering death. In October of 1969 Zodiac had a face-to-face confrontation
with two officers of the San Francisco Police. This was not more than five
minutes after he gunned down cabby Paul Stine, and only a miracle saved him
from capture or a shoot-out that would probably have ended in his death. No
known Zodiac killings occurred from that point. Zodiac was thoroughly spooked
by the near-disaster, and contented himself for the next 19 months with bomb
diagrams and threats mailed to the San Francisco Chronicle. (A comparison of
Zodiac and Unabomber bomb diagrams can be seen at
http://members.aol.com/Mignarda/bomb.htm)
In his journal entries Kaczynski repeatedly agonizes over the necessity to get
his revenge in a safe and indirect way. On a couple of occasions he tries to
break free, intimating that he might go out on a killing spree and run the risk
of death, or lie in ambush for the people he hates. Long before a single fatal
bomb was set he spoke of killing apart from killing with bombs, and spoke as
one who was an old hand at it.
Esjeje1
John wrote:
>Any ideas as to what chemicals might allow an extremly shy person
>"come out" without being stupid drunk?
There are plenty of chemicals out there, being prescribed for people with
different types of depression, etc. Over prescribed, I think.
It's a real shame Ted didn't get therapy, which he did seek out later in life.
Of course, his problems started in childhood, and back then, it wouldn't have
been thought of. Or his liberal parents would probably have sought this type of
help early on. Therapy doesn't necessarily mean indoctrination. It can be like
going to a health club for the psyche. He needed to learn some social skills to
be happy, but just didn't know any more about them than I do about fixing a
car.
-Susan
"Practice makes perfect."
RossG12345
John writes:
"I think, basically Ted was a nice guy and that this is supported
without doubt, but couldn't. This backlog of things to show evolved
I definitely agree. Everyone who has had dealings with him
has said he was gentle, polite etc. My friend took a valium
to get over his case of blue balls. I think that if TK had smoked
some marijuana in college, he might have relaxed some.
He could have played his trombone in some honky tonk
dive, become a world class journalist and author, and used
his writing ability and intelligence to spread his
anti-technology views. The dissemination of those
views through the written word would have been the goal
that gave his life meaning (which is how it turned out
anyway even though he thinks of himself as pursuing only
the immediate goals necessary for survival).
RossG12345
Mignarda,
Do you agree that the asterisked items in Graysmith's
book (in the appendix) represent "confirmed Zodiac killings?"
Was Stine the last one? What about the Fall of 1970 and
the Spring of 1971? Does Graysmith treat any
"confirmed Zodiac killings" as occurring during that period?
(I don't have the book handy).
Mignarda
>Subject: Re: More (new) diary entries
>Date: Mon, Jun 1, 1998 22:56 EDT
>Message-id: <199806020256...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
incident (March 22, 1970) where a woman was abducted by a good samaritan ruse
and driven by Zodiac all over the backroads of northern California for two or
three hours while her abductor sat in the driver's seat making terroristic
remarks in a soft, quiet monotone. Here's the rundown on the known killings:
Cheri Bates, Riverside, CA October 30, 1966
David Faraday and Betty Lou Jensen, Vallejo, CA Dec. 28, 1968
Darlene Ferrin, July 4, 1969
Cecilia Shepard, Sept. 27, 1969
Paul Stine, Oct. 11, 1969
And that's pretty much it. The campaign of terroristic letter writing commenced
immediately following the Stine killing and ran straight through in choppy
intervals until March 22, 1971, when the correspondences suddenly ceased until
January 29, 1974. From that date there is one authenticated and one
semi-authenticated (acknowledged by the San Francisco Chronicle but not by
police) letter, styled the "Old Norse" letter in which the writer mentions the
Old Norse language.
Other than the killings mentioned, neither Graysmith nor anyone else knows of
any confirmed killings from Oct. 11 on. No one knows what would have happened
to the abducted woman had she not escaped.
Esjeje1
Ross wrote:
>The dissemination of those
>views through the written word would have been the goal
>that gave his life meaning (which is how it turned out
>anyway even though he thinks of himself as pursuing only
>the immediate goals necessary for survival).
I've wondered about that a bit - how did Ted see his writing in terms of
surrogate activities? Remember, non-surrogate activities should also be
mentally fulfulling.
I think it would be interesting to look at the journal entries, and compare
them to passages in the manifesto, which John is still posting (thanks!) (I
also thought more proof was needed for certain points.) While browsing through
it, I noticed paragraph 64, which includes that the need for the power process
"can be fully satisfied only through activities that have some external goal,
such as physical necessecites, sex, love, status, revenge, etc." I had put a
question mark there under status and revenge. How odd. Perhaps I've just
answered my own question, but I think that there is still something missing
here.
Yet, it will be interesting to hear his rebuttal to the prosecution statement.
Any word on when that might be coming forth?
-Susan