Philippine Urban Legends (Jose Rizal was Jack the Ripper)

Status: urban legends
An article from the Philippine Daily Inquirer records some Philippine urban legends: the "White Lady" of Balete Drive, Robina Gokongwei's "snake twin" lurking in department store dressing rooms, the elusive "kapre" that lives in an ancient mango tree near the Emilio Aguinaldo house in Kawit town, and Andres Bonifacio's love child from a place aptly named Libog (now Santo Domingo) in Albay province. None of those mean much to me. But most of the article is devoted to discussing two other Philippine legends that are of more general interest. The first one is that Jose Rizal, the national hero of the Philippines, "was the father of Adolf Hitler, the result of an indiscretion with a prostitute in Vienna." The second one is that Jose Rizal was also Jack the Ripper:

Rizal was in London from May 1888 to January 1889, in the British Library copying "Sucesos de las islas Filipinas" by hand because there were no photocopying machines at the time. Jack the Ripper was active around this time, and since we do not know what Rizal did at night or on the days he was not
in the library, some people would like to believe Rizal is suspect. They argue that when Rizal left London, the Ripper murders stopped. They say that Jack the Ripper must have had some medical training, based on the way his victims were mutilated. Rizal, of course, was a doctor. Jack the Ripper liked women, and so did our own Rizal. And -- this is so obvious that many overlooked it -- Jose Rizal's initials match those of Jack the Ripper!

If Jack the Ripper did turn out to be Filipino, that would throw a wrench in his status as the Most Evil Brit of all time.

Related Posts:
Nov 9, 2005: Japanese Urban Legends
Oct 14, 2004: Iraqi Urban Legends

Law/Police/Crime Places Urban Legends

Posted on Wed Feb 22, 2006



You are definitely not wrong in your observation.

However, this patriotism/fanaticism is, mentally, counter-evolutionary. To see others as "Filipino," "American," "European," et al, is to create a barrier. Ex tempore, we become divided/separated. To be proud to be human is most beneficial.

We must free our minds from all conditioning in order to find truth or the least, what it is not.
Posted by eon  on  Thu Feb 19, 2009  at  08:58 AM
hey guys, there's no need to call each other names. You can disagree without being disagreeable.
one interesting thing that came out of this is that jose rizal was in a lot of other countries in different periods, and there were no series of killings other than in england. think about that folks.
Posted by george  on  Sun May 03, 2009  at  04:12 AM

That is a valid point. However, the past does not determine the future.

Case and point - Jack the Ripper. It stopped didn't it? Why didn't he keep on going until he got caught? Regardless of where he was it stopped.

If there were to be an intelligent killer who knows that the chances of him getting caught are minute, then he will pursue it.

Let's go Manny Pacquiao!
Posted by eon  on  Sun May 03, 2009  at  05:10 PM
oops sorry i forgot...

also, if there is much to gain from that certain action, then the person will do it.

I've stated before that the living conditions in Whitechapel were dreadful at the time. The murders brought attention to these terrible living conditions and the world reacted in favor of change.

perhaps it was a "means to an end" approach to efficiently solving the problem.

I also stated that Jose Rizal could've been Jack the Ripper. I never said that Jose Rizal was a deranged maniac who kills wherever he goeth.

Posted by eon  on  Sun May 03, 2009  at  05:16 PM
I think this theory is interesting. Funny but interesting. 😊)

Why don't you guys email national geographic or something. I once watched a special on Jack the Ripper on the NatGeo channel.
Posted by innocent bystander  on  Wed May 20, 2009  at  07:18 AM

Ano na po ba ang nangyari tungkol sa unconfirmed report ni amatheur sleuth na may nakita daw na mga ebidensya gaya ng diary ni rizal at ang kidney daw na nai-match sa DNA ng kamag-anak ng isa sa biktima?

Eto po sana ang gusto kong mabigyang linaw kung ito po ay totoo o isa lamang imbento ni Ms.Sleuth dahil dito nag-ugat ang lahat ng paniniwala na maaari nga na si JPR at si JTR ay iisa. Sapagkat ang mga teorya na si Rizal si Jack The Ripper dahil sa siya ay nandoon nang maganap ang mga pagpatay, o dahil sa siya ay isang Mason, o dahil sa siya ay marunong sa pag-opera, o dahil siya ay lahat ng nabanggit ay isang teoryang mahina at hindi kapani-paniwala.

Sana po ay may makapag-konpirma na sa report na ito kung totoo nga po o hindi.

Kung si Rizal man si JTR, hindi mababawasan ang aking lubos na paghanga sa kanya, (ewan ko pero parang madadagdagan pa nga yata). Sabi nga ng sumulat sa Philippine Daily Inquirer tungkol sa ulat na ito (ayon sa aking pagkaka-alala) "patuloy pa rin tayong napapamangha ni Gat Jose Rizal simula noon hanggang ngayon."
Posted by low_arq IGLPI  on  Sun Jun 14, 2009  at  03:52 AM
Mr. Low,

The truth is, no one knows who Jack the Ripper is. Everything about Jack the Ripper is mere speculation. Jose Rizal happens to be there at time of the murders and has the skills and knowledge that were attributed to Jack the Ripper.

In a court of law where a man is innocent until proven guilty, yes, these theories might not be as solid as the prosecutor would want. One thing you have to understand is that Jack the Ripper was never caught. No such information within our immediate grasp can be conclusive enough to pinpoint who Jack the Ripper is/was.

Your love for Rizal shouldn't wane as he was still an exceptional writer, doctor, and revolutionary.

I've stated in my previous comments that people harbor false sentimentalities. They do not believe in man's ambiguous nature. This is partly due to their simplicity in their upbringing and thus their thought process.

My theories are not to put blame on anyone. It is for the love of truth and the enlightenment of the human race.
Posted by eon  on  Sun Jun 14, 2009  at  11:13 AM
If everything said about Rizal were true, being the father of Adolf Hitler and Jack the Ripper, then I would be a more proud Filipino than I am today. I'm not saying that I believe that he was indeed the person others claim he was, but then again, I'm not saying that I don't.
Posted by Cris  on  Sat Jun 20, 2009  at  09:40 AM
It's just incredible how many debates can stir up on an unproven myth. Jose Rizal was not Jack the Ripper. He was a well respected physician and national hero of the Philippines. So don't insult his name with this utterly absurd story.
Posted by zedmark  on  Thu Jul 16, 2009  at  07:18 AM
It's a theory not a myth.

Zed, your logic is, he is a well respected physician and a national hero therefore he cannot do anything beyond that?

Fact - he was also a womanizer.

Winston Churchill was a drunk.

Hitler was responsible for the Autobahn and the Volkswagen-among many other accomplishments.

Your priests molest little boys.

You my friend are the one who is absurd. You speak with your eyes closed.
Posted by eon  on  Thu Jul 16, 2009  at  07:28 AM
I saw a comment about Rizal being fictitious and used only to manipulate the people... I found that very interesting taking into account on how history is being tampered with and covered up and I see it plausible.

I saw that the main comments here were made by eon and concerned who debated harshly... In my opinion, eon won hands down... And concerned, the people you asked if Rizal was Jack did not see the arguments and evidences eon showed thus making it invalid in your case and does not prove you won. Eon only debated on the POSSIBILITY of this happening and not making Rizal immediately guilty. This was ignored by concerned who kept on attacking in different angles which, I may say, is ineffective, futile and quite desperate. And about the previous debates that concerned supposedly won with "smarter" people, I think that you were just bluffing because if you can't win this, what more can you say in these other posts?
Posted by emilyrochefortlover tekken4ever!!  on  Mon Aug 31, 2009  at  02:02 AM
"JR"--- 'J'ose 'R'izal? 'J'ack the 'R'ipper?

Know what? I can really say that it is true.. I am really interested about this story. Jack the Ripper and Jose Rizal have those similarities. I applied the novel of Jose Rizal.. Remember Ibarra?, he turned as Simon in the story.. And like in real story, Jose Rizal turned as Jack the Ripper. Jose Rizal was a bright man, so it's possible that he can do those accusations..

What if, this is true?
Does is it mean that.. OUR HERO IS A SERIAL KILLER?! (oh no!)

Posted by YEYE  on  Wed Sep 02, 2009  at  07:36 PM

Indeed, if you had read "Noli" or "El Fili," one can gather that Jose Rizal was not oblivious to evil.

Now, I'm not saying Jose Rizal is evil, I'm simply stating that he is familiar with.

One who knows the greatest good must of course, know the greatest evils.

"Mane Thecel Phares" - I love it!
Posted by eon  on  Thu Sep 03, 2009  at  06:52 AM
what the ???

After I have read the article I was really shocked.
A part of me believes this and a part of me doesn't.

I really idolize Jose Rizal because he had done great things that none of us can ever do.

And I have also read some of the comments.

Truth is I was only searching for Philippine Urban Legends for entertainment and to scare the hell out of me and then I stumbled upon this.

I got really curious so I read it and I think that

It's a shame that we can't ask Dr. Jose Rizal if its really true.

Posted by meimei  on  Tue Sep 08, 2009  at  08:34 AM
I don't know, if its bad to believe this theory but somehow, some part of me believes it.

With the theory and some facts presented which matched with Jose Rizal, this theory can be convincing.

It's kinda weird that they do also have the same initials, J.R. which is really hard if it's coincident. It couls have been William the Ripper or George the Ripper which is W.R or G.R. I don't know what a lame explanation of mine.

But reading the arguments of the first comments of these article could be pretty obvious that these theory is possible.

I was wondering about all the article I've read that when Jose Rizal left the country the Ripper killing's stopped. So how was that?

And some letter evidences, jewelry possesions and even kidney organ which matched to the Ripper killing's victim Catherine that Jose Rizal possesed could be true?

We know that Jose Rizal was somehow a playboy seen at his relationship. Others may call it formal or informal, still he was linked with many woman. He is also a doctor.

And if for the motive, what could that be? Hmm.
Posted by Lee  on  Mon Sep 28, 2009  at  12:35 AM
Why did you argue about that? It can be factually true or factually false but certainly, there is no certainty. I, Jose Rizal, am not Jack the Ripper. Or maybe I am.
Posted by Jose Rizal  on  Thu Oct 01, 2009  at  04:18 AM
wow... i've read all the arguments of eon and concerned from the first page (well actually just the first page) and i just feel my blood rushing everytime concernedfil will make his/her arguments.

obviously, eon neither said he believes or rejects the story/speculation/theory whatever you want to call it. concerned kept on saying that eon is avoiding to answer if he believes it or not yet you yourself is avoiding to understand what eon's argument is. your already jumping to the conclusion that eon is not a patriot like you just because he's not trying to clear out what his stand on a theory is.

i just want to raise points on your previous points.

* "You counter viewpoints with VERY WEAK arguments."
According to you, anyway. But you're an idiot.

i don't like this one. why?
because if you're already commiting a form of fallacy by trying to answer an argument with a statement that is meant to tarnish eon's credibility of making a straight argument.

(sorry if i forgot what the exact fallacy is, you could read that in a philo book if you want. actually it's a real basic thing in philosophy.)

*I suppose that all patriotism would look like fanaticism to you, because you are a mere coward who left the hardships of this country to pursue an easy life in a rich country, and now doesn't even respect his national heroes.

I don't know what you're trying to point out here but again I still don't like this statement here.
you are generalizing. saying that someone that believes the statement that Rizal was Jd'Ripper does not value his own country's national heroes.
worst is eon is not even saying he believes the statement.

please you are the one that doesn't listen to anyone. that's not even patriotism you're doing. all i could see while reading on to this thread are arguments stated because of ego. you don't want to lose to someone having better arguments than you and to save that pride you even resort to calling people names just because you can't answer them straight.
Posted by badtripnapinoy  on  Tue Oct 27, 2009  at  04:55 PM
Come on, this is a shame if non-filipinos read this. You have to much comments that are so shameful. If you are very nationalistic and haters of the idea of this person, say so in more appropriate ways. This is only a theory. The article was far from being matter-of-factly. You have seen proofs and arguments. If you don't believe this, no need to trample on other people's theories.

Accept it as a theory, not a fact. Over time, us Filipinos have been branded as overly sensitive to things that tackle our race. Its really a shame.
Posted by Leo Lutero  on  Fri Jan 01, 2010  at  06:50 AM
Yes he is Jack the Ripper! The name "Jose Rizal" was actually written in blood by one of the victims that knew him on a wall. It was a very blurry, almost unreadable because when he was washing it, the authorities were alerted and he did not have enough time to erase it. That is why they concocted "Jack the Ripper" instead as an alias.

When he came back to the island of the Philippines, London finally knew his crimes that is why they immediately notified the Spanish government about it and his execution was swift. This was never written in history because of reasons that the investigation was lackluster -- a bad point for the London police and a big shame to the London government.

Despite that, to me, he is even more than a hero. He is the legend!
Posted by Andres  on  Wed Jan 13, 2010  at  01:03 PM
First of all, concerned is such an idiot, what he/she is doing is an embarrassment to Jose Rizal.

Now for the topic, I just want to know the truth because all of the arguments that point out to Jose Rizal being Jack the Ripper are very convincing, actually i want to prove that Jose Rizal is Jack the Ripper, it would make a very amazing discovery and someone pointed out that we should send this to NatGeo I AGREE! haha it would make a very interesting documentary. I have a few questions if someone can answer them it would be very helpful.

1. Where did Rizal live when the killings happened?

2. Did the killings actually stop during the time Rizal left London? Like the exact date?

3. About the kidney and the letter, what was written in the letter? and the kidney belonged to one of the victims? did it have an exact DNA match to that of the Victim?

4. Did Rizal have any person that he can be linked to during the time he was in London? A friend? A girl?

5. Is there any historical evidences of what he was doing while he was in London, maybe like he went to a gathering or he met someone?

6. Someone mentioned that there was some writings on the wall? it was written in blood? what was that about? can anyone explain its very intriguing.

That's about it, if anyone could answer my questions I would be very grateful 😊

BTW, EON, your statement:
( I've stated before that the living conditions in Whitechapel were dreadful at the time. The murders brought attention to these terrible living conditions and the world reacted in favor of change.

perhaps it was a "means to an end" approach to efficiently solving the problem. )

Posted by iWantToKnowTheTruth  on  Thu Jan 21, 2010  at  07:07 PM've been following this argument since last last year and it's still not there really no way of knowing the truth....????'s frustrating....
Posted by sun-hi  on  Thu Jan 21, 2010  at  11:11 PM
Seeker of Truth,

1) Rizal arrived in London several days before the killings. He lived by Regent's Park...a very affluent part of town.

2) The bulk of the killings ended late 1988, before December. Though there were others that are labeled "Jack the Ripper" killings in 1989 but some pathologists who had examined the older victims' bodies disagree it was the same guy. The style was just different.

3)January 1986, St. Pancras, London

While up in the attic putting away boxes of Christmas ornaments,
the present-day owners of #37 Chalcot Crescent stumble across
a dusty old trunk, which (once the lock is pried open) reveals
some /very interesting/ items once belonging to Dr. Jose Rizal.
In particular, a diary wherein he confesses to the Whitechapel
murders; and a glass jar with half a human kidney preserved in

4)He lived with the Becket family. He's also famous for his ties to Ferdinand Blumentritt.

5) Yes, it is documented that he came to London on May 24, 1988, at the aforementioned address (No. 37 Chalcot)

6) Writings on the wall - I was not aware of the Jose Rizal on the wall. The writing on the wall that is fact is the "The Juwes are the men that will not be blamed for nothing." I think this alludes to the threw "Juwes" of Freemasonry - Jubelo, Jubela, and Jubelum. Close to it was also the bloody apron of Catherine Eddowes. The apron is a main symbol of Freemasons.

Enjoy 😊
Posted by eon  on  Mon Jan 25, 2010  at  12:21 PM
I just wanted to add...

Rizal also had at least 2 known Masonic Brothers in London at the time. The gentlemen are, Dr. Antonio Regidor and Dr. Reinhold Rost.

Possible accomplices as they are also learned in the rites and rituals of Freemasonry.

P.S. I am not trying to bash Freemasonry, I myself am a Freemason. I am just trying to be as objective as possible and I believe that the truth transcends my fraternity.

I would also like to add, Albert Pike, a famous Freemason, wrote in his book, Morals and Dogma, "The greatest deeds are not done in the glare of light, and before the eyes of the populace."
Posted by eon  on  Thu Jan 28, 2010  at  09:28 PM
NAHHHH....he was a great man indeed because of his intellectual dont judge him quickly....!!!
Posted by Prince keemer B. Aroma  on  Thu Mar 04, 2010  at  06:36 PM
I think that it's impossible to prove or disprove that Jose Rizal or any other person was Jack the Ripper. But I'm pretty certain (95%-ish) that it wasn't him, although anything could be possible.

Although I totally think that eon won hands down, I would have to side with concerned Filipino when he stated that Jose Rizal didn't have a motive. One of his few good arguments, really. If you go to the link that eon provided a few pages back (shortened:, an alternative, and what seems to be a more believable, theory is proposed. Just "Ctrl+F" the page and look for "All Roads Lead to Dorset Street and Mary Kelly". Interesting perspective.
Posted by with an open mind  on  Sat Mar 06, 2010  at  04:51 AM
Open mind,

How could you have an "Open mind" if you immediately rule out something when it's not proven to be wrong or right? You are certain it is not him - how do you know? A statement like that is equivalent to saying, "I am certain there is a God" I'm not being offensive, I just question.

As far as motives go, I've already stated possible motives and the effect the killings had throughout the world.

I'm not saying it necessarily applies to this case, but motive is not always existent. Haven't you ever done something and didn't know why you did it?

The conspiracy theory regarding the protection of someone important is in fact a good one 😊 Jose Rizal is not liberated from being a suspect. The conspiracy points to the Freemasons(ritualistic nature of the killings), which Jose Rizal was a part of. He, as a Mason, and being in the vicinity, would've known about these machinations. The span of the murders were during his time there. Being that he was a doctor and a Freemason, he is part of a shorter list of possible suspects(not all Freemasons are doctors).
Posted by eon  on  Sat Mar 06, 2010  at  11:31 AM

I didn't rule out anything. I just said that it's impossible to exactly pinpoint who Jack the Ripper was, especially with the lack of incriminating evidence. It could have been Rizal or it could have been someone else entirely.

When I said that I was pretty certain that Rizal wasn't Jack the Ripper, I wasn't stating that as a fact. I was stating that as a personal belief, much like your "I believe in a God" statement.

Plus, I would be pretty sure that Rizal wouldn't just murder at least five women without a motive. Rizal isn't exactly a deranged psychopath (as far as we know).

My dad's a Mason but he thinks that stories like this have been twisted to put their organization in a bad light.

Wait, how about this angle:
A former Freemason had a falling out with the organization and left the fraternity. He wasn't exactly the most right-minded guy, so he thought of a way to get revenge. Boom! He kills five women and does so in ways that point to the Freemasons, putting them in a bad light. Up to now, most of the world thinks that Jack the Ripper was a Mason.

Maybe he was just some low-profile guy whose murders coincided with Rizal's stay in London. And maybe, his Freemason enemies were regular customers of the five women (who were prostitutes). Kind of like hitting two birds with one stone: tarnishing the Freemason name and depriving his enemies of sexual satisfaction with these women.

Just a thought though.
Posted by with an open mind  on  Sun Mar 07, 2010  at  08:07 PM
Open Mind,

I didn't state "I believe in a God," I stated that your statement is equivalent to, "I am certain there is a God." Being that it is unproven, you cannot exactly say you are "certain" about something. Certainty is borderline factual. Let me give you an example of a usage of the word certain : "I don't remember what the PH of water is, but I'm pretty certain it's 7." Actually, if you look up the exact meaning of "certain," you find that it means : fixed, indisputable, known to be true, etc.

Anything is possible, anything could have happened. I'm not saying Joes Rizal had to have done it! 😊 I'm just saying his case is strong enough to not escape suspicion.

Remember one thing, Jose Rizal is a revolutionary. Many revolutionaries, not all, are very capable of killing for a cause, because to them, the cause is greater. Reading Rizal's works shows that he is capable of well-contemplated machinations - The main character tried to bomb a house filled with both civilians and targets. That's terrorism. Therefore, in reality, I cannot exactly say our hero is 100% incapable of wrong when his mind and writing clearly shows he is knowledgeable of terrorism.

I myself and a Freemason. My uncle is a Freemason, he even belonged to the Grand Lodge of the Philippines (I found out when he told me he was a Mason - For many years I wanted to become one, but I had no clue he was.) As a Mason, let me tell you, the majority of people in it do not know anything. They pay their yearly dues, hang out with other Masons, perform charitable works etc. Real Masonry is reserved for the adepts; The Princes of Freemasonry - those who seek, shall find. Unfortunately, many of the members simply do not seek. I've witnessed it first hand. I've been to many different lodges, regardless of race, etc and they have no clue - even as to the beginning of it all. I am not saying your father doesn't know anything. I'm just saying that a seeker would not rule it out.

Food for thought : Albert Pike was a truly great man both in mind and in practice. However, he was a part of the Ku Klux Klan (records say he was a founding father). How could that happen? The man even preaches equality. Look deep enough and you will understand. Just as in Jose Rizal's case.

Your theories regarding the angry Freemason is possible of course. Who though? We need a man who has close ties and with the motive you illustrated.

Possible motives of Rizal as I've stated before :

1. Bring world attention to the poor living conditions in Whitechapel (which succeeded).

2. No motive - motive is not always necessary.

3. Possibly crazy(very far fetched) but you know what they say, there is a thin line between genius and insanity.
Posted by eon  on  Sun Mar 07, 2010  at  11:02 PM

Being "pretty certain" actually means that you have no doubt as to something being true. I used the word certain in that context. You could have easily said something wrong like, "I don't remember what the PH of water is, but I'm pretty certain it's 8" and still have no doubt as to the truthfulness with what you said. Certainty in that context doesn't rest on facts, it rests on the person's belief that what he is saying is true.

Still, I'd think that Jack the Ripper was very familiar with the area since he was able to hide from the authorities. Maybe he even knew the activities of the police and timed his murders when he was sure he wasn't going to get caught.

I think there's a bigger possibility of Jack the Ripper being more than one person or a person whose murders were orchestrated by an affluent group of people.

Think about it this way: a wealthy group of individuals contrive a clever plan to bring attention to the poor conditions in Whitechapel. The Freemasons were famous for being involved in revolutions, so they could have been involved. Thus, Jose Rizal could have known of the plans and thus be an accomplice to the crimes.

I don't know why but it seems that every time I research on the background of the murders, I get think of a new theory.

About the lamp-bomb scene in El Fili, I don't know if Jose Rizal really meant for the bomb to not explode. The movie "Jose Rizal" had the hero talking with his character Simoun in his head. Simoun wanted Rizal to change the ending where the governor-general and the other big guys would get blown up. I'm not very sure though. But the "Jose Rizal is knowledgeable on terrorism" theory is valid, he was a revolutionary after all and I never denied that.

But seeing that Jack the Ripper wasn't caught and there weren't any definitive leads, I'd conclude that the murders were very well thought out. Not really something that a foreigner who just stayed a few months in London would have achieved (just my opinion). So, it would have been a single person who planned out the murders over a considerable length of time or it was contrived by a group of planners who hid the murderer using their influence and wealth.

So, I'd think that Jose Rizal is more likely to be knowledgeable of the murder plans rather than the actual perpetrator of the crimes.

I don't know if this amounts to anything, but my father once mentioned that he had already achieved the level of 32nd degree mason or something like that. I also know that my father is a very "investigative" man, in his being a prosecution lawyer for the government. I would think that he would have researched himself to exhaustion before he made that conclusion. I don't know though, I didn't even join the Order of Demolay...
Posted by with an open mind  on  Mon Mar 08, 2010  at  07:39 AM
Open Mind,

I've already put the rest to the question of the word "certain." Just look up the exact definition and it means : fixed, indisputable, known to be true, etc. Perhaps your word selection was wrong, but certain means that, you cannot change its meaning.

As far as Jose Rizal being wealthy - he was. He also was connected to his Fraternity Brothers in London - Antonio Regidor and Reinhold Rost - both of whom were doctors also. Of course it's possible, and highly probable that Jose Rizal was not alone. Kudos that you pointed it out and explained it well!

These theories of yours are very good. They do make plenty of sense 😊

Being a 32nd degree is an achievement but it doesn't take too long to become one. There aren't any obstacles or anything like that. Some people have become 32nd Degree Masons in 1 day. You can even ask him, that in reality, 3rd Degree is the highest you can go. 32nd Degree is just an appendant body - the Scottish Rite. It is just extra, but not necessary. If I were to join an appendant body though, it would be Scottish Rite as I find it more philosophical.

I don't mean to insult your father, friend. I just know that there are many that don't know. Masonry just isn't the same anymore - it has become a business. I can't imagine the revolutionaries of old attending to the trivial affairs of today.

You don't have to be Demolay to become a Mason. Is it your desire to become one?
Posted by eon  on  Mon Mar 08, 2010  at  08:28 AM
I wish to stay neutral in this battle.

However, I have to agree that eon has some perfect statements. And 'concerned Filipino' didn't really help his case with the mindless rambling of his.

Much of the evidence points at Rizal, but it might've just been an coincidence. Did he simply wanted to blow off some steam?

That remains an mystery,
Posted by native  on  Fri Mar 26, 2010  at  05:25 AM

Perhaps he was frustrated. Noli Me Tangere just came out and it caused much chaos. The friars were censuring it, compatriots are resigning from office, insurrection, his family was being maltreated, etc.

It could have all been a coincidence of course! Who am I to say that it wasn't? I'm trying to gather as much information on the matter to build a stronger case.

Open minded, I was thinking about it and I am definitely ruling out conspiracy. It just wouldn't make sense. If you are trying to protect someone, why bring attention by killing in that fashion? I know that if I wanted to have someone killed, I would want as little ties to myself as possible. It would be discreet and not high profile.

The killings were meant to grab your attention. The alleged letters provoking Lusk and other notable figures, the writing on the wall, the ritualistic manner of the murders, etc. shouts "look at this!"
Posted by eon  on  Fri Mar 26, 2010  at  06:57 AM
if jose rizal is left-handed, then it is possible that he's jack the ripper. JTR is assumed to have knowledge in medicine, and has been analyzed as left-handed. Iguess it could be the missing piece of the puzzle.
Posted by curious pinoy  on  Sun Apr 04, 2010  at  01:19 PM
Hi Curious Pinoy,

Thanks for the input! Jack the Ripper was long believed to be left-handed. According to the reports, his attacks were both left and right handed, depending on the position. He used both hands or maybe he just used different angles?
Posted by eon  on  Sun Apr 04, 2010  at  02:23 PM
Maybe its the angle eon. You see, its nearly impossible for someone to train himself to become an ambidextrous killer. Going back to Rizal, I am almost convinced that he is jack the ripper. Most of the details of the case points to him. I'm a Filipino, and it will really suck if he's actually the ripper. If it would be proven, then there's nothing we could do.
Posted by Curious Pinoy  on  Mon Apr 05, 2010  at  08:22 AM
first things first jose rizal arrived in london in may 1888 the jack the ripper killings started in april 1888 so there was no chance that he was jack the ripper and also the suspect did not state his identity as jack the ripper jose rizal's initial couldn't be an accountable proof. the serial killer was named jack the ripper because of some letter stating that he is jack the ripper but then again another letter was sent to a deputy doctor of scotland yard containing a kidney which was believed to be owned by one of jack the ripper's victims yes indeed dr jose rizal was excelent in the field of medicine but so was the others that time yes he was obsessed by woman but is not obsessed enough to kill them and now i appeal to those who spread this non sense stop it now you are tarnishing the name of one of the most talented person the philippines has ever produced such a shame

-arch duchess yvette neighfreya neckolayevna
Posted by yvette neighfreya neckolayevna  on  Tue May 04, 2010  at  06:37 AM
"Arch Duchess,"

First of all, the killings that happened before Rizal arrived didn't have the same Modus Operandi. Tabram was raped while none of the canonical five were. It was speculated that she could be one of Jack's victims, but very unlikely.

You are saying that Jose Rizal can't be Jack the Ripper because Jack the Ripper calls himself Jack the Ripper in a letter? How does that make any sense? Do you think Jack the Ripper was born with the name "Jack the Ripper?"

Surely, we all know that he wasn't the only doctor in London. It would be preposterous to think that he was the only doctor there. I never said that he is absolutely guilty. Other doctors could be guilty as well.

"He was obsessed by woman, but is not obsessed enough to kill them." How could you possibly make that statement? Were you there? Do you know him personally? Saying that is like saying Bill Clinton can't possibly have sex with Monica Lewinsky. Yes, Jose Rizal was a very talented man, but like all others, he was human; i.e. he was flawed and was capable of doing wrong.

Lastly, you appeal to no one because your statements are unwarranted. If you want to be taken seriously, you will have to come up with better counter attacks. Instead of saying, it's not possible, now believe me because I think what you're doing is wrong.
Posted by eon  on  Thu May 06, 2010  at  12:37 AM
This is awesome! I skipped my P.E today and headed for the lib in search of something better to waste my time on and I found this.

Who knew, the most interesting things that can be learned are not taught inside the classroom after all 😊
Posted by amused  on  Thu Jun 17, 2010  at  02:45 AM
Will you please stop that nonsense and not a very helpful information about 'Jack the Ripper'. If you love your country you should not have posted that opinions of yours and let the world see that.
Posted by rizal  on  Sat Jun 26, 2010  at  11:47 PM
Found this yesterday. interesting. just finished reading the article including all the comments from Feb 2006 up to this year. wow... 4-year long thread... mostly by the 2 debaters eon and concerned filipino.

i loved the arguments, from both sides. it's just so irritating how they throw personal insults to each other.

i personally go for eon's side - when it comes to the topic. fact is, he is not assuming. what i like about him is, he is just presenting his research.

but on how to present his arguments, i think concerned is better, and fairer.

concerned filipino is correct, it is eon who started the name-calling. and eon, please, money and socio-economic status isn't the issue here. i think that point didn't helped at all.

yet, hands down for both eon and concerned filipino. both of you are really good critical thinkers.

overall, this is a really intriguing article.(actually, the real fun is in the thread)

with what everyone here has said and from what i've researched, only one thing is clear,

Posted by proud to be pinoy  on  Thu Jul 22, 2010  at  01:04 AM
Proud to bePinoy,

I understand what you are saying. I believe money and status definitely applies because I stated that concerned Filipino is fanatical. In fact, the majority of religious fanatics and uber patriots are indeed from poor backgrounds.

I admit, most of my arguments in the beginning was weak after having read my own words. If you look carefully, the content of my posts have improved/evolved.

It will be really really hard to prove that he was JTR, in fact, it's so hard that no one has been able to prove it. All the while, even though our search for the identity of Jack has been unfruitful, it doesn't mean it cannot happen. As a matter of fact, I've been gathering more information and some findings have been really exciting. This blog has inspired me to write a book about it!

Stay tuned!
Posted by eon  on  Thu Jul 22, 2010  at  07:14 AM
Proud to bePinoy,

I understand what you are saying. I believe money and status definitely applies because I stated that concerned Filipino is fanatical. In fact, the majority of religious fanatics and uber patriots are indeed from poor backgrounds.

I admit, most of my arguments in the beginning were weak after having read my own words. If you look carefully, the content of my posts have improved/evolved.

It will be really really hard to prove that he was JTR, in fact, it's so hard that no one has been able to prove anything about JTR. All the while, even though our search for the identity of Jack has been unfruitful, it doesn't mean it cannot happen. As a matter of fact, I've been gathering more information and some findings have been really exciting. This blog has inspired me to write a book about it!

Stay tuned!

PS I'm on my Droid...didn't get to preview because of laziness! I edited it now...sorry for double post!
Posted by eon  on  Thu Jul 22, 2010  at  07:19 AM
wait. this is crazy.
Why would jose rizal be the ripper?
this dosent make sense!
mabye there's just sum1 who is framing him.
Posted by shaina  on  Fri Jul 30, 2010  at  08:54 PM
Eon and concerned Filipino, shut up.

Rizal was the father of Adolf Hitler.
He was also Jack the Ripper.
In fact anything you can think up about him is true.


And pigs fly.
Posted by Filipino  on  Sat Aug 07, 2010  at  10:37 PM
Don't Blame Dr. Jose Rizal!
Posted by Happy Filipino  on  Sun Aug 22, 2010  at  02:34 AM
Pigs Don't Fly! 😛
Posted by Happy Flipino  on  Sun Aug 22, 2010  at  02:35 AM
Dr. Jose Rizal can't be Jack The Ripper!
Posted by Happy Filipino  on  Sun Aug 22, 2010  at  02:37 AM
I really like eon and concerned's arguments. I, myself, believes that eon is the winner of this argument/debate, whatever you want to call it. I can see that what eon states could be considered when thinking about this topic.

One more thing, a little advice to anyone who reads this, although this is more likely to affect concerned; It doesn't matter who starts the name calling, what matters is who stops it. I think it's better to just argue on the topic not on your personal lives, well, unless it has something to do with this.

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbably must be the truth."
Posted by Jadecailao  on  Sat Sep 25, 2010  at  09:28 AM
from hell. you speak of your minds. but look at yourself all of you. what can you do? what will you do? just sit down with your damn computer. by the way keep it up. coz all of you will end up in the hospital early. see you there. i will be waiting!!!
Posted by juan pasan cruz  on  Mon Oct 04, 2010  at  03:01 AM
This article about Dr. Jose Rizal being Jack the Ripper can be put in the same class as the Robinson half snake creature. Meaning, it's not really possible. Like the urban legend about the Balete Drive white lady, its not to be taken seriously. Speaking of the Balete Drive apparition, have you heard that this could possibly be just a joke that went too far? I have been informed that this white lady was really a film actress, (now departed) who played a joke one night in the 1950's.As you know, the film studios were near the area. And, as the saying goes, the rest was history. It became part of the mystique of the place.But I have passed the street several times in the dead of night and saw or felt nothing.The white lady was not for me.
Posted by ruben s. hernando  on  Fri Oct 15, 2010  at  09:39 PM
Comments: Page 3 of 4 pages  < 1 2 3 4 > 
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.