In order.

Door PinaJones gepubliceerd op Sunday 07 December 21:32

Short story as a testament to how complex I think.

(In Google-translate English).

"In Command"

I made a study of Chapmann.

He didn't shot John Lennon to dead because the contract between the lines in "Catcher in the Reye” was, as he himself claims, but because on the cover of "Jealous Guy" under the photo of John on the maxi-single was:

"Shoot that Tiger.

Chapmann took this as a mandate from Lennon himself.

The "contract" was therefore Lennon, in a direct way as you Chapmanns thinking follows but he carries the book "Catcher ..." on and then also as well as indirect motive because he is afraid to give themselves completely exposed.

If you have a study of Chapmann do, do not try to between the lines of "Catcher ...." read but try to follow his thinking.

One thing I do not understand: Why is John a tiger?
Chapmann took so that he thought that the humor of him as Lennon was undetected, accordingChapmann then tried to approach? The fact is that Chapmann does not think normal.
I know it too, so will try to throw a veil behind which he is hiding.

It is easy to achieve if you think nobody understands.

So why should we the people not on the wrong track with the announcement that he
commissioned from a book has acted in the book: "Catcher ..."

If you know Chapmann can't think not normally do and this combines with the extreme, but still nice humor that John occasionally still had honest, and you follow the thinking of Chapmann, it is perhaps natural that as a result of a sentence in a cover,

Chapmann think they are calling, as right-minded fan of John.

Stranger thinking isn't possible, but when I examine him and study him, I can understand his thinking.

Chapmann , made a study, as a fan, in turn, of John.

What about phrases in texts of John: "Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try ..."
It can interpret that John was down at that time he wrote that.
Maybe Chapmann him just to relieve his suffering and when they "consent" was (Shoot that Tiger)

saw his opportunity. (Redigilious story, by the way).

Despite all the negative sides of the murder, I must confess that I did was an original act.

Another way to be famous. Everyone is a little vain, maybe also Chapmann was/is like that and therefore he also did a bit selfish. Personally I would go so far as to do something to achieve in the media, then I do it on my own, because in the end he used the fame of John, as he already wanted to be famous.

This is a part of the theory because I am but a layman.

So this need not be true, this paragraph.

It is merely a theory of a long study, conclusions from that.

So the contract was, according Chapmann and that is his secret because he did not want to give all exposed-not indirectly but directly given.

Indirectly, as he claims, between the lines to read: "Catcher in the Reye 'but directly, as so-called contract (we know better) on a record cover.

Wat is against someone who wants to provide a good deed, there is that he does,
by someone to relieve his suffering, that he actually delivered from his misery?
Anyway, you're right, then everyone will say, if that is legal would be on someone they hate had:

I may deliver him from his suffering, which I read between his / her lines when I with her / him talk.
And in that person a lecherous, ruthless killer, as are lawful killings may consult.
En meanwhile is stupid, so he / she practices with his up.

Yes, I can all evil geniussen even for me.

I mean really so only the people who usually commit murders, not everyone, so sorry, that was a mistake of mine.

So when everyone is looking for hardworking indirect reason Chapmann rubbed in the hands killer and laughs in himself because he has mislead all.

Anyone looking for an indirect reason while the solution is so simple: a direct indication.

So simple, that Chapmann has had misled the people, or was he really sick enough for the thought, the murder in his eyes still failed then.

Do you still got it? He wanted to kill and still have a secret (!)

Perhaps he feels that as a "secret party" with John, logical, right? Because Chapmann think not normal?

Furthermore, I will not talk to, the case is long from the cloth and thus eliminated.
By John I would like to say: "Good riddance to bad rubbish".

Interpret in their own way.

But please do take yourself the responsibility for your own interpretation and I try not to accuse from John that I think are up nicely, if this misinterpretation, and I then
rate in a negative way, while the interpretation is your own responsibility should be.

Because it's about a neat turn on Chapmann in the cell).

(And look for the interested how cynical this text is: "Please remember, my life is in your hands ....."
From: " Woman ").

The female aspect Chapmann in himself, it would save back to the title: "Woman", I can not explain.

But that is the only thing I can not explain.

This story in Dutch.....

Reacties (0) 

Voordat je kunt reageren moet je aangemeld zijn. Login of maak een gratis account aan.