I typed in "List of San Francisco lawyers 1976" on google (regarding the S.F. Chronicle personal ad), and one of the top hits was a wiki page for "Peoples Temple in San Francisco." I was specifically looking for the initials R.A., but did not find anything. But now I am thinking that the R in R.A. could possibly stand for reverend. I could see a reverend being the "messanger" and placing this ad for the Imperial Wizard. I have read about plenty of religious folk from different churches back then that were involved in some pretty heavy stuff… But this cult known as the "Peoples Temple" were big time scumbags and definite weirdos. They were very active in 1976, when Fred Manalli was killed. I have always wonder if Manalli’s accident was indeed an accident or if there was foul play involved. I have seen absolutely nothing that indicates that Manalli was tied to this group, but I have plenty of time on my hands to look into it.
"Problematic for the Temple was that Jones’ "healing" ceremonies in San Francisco also drew some religious conservatives who were less likely to join a socialist organization. Because of that and the Temple’s constant fear of conspiracies attempting to destroy "the most promising hope for world socialism", new members were carefully screened." Terminate your case???
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peoples_Temple
"The Temple also asked adults to sign papers admitting various crimes and wrongdoings, including conspiring against the U.S. government, involvement in terrorist acts and molesting their own children. If such members attempted to leave the Temple, Jones threatened to release the statements."
Bob Houston tried leaving the cult in 1976: "October 5, 1976, Bob Houston was found dead along the tracks at the Southern Pacific railroad yard."
"Jones expressed admiration for the SLA after it kidnapped Patricia Hearst and was involved in shootings, and the Temple distributed the Symbionese Declaration among its members."
Even if Manalli had nothing to do with this group, they are still worth researching.
A few minutes ago on a toilet not very far, far away….
Excellent work. I think I may have figured out who RA was, but I’m too tired, so will post it later. (Think KKK.)
Interesting. Can’t wait to hear your thoughts. Can’t think of any Klansmen with the initials RA off the top of my head.
A few minutes ago on a toilet not very far, far away….
Thank you. It makes no sense to me, but then nothing in this case adds up, so, who knows? I’ll put it out there. Forgive me if you guys already know about this man! I’ve tried to find mention of him.
He is Robert Baker Aitken.
Was this woman staying at the house in San Francisco, which Zodiac went into? (There’s an OTO lodge in Honolulu.)
https://sites.google.com/site/annehopkinsaitken/
Here’s her husband: Is he the ‘RA’ who placed the ad in the Chronicle, threatening the Zodiac?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Baker_Aitken
Was this the Imperial Wizard? (They also have a ‘Dragon’. And an almost identical Zodiac-type symbol/logo.)
And this ‘militant’ group and its timing ties in perfectly with the Manson family stories about a race war. The Wiki for the Zen militants branch seems to have been deleted!
Manalli taught Creative Writing to the leader of the Black Panthers in San Quentin. The approach to an ‘astrologer’ had just been reported. Did they think Manalli was going to talk? Or was he killed as a warning to Zodiac?
They must have been annoyed at the Zodiac for constantly implicating them in the letters! He knew they were all crackproof, because people thought there was only 1 of them. No single person could be tied to more than 1 crime scene. As Robin Smith said: like ‘Strangers on a Train’. Only with a common motive.
For what it’s worth, I do think the Zodiac acted for what he was convinced were the best of motives. Don’t shoot me, it’s only my opinion.
Must be missing something. This guy was a Zen teacher, a Buddhist, and by the looks of it a pacifist.
What’s he – or his wife – got to do with OTO and the KKK?
Sorry, I meant to include this guy. I’ll try to find the other, connecting links.
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Donald_Joseph_Ballentine
‘Ku Klux Klan’ comes from the Greek word for ‘circle’. The Dog (Moon) Cult is called ‘K’, or Circe/Kirce. Sirius the Dog Star is their star, with links to Orion the Hunter. I have no idea if this is significant. But in order to understand the letters, and get at the motive, I think we must try to think like Zodiac.
Sorry, I meant to include this guy. I’ll try to find the other, connecting links.
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Donald_Joseph_Ballentine
Look, man – I largely agree that we have to – within reason – try to think like Zodiac. Being too narrowly rational is probably a bad idea, trying to figure out what he was about, and what he, himself, intended.
I’m still not sure where the Zen guy is supposed to fit in, though. Is there an actual connection between him and either that LaVey crap or the KKK? It seemed like you were suggesting he, the Zen guy, placed the ’76 ad in the paper as a message to Z.
There may be superficial similarities, symbols and whatnot, between Zen Buddhism and…what? Golf? The rise of the Third Reich? The art of motorcycle maintenance? Well, certainly the latter…but…what is the point here?
All of the above. Apart from golf. Personally, I don’t think Zodiac believed in an afterlife, but the people the letters were aimed at, often did. (Apparently, Church of Satan members were not required to believe in an afterlife.)
LeVey knew who Zodiac was. Police didn’t investigate his tip-off.
I am doubter’s doubter. I don’t like this any more than you do. I wish I could say the motive was jealousy, or money, or revenge. But this case is something else. I am only going by the (usually circumstantial) evidence. The letters are the key.
LeVey knew who Zodiac was. Police didn’t investigate his tip-off.
Heh – is that so?
Call me a doubter’s doubter’s doubter – but I doubt that. LaVey didn’t know his ass from his elbow if you ask me.
An interview with the officer who took the calls from Church of Satan members, including Anton LeVey, is on youtube. (Isn’t it in Part 2 or 3 of ‘This is the Zodiac Speaking’, or was that a one-off documentary?)
They each refused to give the name of their suspect, so the officer didn’t bother investigating what they told him.
I think they were afraid of Michael Aquino. (I don’t think he was the Zodiac, but he may have been in the ‘thing’.)
Ah. I see. Well, we all need to keep calm. That’s the main thing. So, I will ask again: What about the Zen guy?
I thought his wife may have been staying at the house Zodiac went into. (I looked at the list of possible houses and checked out the people.) It was only a possibility. I thought the afterlife may have been significant, especially as Zodiac encoded it. And I think the initials on the personal ad may be significant. Then I saw Buddhists. So I’m crazy.
You make me frightened to post anything. It’s just that to someone, a name or an idea may connect to something else, which leads to evidence. And hers was a name which seemed possibly relevant. I think CIA-organised cults were involved.
I’ll wait until you stop laughing.
Anyway, I think it’s pretty obvious whose house he went into. (Well, to me, only 2 possibilities.)
You make me frightened to post anything.
That’s not the idea – it’s never been my idea.
But it has to be coherent – it has to be something you can consider, grasp, agree with or disagree with on some kind of established grounds.
You’re all over the place with this – you even admit as much yourself. Brainstorming isn’t a bad thing in itself, but there has to be some order to it – if there isn’t, there can’t be any exchange of ideas: It’ll be limited to isolated brains storming around on their own. And that isn’t productive – it can’t be.
Your last post finally goes some way to explain why you came up with this guy’s name – but why didn’t you present this line of reasoning to begin with?
I would have disagreed with you then too – I would have said that I don’t think the guy is relevant, and that the initials are just a coincidence, and that there isn’t any valid reason to drag him into this…and then we could have taken it from there.
Present an actual argument – or a theory. Then we can talk – and disagree, and debate, and what have you.
See the thing? It’s not about thinking that people’s ideas have no merit – it’s ONLY a question of how these ideas are presented. And it has to do with respecting the people you try your ideas out on too – don’t you agree? If they don’t get your point – explain it to them, Right away. Don’t feed them vague bullshit – be honest and state your case. Then you can launch whatever theory you like – and I for one won’t be laughing at you. I might disagree, but that’s different – that’s part of the game. But the game has some rules – that’s what it’s basically about.
Some good stuff posted and worth further research. Might be a bit of a stretch, but looking outside the box is always a good thing.
As far as Anton LaVey goes, he did have some crazy ideas, but he was a much smarter man than he ever got credit for.
A few minutes ago on a toilet not very far, far away….
