John Simkin Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Many members will be aware that Bob Vernon has been mounting a campaign against our forum over the last few weeks. The problem started a few months ago when Vernon was a member of this forum. Vernon is in fact very knowledgeable about the JFK assassination. However, a few years ago he became convinced by the James Files story. Now, like most other serious researchers, he considers Files is a hoax. I don’t know all the details but for some reason that has brought him into conflict with Wim Dankbaar. On several occasions Vernon claimed he was about to publish details of why he knew the James Files story was a hoax. However, he never did this. Vernon also has strange views on world politics. For example, he believes that the UK is actually ruled by Queen Elizabeth II (he calls her a dictator). As a republican I have no love of our monarchy but it is silly to overestimate the power she has. The post where I explained the history of the monarchy in the UK seemed to upset Vernon. Unable to put forward any evidence for his view that the queen was a dictator, Vernon, made a bad tempered posting where he said he was unwilling to discuss this matter any further and asked for his membership of the forum to be cancelled. This I did. Vernon continued to post his nonsense about the UK dictatorship on two other JFK Forums: JFK Lancer and JFK Research. He also made numerous attacks on me. This include the false charge that I was a supporter of the James Files story (as Wim knows, nothing could be further from the truth). He also made the claim that I was using this forum to brainwash students. Only two members of these forums, Lee Foreman and Allan Eaglesham, came to my defence. That is understandable as Vernon turns very nasty when people disagree with him. This includes threats of legal action and home phone calls. For some reason Vernon got really upset by our online seminars. I suspect his main concern was the success of them. One thing is clear, he desperately wanted to take part in them. Last Sunday he sent me an email. Here it is: Let me help you with your "pal", Dankbaar....here are you answers to his assinine questions, take it or leave it, its up to you......my responses are where it says BV: If you could answer the following questions for me, then maybe I'll start thinking about what you said. 1) What do you make of Joe Granata? Is he lying too? BV: Joe Granata is what is called a "reliable FBI informant" which means that he has told the FBI things in the past that they have found to be credible, nothing more. It doesn't mean that Granata tells the truth about everything for if he did, he probably wouldn't be in jail under a phony name. Since Files says he didn't use the name Files until 1963 which is a lie (his 1959 FBI rap sheet proves he's lying) how could Granata have referred to him as "Sutton" when Granata would not have any knowledge of him until AFTER 1963. Granata was more than likely fed his name by Shelton PRIOR to the phone interview in which Granata calls him Sutton..., in fact, Granata even says to Shelton, what was his name....Sutton?....go figure..... 2) What is your explanation for Files knowing there was a toothmark on the shell casing, while nobody else knew that? BV: Joe West inadvertently gave Files the information on August 16-17, 1992. Files had from that date until May 3, 1993 to polish up his tale. Files is a master con-man. Even his Rap Sheet shows he was arrested on "FALSE PRETENSES" . not exactly a sign of veracity....... 3) If Files is a hoax, who else was/is involved in perpetrating the hoax? BV: See attached Acrobat file. 4) Why has the man who Files says killed JD Tippit, never come forward to refute the claim? BV: LOL...er...ah....(1) he's dead....(2) Files is lying....(3) Files said th nguy is really Kenny Larry and it's not.....(4) Dankbaar is an idiot....or all of the above....... 5) What is your explanation for the information below (from a guy that hates James Files) ? If Files is a hoax, who else was/is involved in perpetrating the hoax? Wim A post of Dave Ostertag The interesting part: Some interesting things happened with Files' military record and his criminal history during the sentencing part of his trial. The military refused to honor the subpoena for his records. Why subpoena for Files military records if supposedly Files lied about his military past and there are no records? Note that the military did not say: we don't have them. They refused to honor the subpoena! Why? Another question: Why were his rap sheets "cleaned"? BV: I know Dave Ostertag, John. In fact, Dave is going to sue Pam Ray for saying Dave is a government assassin. I talked to Dave about his post several times and I communicate with Dave regularly...in fact, I sent him the crap Ray posted on your forum just a day or two ago. Dave feels that Files may well have been some sort of low-level CIA asset or operative but there is no proof of that and there never will be. It's just what Dave thinks. BTW, Dave told me that when he arrested Files in the mid 80's that Files tried to tell him that his name was SUTTON. That's where the name SUTTON was first used by Files and NOT before 1963 which his FBI rap sheet proves. John: You see, I'm not your enemy. I'm sorry we got off on the wrong foot about your Queen but I could care less about her. I just don't think that children should read about bogus (censored) like FIles, Baker, Marvin, etc becasue it influences them. I don't think that's right. And I'll make you a deal to show you I'm sincere.......if you want me to do so, I'll come back on your forum and I'll tear Dankbaar, Baker, Plumlee, and Ray a new (censored) and I'll do it with the facts, with a civil tougue and manners and.....with the intellect that you don't think I have. It's your call. Bob I sent out an email to all our regular members and asked their opinion about whether Bob Vernon should be readmitted. Of these, only one thought he should be. A couple said that they would not object but thought it was a risky idea. The overwhelming majority were completely against the idea. They argued that he would damage the forum in the same way as he has damaged JFK Lancer and JFK Research. Several of our most valued members said they would leave if Vernon joined. I therefore took the decision that it would not be for the good of the forum if I readmitted Vernon. However, I decided to wait awhile before telling him. The reason being I wanted to monitor his postings on JFK Lancer and JFK Research to see if he really was a changed character. For some reason Vernon has not posted on JFK Lancer recently (I have been told he has been banned). However, he has continued to post diatribes against me on JFK Research. The latest one (posted at Nov 29 2004, 12:36 PM) is entitled “My last post about John Simkin and his bad influence on children”. It is a very long posting and contains the often repeated claim that I am brainwashing children. His main attack is on Gibson Vendettuoli. Vernon was upset by this posting by Gibson: I've heard a lot about Bob Vernon, some good, some bad. I don't have a real balanced opinion on the guy. However, from what I have heard, he has been a shyster in the entertainment business for many years. He pulls up the same credentials he's used over and over ("I uncovered Jimmy Swaggart's sins," "I managed Fats Domino and was in his documentary," "I made a JFK assassination interview with Dick Clark Productions and MPI," "I've been an entertainer since I was six," "I'm gonna sue Wim Dankbaar and virtually everybody who gets in my way," etc.). All I say is, you backed what you think is a fraud. Go out with dignity, find a new music project or an educational thing for kids, the things that matter - forgive and forget, live and let live; don't go out with a whimper, having your documentary on JFK "hoaxes" not picked up for distribution by anyone and continually posting everywhere as "Dr. Truth" when you're considered by most to be one of the biggest screwballs, liars, and cheaters in the entertainment business. Now, Bob, if you read this, I'm not saying I agree with others. I do find some of what you say accurate, as I don't believe Madeleine Brown's story or anyone of that nature. But please, if you're gonna go out with a lawsuit, sue the entertainment world for the attention they have reportedly denied you. Then we can laugh and forget all about it. In his posting Vernon reveals he has carried out an investigation into Gibson. He claims that Gibson is not who he says he is. What is more, he contacted Gibson’s father and threatened him with legal action. Vernon also make the point that I am allowing members to break the rules of the forum by posting false information about themselves. It is of course this sort of accusation that I have been trying to prevent by urging members to post biographies and using photographs as avatars. As you know, I accepted Gibson’s claim that he was only 14 years old and that his parents had refused him permission to post his photograph. So could I once again urge members to be completely honest with their biographies. It would also help if you used a photograph as a avatar. So far, only Don Roberdeau has given me a good reason why he should not do that. Given what has happened to Gibson, I would suggest, unless you are willing to take the flak, it is best that you do not post critical comments about Vernon. Of course, that is what his behaviour is all about. These bullying tactics are an attempt to intimidate his critics. In that sense he wins. However, there is a possibility that he hates one thing even more than being criticised. I suspects he hates being ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judyth Baker Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Dear John: I do hope you will not allow Mr. Vernon to sully the nest at this forum. I realize that I will be seen by readers as a prejudiced person. After all, Mr. Vernon has posted over a hundred recent attacks against me on the internet, many of them containing vile language. Mr. Vernon never bothered me until I wrote a post defending Dankbaar against a particularly vitriolic attack. Yes, I have been unhappy that Wim and "Vermin" (as he is known to many) try to sock it out online, but Wim rarely started the fights. In my case, by defending Wim, Vernon began attacking me, and since then, has never quit. I have NO DOUBT that by speaking out now he will again find some excuse to attack. I wonder how many people he has intimidated who are witnesses who would prefer to have the truth get to the fore, but fell silent after experiencing his threats and/or harrassment? I know he has damaged several of my potential witnesses with either lies about me or with threats. He has made telephone calls to people apparently for the express purpose of intimidating them and me. He pretended also to have contacted a witness about me - a former lover of Dave Ferrie - and reported that the witness said he never heard of me - when I had already spoken to that witness and know better. The man has since died, rendering what the man told me, due to Mr. Vernon, now under question, but an email Mr. Vernon sent to Wim Dankbaar after the man's death showing he had JUST learned of my existence proved he had not interviewed that man at all and was lying. Lying seems to comes easily to Mr. Vernon, no matter how many people get hurt thereby. Mr. Vernon has also brought people's attention to a porn picture he dubbed was of Lee and me; he has placed descriptions of my having been tortured and electroshocked online without even checking with me first to see if the information was false, which it was; he has made telephone calls damaging my reputation; he has threatened to sue me on numerous occasions; and finally, he says he will have me arrested if I return to the United States. He has moderated his arrest threat, claiming I have nothing to fear unless I am telling the truth. Since I possesss copious evidence, which in private a number of honest researchers have now seen, his arrest threat for me is taken seriously. I had to move from the US two years ago because of harrassment and threats that ruined my life from nuts, oddballs and stalkers. Mr. Vernon resides in this category. He even published a handwriting analysis of my handwritten materials from some free website online, trying to prove I was a bad person. He simultaneously tried to 'prove' I hadn't written some of the material, contrasting block letters with cursive letters. The block letters came from a poem I wrote in block letters. The cursive letters came from the rest of the material, which was cursive. He labeled these 'finds' of his "Judyth Caught Red-Handed" or similar ridiculous ALL CAP headers. People on the Internet, if skimming and finding my name, find numerous CAP headers from him saying I am a scam, a hoax, a xxxx, and even that I lied when I said I did not believe in God in 1963 because I used the phrase, "I prayed to God he (Lee) would be OK"(or whatever the phrase was..I used a common phrase and for this, he called me a xxxx! )... Of course I had been an atheist at that time but still used ordinary idioms and phrases in my vocabulary. I stopped being an atheist in 1969. The man has never met me. He has always been abusive to me, but his online attacks have been almost ceaseless since I defended Dankbaar; his numerous phone calls harrassing people, his calls to potential witnesses - destroying their utility (such as Sheriff Harry Lee and Dr. John Ochsner, who were fed tripe about me, which makes them now impossible to approach for any kind of clean testimony) - in my opinion represents the actions of a man whose reckless, irresponsible and deliberate actions serve only to impede the resolution of the case of who actually killed John F. Kennedy and why. I even wonder if his handling of the James Files matter for ten years means that people should take a closer look at the Files story, which I personally believe James may have made up because he overheard a lot of information while being the driver for Nicolettti, and wanting revenge after Nicoletti's death. But maybe Files is telling more of the truth than I have assumed, seeing who was in charge of his story for a decvade. God knows what might have been mishandled. So I'll say this: I would be inclined to want to carefully review everything about Files, knowing that this individual, Mr. Vernon, was in charge of the hapless Files and that what we have been presented may not be the whole truth, since I frankly do believe it is impossible for Mr. Vernon to string together three sentences that do not include a misrepresentation or a lie. I realize that by posting this, I will incur his wrath once more and be threatened with additional lawsuits, which means I do not care any more what he says he will do to me, as he has already threatened everything he possibly could. I apologize if I sound angry, but I have not begun to speak about all the harrassment I have endured from this man, whom I pity. Please add my (prejudiced) voice to keep your nest clear from the Cuckoo Bird that would knock all the other chicks right out of the nest in order to grab all the attention for himself. Best Regards, Judyth Vary Baker seeking the exoneration of Lee Harvey Oswald Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wim Dankbaar Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 (edited) John, I just read this now. I have been very busy. I've just come off the phone with another person disgusted with Vernon's insults. Anyway, I don't have the time to answer this lenghty post now. I do not care if Vernon is re-admitted here again. I'll answer his lies here soon in this thread, if anyone is interested. Suffice to say now they are BIG. And Judyth, thanks for your support, but you're just speculating about Files having made up the story from Charles Nicoletti or others. That shows you know very little about Files. You do not have to defend Files in any way. I am not asking you. In fact your supporters don't want you to, so why risk that? John, I think Gisbson is a female, not a male, and with her 14 years of age, she is rather smart too, because she hit the nail right on the head. And that's even a bigger compliment knowing that she doesn't know everything. Wim I'll have some more Ostertag too, the man is lying through his teeth, but I understand. He has to. I can't expect him to admit he got a contract on James Files. He just blew it. Edited December 1, 2004 by Wim Dankbaar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Simkin Posted December 1, 2004 Author Share Posted December 1, 2004 John, Gibson is a female, not a male, and with her 14 years of age, she is rather smart too, because she hit the nail right on the head. And that's even a bigger compliment knowing that she doesn't know everything. How do you know that? Who is supplying Gibson with information? Her posting on Bob Vernon was in a style much older than a 14 year old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanet Clark Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 I have never known a 14 year old able to participate in an adult research dialog at the level of Gibson. But I see no bias or irrational behavior, so its not a problem. I was very concerned that Terry Mauro left. She had a very legitimate concern. Please, lets just ignore personal and irrational postings and let those threads fade to the bottom. I support John 100% Shanet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Simkin Posted December 1, 2004 Author Share Posted December 1, 2004 I was very concerned that Terry Mauro left. She had a very legitimate concern. So was I. However, the reason she gave (an unwillingess to be on the same forum as Nancy Eldreth) did seem very strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wim Dankbaar Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 I am not sure if Gibson is male or female, but I thought she was female if she is called "Gibby" by friends. Her/His bio says she/he was born in 1990: I was born in 1990 and have been raised in the US (I can't say exactly where for obvious reasons). I am a wannabe screenwriter and have been trying to see if Judyth Baker can release her book quick enough for me to get permission to write a movie out of it. I have also been a JFK assassination researcher for the past few years and have uncovered several bits of new evidence. This post has been edited by Gibson Vendettuoli: Oct 8 2004, 09:33 PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 For some reason Vernon has not posted on JFK Lancer recently (I have been told he has been banned). My understanding has always been that Lancer does not like to ban anyone. They go to great lengths to avoid doing so by showing a lot of leeway and patience. Only in extreme instances have I seen where someone has been banned from that forum. Bob and Wim agreed to take a cooling off period (for a better term) and neither has been banned from Lancer to my knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanet Clark Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 (edited) I was very concerned that Terry Mauro left. She had a very legitimate concern. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So was I. However, the reason she gave (an unwillingess to be on the same forum as Nancy Eldreth) did seem very strange. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> John, Nancy is our member most given to rambling, disjointed postings. I believe she is sincere and well meaning, and I don't want her barred, but I would like to see her tighten up a bit. Also her postings on Lancer are sometimes even farther afield, (and I think she had run-ins with Terry over there)...... Gibby is a masculine name in the States (like Giggy Haines) Lancer puts Vernon in a special thread called "Weird" ... really! Edited December 1, 2004 by Shanet Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Simkin Posted December 1, 2004 Author Share Posted December 1, 2004 Bob Vernon has published Gibson's photograph on the JFK Research website. He is very much a male and looks older than 14. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Simkin Posted December 1, 2004 Author Share Posted December 1, 2004 Nancy is our member most given to rambling, disjointed postings. I believe she is sincere and well meaning, and I don't want her barred, but I would like to see her tighten up a bit. Also her postings on Lancer are sometimes even farther afield, (and I think she had run-ins with Terry over there)......Gibby is a masculine name in the States (like Giggy Haines) Lancer puts Vernon in a special thread called "Weird" ... really! I agree that Nancy's posts take some understanding. I am afraid I stopped reading her posts some time ago. I suggest others follow the same policy. Bob Vernon has published Gibson's photograph on the JFK Research website. He is very much a male and looks much older than 14. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wim Dankbaar Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Okay, Gibson is a male, maybe he could enlighten his on his age himself? Wim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wim Dankbaar Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 For some reason Vernon has not posted on JFK Lancer recently (I have been told he has been banned). My understanding has always been that Lancer does not like to ban anyone. They go to great lengths to avoid doing so by showing a lot of leeway and patience. Only in extreme instances have I seen where someone has been banned from that forum. Bob and Wim agreed to take a cooling off period (for a better term) and neither has been banned from Lancer to my knowledge. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hi Wim, don't know if Debra has informed you already. Both Vernon's and your account on the forum has been temporarily disabled for 30 days.by me upon request from Debra. Any complaint should be mailed directly to Debra. -------------------------------- There was nothing to agree on, but FWIW I answered Uwe: no problem, good move. Wim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Carroll Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Bob and Wim agreed to take a cooling off period (for a better term) and neither has been banned from Lancer to my knowledge. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It is my understanding that a 30 day moratorium was imposed by Lancer (temporarily "banned"), but Bill would know far more than I about the internal workings of Lancer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Geraghty Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 i recall someone asking gibson if the year 1990 was a typo and said that it was not a typo and that he indeed is 14. john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now