Michael Hogan

[Michael Hogan]

I have thanked David Healy privately for his apology. What was said remains between the two of us, but I was glad to bury the hatchet. I want to take this opportunity to thank him publicly.

To the members that voiced their support for me, I am most grateful.

The moderators closed the other thread for reasons. I've tried to respect that by staying out of this one, but each time Bill Miller mentions me in this thread, it becomes increasingly difficult.

[Myra Bronstein]

I have thanked David Healy privately for his apology. What was said remains between the two of us, but I was glad to bury the hatchet. I want to take this opportunity to thank him publicly.

To the members that voiced their support for me, I am most grateful.

The moderators closed the other thread for reasons. I've tried to respect that by staying out of this one, but each time Bill Miller mentions me in this thread, it becomes increasingly difficult.

I'm sure it is difficult when constantly provoked and lied about Mike.

On the other hand the provocateur is simply not to be believed. In so many ways.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Hi folks, here's an idea, if you wish to continue insulting each other in this purile manner, please do so by email, or P/M. This thread adds nothing of value to an educational forum, and if it continues I shall, after consultation with my fellow Mods, lock it. After which you may all accuse me of being a Nazi or something....Steve.

[John Simkin]

Hi folks, here's an idea, if you wish to continue insulting each other in this purile manner, please do so by email, or P/M. This thread adds nothing of value to an educational forum, and if it continues I shall, after consultation with my fellow Mods, lock it. After which you may all accuse me of being a Nazi or something....Steve.

Threads like this only damage the reputation of the forum. I am tempted to delete the whole thread as I do not have the time to decide which individual insults should be removed. I am also considering putting the worst offenders on permanent moderation. I think this is going to be the only way to control this kind of behaviour.

[Miles Scull]

Hi folks, here's an idea, if you wish to continue insulting each other in this purile manner, please do so by email, or P/M. This thread adds nothing of value to an educational forum, and if it continues I shall, after consultation with my fellow Mods, lock it. After which you may all accuse me of being a Nazi or something....Steve.

Threads like this only damage the reputation of the forum. I am tempted to delete the whole thread as I do not have the time to decide which individual insults should be removed. I am also considering putting the worst offenders on permanent moderation. I think this is going to be the only way to control this kind of behaviour.

Hear, hear!

I applaud your intervention, at long last. I urge & support this course of putting the worst offenders on permanent moderation, even if that means that I will be placed so. I gladly submit to this stricture if it means the removing of all elements which bring the forum into disrepute. This is a course of repair & improvement that is long overdue.

[David G. Healy]

Hi folks, here's an idea, if you wish to continue insulting each other in this purile manner, please do so by email, or P/M. This thread adds nothing of value to an educational forum, and if it continues I shall, after consultation with my fellow Mods, lock it. After which you may all accuse me of being a Nazi or something....Steve.

Threads like this only damage the reputation of the forum. I am tempted to delete the whole thread as I do not have the time to decide which individual insults should be removed. I am also considering putting the worst offenders on permanent moderation. I think this is going to be the only way to control this kind of behaviour.

Mike Hogan accepted my apology, which I'm pleased --- this thread has grown into something utterly amazing, do with it as you wish -- thank you, Mike and JohnS..

[John Dolva]

(purely IMO) : to reiterate: locking a thread will automatically allow it to progress beyond the first pages, yet at the same time the content that does have value will remain and the overall record remain for future historians.

A blanket delete sets a precedent that once accepeted as a norm, risks diminishing the forums overall commendable stance on censorship as well as introduce a subjective dogma that at times may not be a good thing.

Locking can clearly be productive, and reversible as well, and portions of value can be still be accessed and copied to other threads. Deleting means: that's it. The baby goes out with the bathwater. No good IMO.

[Bill Miller]

I'm sure it is difficult when constantly provoked and lied about Mike.

On the other hand the provocateur is simply not to be believed. In so many ways.

Myra ... when you are done doing a little provoking yourself, please feel free to tell us what the "lie" was? I can ask this question in confidence that you cannot state something that was never said. In fact, it was never specifically stated what I was referring to, nor was it ever stated as to what level concerning a possible loss of respect some people might gotten from it. It could have been anything from keeping a messy room to swearing in church. I believe that it is you people who made more of it than it was and you are still doing it by posting that a "lie" was told when you cannot even tell us what the lie was. I can also say that what I touched on was something I have done myself in my life and I saw nothing wrong with Mike doing it. The point was that some people might not agree and that we all have those crosses to bare. Mikes complaint is that I am too hard on Jack, while others have told me not to let up. The rest is history!

Bill Miller

Edited July 3, 2007 by Bill Miller

[David G. Healy]

Debra Conway, the LANCER ADMIN, sent me this to post:

"Kathy

I am out of town and not able to post. Would you please post for me that while bill can be cantankerous and sarcastic (which doesn't read welll and can get in the way of his point), there has been no one more giving and willing to dig deep into the photographic evidence using online techniques to make things more clear. Bill is the go to guy for many of us.

Because I know he will admit when he is wrong I trust his opinions.

Bill gives strong answers because he has a strong heart. In our search for answers, I would rather have the truth unvarnished than a shiny lie.

Sincerely

Debra"

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/885 - Release Date: 7/3/2007 10:02 AM

seeing that Kathy (or else someone) dragged Debra into this:

opinions are fine, Debra -- evidence, facts and truth are however, another matter. Does "strong heart" = arrogance, Debra? And if that's all it takes to trust and publish...well so be it. The unvarnished truth is JFK was murdered through conspiracy, everything else in this case *pales* in comparison.

Further, I'll keep my longtime tenure as the MODERATOR of the JFK Assassination Research Film/Picture forum in check for the moment. It's enough to know I was there when Bill Miller (under that name) made his JFKResearch forum, internet debut. Film/Photo technical abilities, NOT his strong suit, rhetoric certainly was... it appears not much has changed over the years.

When Bill Miller left the JFKResearch forum he found a immediate home at Debra's *Lancer*, discussion forum. That 1st *Lancer* discussion forum was on its last legs, hardly any participation much less appreciable membership (I was also a member of that old *Lancer* forum, as well as the early days of the new and improved *Lancer*, though seldom posted in the early day's, though that increased during 2002-2003.

Miller showed up at Lancer during the last days of the OLD Lancer forum, the Lancer forum had a face-lift, was rejuvenated, membership drives, etc and went on to interesting things... Away from *Lancer* rumors flew as to the forums newfound successes and just who was responsible in those early days of the new forum. From then on Bill rubbed shoulders with Gary Mack, Groden and the Dallas tribe of: Dealey Plaza Film/Photo History staus quo, at all costs.

Anayway, a lot of that early Lancer success spawned jealousy in quite a few circles. I recall we at JFKResearch wished Debra and her forum well and best of luck and meant it! She even poked her head in a time or two... all that changed in 2003 when Fetzer's The Great Zapruder Film HOAX was published

....btw, for those that care...GIF animation is not rocket science and was not invented by Bill Miller

[David G. Healy]

Debra Conway, the LANCER ADMIN, sent me this to post:

"Kathy

I am out of town and not able to post. Would you please post for me that while bill can be cantankerous and sarcastic (which doesn't read welll and can get in the way of his point), there has been no one more giving and willing to dig deep into the photographic evidence using online techniques to make things more clear. Bill is the go to guy for many of us.

Because I know he will admit when he is wrong I trust his opinions.

Bill gives strong answers because he has a strong heart. In our search for answers, I would rather have the truth unvarnished than a shiny lie.

Sincerely

Debra"

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/885 - Release Date: 7/3/2007 10:02 AM

seeing that Kathy (or else someone) dragged Debra into this:

opinions are fine, Debra -- evidence, facts and truth are however, another matter. Does "strong heart" = arrogance, Debra? And if that's all it takes to trust and publish...well so be it. The unvarnished truth is JFK was murdered through conspiracy, everything else in this case *pales* in comparison.

Further, I'll keep my longtime tenure as the MODERATOR of the JFK Assassination Research Film/Picture forum in check for the moment. It's enough to know I was there when Bill Miller (under that name) made his JFKResearch forum, internet debut. Film/Photo technical abilities, NOT his strong suit, rhetoric certainly was... it appears not much has changed over the years.

When Bill Miller left the JFKResearch forum he found a immediate home at Debra's *Lancer*, discussion forum. That 1st *Lancer* discussion forum was on its last legs, hardly any participation much less appreciable membership (I was also a member of that old *Lancer* forum, as well as the early days of the new and improved *Lancer*, though seldom posted in the early day's, though that increased during 2002-2003.

Miller showed up at Lancer during the last days of the OLD Lancer forum, the Lancer forum had a face-lift, was rejuvenated, membership drives, etc and went on to interesting things... Away from *Lancer* rumors flew as to the forums newfound successes and just who was responsible in those early days of the new forum. From then on Bill rubbed shoulders with Gary Mack, Groden and the Dallas tribe of: Dealey Plaza Film/Photo History staus quo, at all costs.

Anayway, a lot of that early Lancer success spawned jealousy in quite a few circles. I recall we at JFKResearch wished Debra and her forum well and best of luck and meant it! She even poked her head in a time or two... all that changed in 2003 when Fetzer's The Great Zapruder Film HOAX was published

....btw, for those that care...GIF animation is not rocket science and was not invented by Bill Miller

David,

This has nothing to do with creating problems!!!! I'm sorry if it came across that way!!!!

I believe Debra was correcting something that another poster had written.. I wasn't trying to create a conflict, just agreed to post it.

Kathy

well thank you Kathy, I hadn't realized this thread had drifted away from its original topic, silly me....This thread, that I started, started out as a *apology to a fellow researcher* and some how it got to Bill Miller, it was off to the races after that -- now we have Debra correcting something about Bill Miller? Protecting him sounds a wee bit more realistic... Can any of these folks read a thread title?

Here's a simple suggestion, I've done this myself as a forum moderator.....have Debra start (or you as a moderator) a thread concerning Bill Miller, move the posts from this thread that deal with Miller to the new thread, in their proper date/time order. That'll allow my *original* thread to proceed to digital oblivion... Mike Hogan and I have completed our business, it's time to MOVE ON

Thank you,

David Healy

[Miles Scull]

Debra Conway, the LANCER ADMIN, sent me this to post:

"Kathy

I am out of town and not able to post. Would you please post for me that while bill can be cantankerous and sarcastic (which doesn't read welll and can get in the way of his point), there has been no one more giving and willing to dig deep into the photographic evidence using online techniques to make things more clear. Bill is the go to guy for many of us.

Because I know he will admit when he is wrong I trust his opinions.

Bill gives strong answers because he has a strong heart. In our search for answers, I would rather have the truth unvarnished than a shiny lie.

Sincerely

Debra"

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/885 - Release Date: 7/3/2007 10:02 AM

seeing that Kathy (or else someone) dragged Debra into this:

opinions are fine, Debra -- evidence, facts and truth are however, another matter. Does "strong heart" = arrogance, Debra? And if that's all it takes to trust and publish...well so be it. The unvarnished truth is JFK was murdered through conspiracy, everything else in this case *pales* in comparison.

Further, I'll keep my longtime tenure as the MODERATOR of the JFK Assassination Research Film/Picture forum in check for the moment. It's enough to know I was there when Bill Miller (under that name) made his JFKResearch forum, internet debut. Film/Photo technical abilities, NOT his strong suit, rhetoric certainly was... it appears not much has changed over the years.

When Bill Miller left the JFKResearch forum he found a immediate home at Debra's *Lancer*, discussion forum. That 1st *Lancer* discussion forum was on its last legs, hardly any participation much less appreciable membership (I was also a member of that old *Lancer* forum, as well as the early days of the new and improved *Lancer*, though seldom posted in the early day's, though that increased during 2002-2003.

Miller showed up at Lancer during the last days of the OLD Lancer forum, the Lancer forum had a face-lift, was rejuvenated, membership drives, etc and went on to interesting things... Away from *Lancer* rumors flew as to the forums newfound successes and just who was responsible in those early days of the new forum. From then on Bill rubbed shoulders with Gary Mack, Groden and the Dallas tribe of: Dealey Plaza Film/Photo History staus quo, at all costs.

Anayway, a lot of that early Lancer success spawned jealousy in quite a few circles. I recall we at JFKResearch wished Debra and her forum well and best of luck and meant it! She even poked her head in a time or two... all that changed in 2003 when Fetzer's The Great Zapruder Film HOAX was published

....btw, for those that care...GIF animation is not rocket science and was not invented by Bill Miller

David,

This has nothing to do with creating problems!!!! I'm sorry if it came across that way!!!!

I believe Debra was correcting something that another poster had written.. I wasn't trying to create a conflict, just agreed to post it.

Kathy

That's OK, Kathy. No problem, I think.

Just remember that as a Mod you have to be careful that you don't appear to be taking sides.

For example, the proper course for you in this case was to simply explain to Debra that she should try to relay her message through a member who is not a Mod.

(It's not your role as a Mod to help members correct other members. Members may do that on there own. There's a good reason for this: the correcting member may not himself be correct. )

Because you inadvertently relayed Debra's message (which is a good one, by the way) you come away by accident, of course, as a someone who should not be a Mod because you are participating in the debate as a partisan.

Of course, you ARE neutral, are you not?

Please reply for confirmation.

Thanks for your efforts as a Mod!

Edited July 3, 2007 by Miles Scull

[Bill Miller]

Further, I'll keep my longtime tenure as the MODERATOR of the JFK Assassination Research Film/Picture forum in check for the moment. It's enough to know I was there when Bill Miller (under that name) made his JFKResearch forum, internet debut. Film/Photo technical abilities, NOT his strong suit, rhetoric certainly was... it appears not much has changed over the years.

David,

It's like you and Debra are talking about two different people ... maybe there really is more than one Bill Miller

....btw, for those that care...GIF animation is not rocket science and was not invented by Bill Miller

I am glad that you pointed that error out. I must have missed someone saying that - who was it? I totally agree that it was not me who invented GIF animation.

Bill

Edited July 3, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Kathleen Collins]

I will do what I think is fair. I told you this yesterday.

Being a moderator does not mean I am void of opinion, however. Last time I checked, Sir, I was human.

I am a member of Lancer, and attend the conferences, it's no problem that she contact me.

Many moderators are partisanly active in threads. All Debra did was clear up something that I believe you said. It's been cleared. This is nonsense.

************

I just want to weigh in: As a moderator, Kathy Beckett and the others are supposed to keep the name-calling, smears, etc., from getting out of hand. But, they are also members of this forum and they have their opinions. What we can ask of them, is to be fair and not let their opinions get in the way when there is nastiness on the Forum.

Kathy Collins

[Miles Scull]

Miles..

I did not post my message to give you ammunition to use against Bill. I am just not knowledgable enough in photo analysis, to know who might be right or wrong, so I usually just avoid it. I do know that Bill is rather acerbic, but I am quite sure that he is also aware of that.....:-) Actually, I wouldn't want anyone to talk to me like that either. However, I will say that he has been a big part of the Lancer Forum for several years now and I believe he is highly regarded there.

__________

Dixie

Fair enough, Dixie. Sorry to involve you in this dispute. Recently a thread was deleted by John Simkin because Miller's scurrilous & debased attack on Mike Hogan was, quoting John Simkin: "completely unacceptable." Go figure.

Miller is continuing to abuse other members of this forum, despite the pleas of Mods that the forum move on. I am protesting in order to focus Mods attention on what Miller is continuing to do, despite their wishes & in defiance of their wishes.

I do not participate on the Lancer forum, but I do happen to know that at the Lancer administration level Miller is NOT held in esteem. Sorry.

Debra Conway, the LANCER ADMIN, sent me this to post:

"Kathy

I am out of town and not able to post. Would you please post for me that while bill can be cantankerous and sarcastic (which doesn't read welll and can get in the way of his point), there has been no one more giving and willing to dig deep into the photographic evidence using online techniques to make things more clear. Bill is the go to guy for many of us.

Because I know he will admit when he is wrong I trust his opinions.

Bill gives strong answers because he has a strong heart. In our search for answers, I would rather have the truth unvarnished than a shiny lie.

Sincerely

Debra"

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/885 - Release Date: 7/3/2007 10:02 AM

"... bill can be cantankerous and sarcastic (which doesn't read well and can get in the way of his point),..." -- Debra Conway

This justifies & verifies the contention of many, that if Miller avoids crossing over the line which separates cantankerous sarcasm from personal abuse, then there is no complain against Miller.

BUT, if Miller crosses that line, as he did in the Hogan case when he caused a thread to be deleted, and as he did on another forum when he was expelled from that forum, then complaint to the Mods is fair & justified.

A good case in point selected from many examples is this post by Miller from a current thread:]

QUOTE

Thanks, Peter...apparently you and Charlie are the only ones interested in

studying the some evidence.

Jack

What is there to study? One can go to Dealey Plaza and replicate those images any day of the week. Not understanding perspective and how it works does not mean an image has been altered. I might also add that your 'Moorman retouched' claim doesn't even have your test photo being taken from the right spot. Your pedestal corner almost touches the corner of the window in the colonnade. Moorman's photo shows a gap that one could drive a truck through. In fact, you once claimed that only the 'Drum Scan' of Moorman's photo shows a gap, so I asked that you post a Moorman print or direct us to any source that shows a Moorman print with no visible gap between those two points and to date you have not done that. Are you prepared to do it at this time?

Bill

This post has been edited by Bill Miller: Yesterday, 05:10 PM

Now, the question is: which side of the line is Miller in this post?

Miller has admitted that he has "baited" Jack White.

"My baiting was to lay the ground work for showing how Jack's claims fall short on their own merit." -- Miller

I think that what gets Miller very close to the line & very close to crossing over the line into the red area of personal abuse is pretty clear in this post.

Miller puts everything into personal terms & into personally adversarial terms. Miller makes out, or paints a picture, that Jack White is an incompetent bungler so far as photographic analysis is concerned and, worse, Miller makes the suggestion that Jack White is purposely practicing deception in order to secure his analytical conclusions. Not a pretty picture. Miller even goes so far as to suggest that Jack White is deliberately withholding from "us" & from Miller materials of great importance which were they revealed would possibly expose Jack White to be a charlatan. Note how Miller is careful to associate himself with "us"; i.e., Miller likes to assail his opponent (read victim) with the cudgel of a phantom public censure. Remember Hogan? It's Miller's trademark & signature personal attack MO.

Now since this ongoing personal attack has been going on 5 years or more, then it is fair & pertinent to ask: when is enough, enough?

I'm beginning to think that many members are beginning to see the laughable absurdity Miller's relentless pursuit of Moby-Dick, the great WHITE Whale! Jack WHITE, the Nemesis!

Edited July 4, 2007 by Miles Scull

[Bill Miller]

Miller has admitted that he has "baited" Jack White.

"Baiting" would be a fair term IMO. In the legal game it is called a "leading question". I have heard Jack's arguments many times and I know how he tries to get around the things that show his alteration claims erroneous. For instance, asking Jack if the Altgens #6 photo is genuine can be seen as baiting because it set Jack up to approve a photo before I show his mistake by way of it. If one is going to whine about using such a tactic in debate, then we might as well not call this 'the JFK assassination debate'.

Bill Miller