In Praise -- and Defense -- of Jack White

[Evan Burton]

Tim, I'm happy to abide by whatever terms and conditions are set by the board owners.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

I find that language by Mr. Drago offensive.

6. In order to be reinstated Jack must admit that Neil Armstrong was walking on the moon--around the same time Sen Kennedy was driving off a bridge.

7. Forget #6.

Fair enough?

Tim, if being told to get stuffed is the worst insult thrown my way between now, and when they screw the lid down, I shall consider myself one fortunate dude, given the nature of my employment.

As regards six, so basically you are recommending Mr White recieve a life ban.

[Don Jeffries]

I admire and respect Jack White. His analysis of the photographic record, particularly of the many faces of Lee Harvey Oswald, constituted some very important research, and we should all be in his debt for that alone. Veteran researchers who remember Penn Jones' monthly periodical "The Continuing Inquiry" also appreciate the many fine pieces he wrote and/or edited for that publication. He has forgotten more about this case than most of us know.

When I first "found" the internet, I soon gravitated to Rich Dellarosa's JFK Research Forum, which was THE place to be back then (late 1990s) for anyone interested in the assassination. I was thrilled to see familiar names like Jack White and Gary Mack, whose work and research were well-known to all of us, as regular posters there. I believe that Jack's tendency to feel personally attacked was born during the many heated exchanges he had with Gary on that forum. For those of you who may not know, Jack and Gary were close friends for years, and were partners in assassination research. When Gary abruptly transformed into a semi-official apologist for the lone- assassin theory, it was understandable that Jack would feel befuddled and betrayed. Then Gary was hired by the Sixth Floor Museum, and we all have seen him on television specials about the assassination many times since them, portrayed as a voice of reason; always decrying some sort of "conspiracy theory," while still claiming to believe in a conspiracy. I remember Bill Miller's many similar exchanges with Jack on Rich's Forum, a few years later, after traffic and membership had already started to diminish there, and they were very similar to many I've seen here, with Len Colby, Craig Lamson and others, even though the subject matter is usually different (Moon hoax/911 conspiracy).

While I think Jack does himself no favors with the way he responds to his detractors (I'd advise him to try defusing things with humor, or ignore them once in a while), I can understand how he probably feels. Jack has been studying this case for decades, and I'm sure it's hard to be patient with anonymous names in cyberspace who question his expertise and claim to be experts themselves. I think he's earned the right to be considered an "elder statesman" here, and should probably be treated as such, even when he complains and theorizes about what a particular failure to log in means, or something like that. I thought that he had been accorded this kind of respect, and his complaints were always handled with patience and civility, at least in the responses by moderators that I have seen. So, I was surprised to hear he'd been put on moderation- I guess he must have stepped over the line. Hopefully, things can be worked out so that he can freely post here again, without restraint. I think we all benefit from his presence and his insight.

I also would like to extend my condolences to Jack on the loss of his nephew. Whether there was a 911 conspiracy or not, any death in this phony "war" is a terrible waste of a young life.

I think this is a wonderful forum, and the owners are certainly free to run it as they see fit. I don't think it would be quite the same, however, without Jack White.

[Charles Drago]

I find that language by Mr. Drago offensive.

Mr. Gratz,

I've offended you?

It is to be devoutly wished.

I, on the other hand, am NOT offended by what in my Constitutionally-protected opinion are your selective piety, flagrant self-promotion, simple-minded "analyses," and annoyingly inept efforts to disrupt this Forum by whining for a seat at the adults' table.

I appreciate you as what I'll term an "alter boy." But despite your best efforts, the truth will not be altered.

(At this point I have about a dozen Johnny Geoghan lines for you, but, believe it or not, even I have limits, and to use them would amount to hitting below the belt. So to say.)

By the by: The day my behaviour is "acceptable" to you, I'll ask Kellerman and Greer for a ride through Dallas.

So why don't you make like a Thanksgiving turkey and get ... oh, you know.

Charles Drago

Edited October 3, 2007 by Charles Drago

[Guest David Guyatt]

Is one who purposely provides "disinformation" an "artist"? I thought he was an "agent"? Or if a disinformation agent is good enough does he (or she) become an artist?

It's an interesting point. I once was at a prize giving ceremony where the award was a golf trophy designed by a Frenchmen who, it was revealed during the opening speech, was known to enjoy drinking French wine. One Oz wag piped up from the back of the room "That makes him a piss artist, then". Can't argue with that logic.

I think disinformation can be an artform.

Ever done any painting, Tim?

David

[Dawn Meredith]

I find that language by Mr. Drago offensive.

Mr. Gratz,

I've offended you?

By the by: The day my behaviour is "acceptable" to you, I'll ask Kellerman and Greer for a ride through Dallas.

Charles Drago

Best line I have seen in awhile. Charles you're too funny!

Dawn

[Guest David Guyatt]

Craig, I have formed no judgement on Jack's posts on the moon landing photography etc., as I don't consider myself sufficiently knowledgeable on the subject to discuss it. But I like Jack and I know he is earnest in what he believes. Whether he, or you, and/or others are misled or not I really don't know. But Jack should come back asap and post in his own inimitable way.

I think common sense would be to apologise to Evan, who I am sure was trying to behave in a fair and correct manner. And as Kathy (I believe it is) says in her signature, "moderators have opinions, too". Jack has strong views on the subject and I'm sure Evan has, also.

I feel certain that changes will naturally follow on from this episode, and perhaps that's for the best.

Now let's move on.

David

[Charles Drago]

I think disinformation can be an artform.

David

Disinformation is by definition a product of the creative process. But unless a given provocation boasts the form, function, and other components and characteristics which, singularly or in the agregate, comprise artistic expression, it is merely creative craft.

On the other hand, I recognize the JFK plot to be art-as-conspiracy. To be specific: the product of dramaturgy. (Ruby/Falstaff, Angel and Leopolod/Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, LBJ/Macbeth [see Barbara Garson's Macbird], etc.).

And you?

Charles

[Duane Daman]

Craig, I have formed no judgement on Jack's posts on the moon landing photography etc., as I don't consider myself sufficiently knowledgeable on the subject to discuss it. But I like Jack and I know he is earnest in what he believes. Whether he, or you, and/or others are misled or not I really don't know. But Jack should come back asap and post in his own inimitable way.

I think common sense would be to apologise to Evan, who I am sure was trying to behave in a fair and correct manner. And as Kathy (I believe it is) says in her signature, "moderators have opinions, too". Jack has strong views on the subject and I'm sure Evan has, also.

I feel certain that changes will naturally follow on from this episode, and perhaps that's for the best.

Now let's move on.

David

David ... With all due respect , Jack White does not owe Evan Burton any apologies ... Evan hatched a plan to have Jack moderated for reasons which needs to be made abundantly clear to everyone on this forum .... It's called a WITCH HUNT and the ones that Burton has targeted are Jack and me for exposing the Apollo hoax evidence ... Burton is an avid defender of NASA'S alleged manned moon landings and the Apollo photography , which Jack , among other researchers , has proven to be fake ....

I am reposting what I did on the political conspiracies thread so the members who don't visit that section of the forum can see the real truth of why Evan Burton put Jack on moderation to the point where he is now unable to post here in his defense .

I encourage everyone to read all of Burton's post comments on Jay Windley's Apollo Hoax forum , so they can get a clearer picture of why this nonsense againt Jack has taken place here .

My post .

"I have been doing a little research on one of our beloved moderators here .... The same moderator who decided to conduct a witch hunt here against me and Jack ... The same moderator who went to his pals at the most dispicable of forums, known as Apollo Hoax , and tried to recruit members there to come here to attack Jack and me ... The same moderator who everyone here thought was such a nice , fair and honest guy...

Here are just a few of his offense posts on Apollo hoax ... He goes by the name of Obviousman there ... and Evan Burton here .

And I quote ...

"Oh yes - Duane is far from being the sharpest knife in the draw. He runs an antique dealership IIRC from his Ed Forum bio. There was also mention of someone with the same name being busted for dope after some domestic incident with his girlfriend - I wonder if it is the same person?" ** (I am guilty of being an antiques dealer , but I never have been busted for dope ...So no , that's NOT me . )

"I do it for pretty much all the reasons previously mentioned.

Sometimes a question is asked and I have to dig deep into technical reports I would normally never bother with. I pick up lots of interesting information, gain a greater appreciation.

I do it to check on the person asking the questions; sometimes they are a person who has heard the misdirection of the HBs, and just need to be shown how to research the subject for themselves.

I do it for the lurkers, who might otherwise just swallow the HB nonsense. I always try to stress researching the facts yourself, consulting experts (plural) in the fields where you don't have the background to make a valid judgment, checking the what people have said is actually what they did say, etc, and most importantly to try and set up experiments to verify the data you have been given. That last one is a killer for the Jack White debates; once people try to reproduce the things he says are impossible, they discover what a fraud he is.

Lastly, and not to my credit, I do it because it is so easy to slap these people with a cold wet fish and make them look stupid. It's schadenfreude.

99% of the time, you are unlikely to change the mind of a "hard core" HB."

"Hey - just register. They don't have any "exclusion policy".

If anyone has problems with the forum, just let Craig, Len, or myself know about it. "

"Straydog accuses Jay of withholding evidence from his 'fan club':

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...try111797"

"That's right. The ID numbers simply confirm what image he is talking about. Think about it; how can an ID number be "fake"?

They are simply numbers assigned to a particular image. He also makes a deal out of GRIN numbers; I'm pretty sure that even GRIN images still give the original image number, although the GRIN server file number is different.

I'm pretty sure it's that Jack is starting to suffer from senility or similar. That's not being offensive or cruel; that is an honest assessment. He is getting on in years, he's making unsupportable claims, he's being illogical, and showing signs of paranoia.

I genuinely think that Jack is starting to suffer the effects of age on the mental makeup. No-one is immune, even the brightest & best can suffer from it. "

"All explained here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...911&st=120#

For any of that garbage Jack calls "studies" about Apollo on the Aulis website see:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...opic=5911"

"And I see Duane is already playing the victim, saying he'll be banned while actually behaving in a manner which will make his prophesy come true!

Now where have I seen that behaviour before?"

"I only get the occasional 'bandwidth limit' error. It's because some.. what do you call them, spammers?..... download heaps of stuff via the website, causing the site to exceed its allowance. There is a thread about it on the website somewhere.

Now, if I were a woo-woo, I'd claim it's all Duane and Jack's fault, trying to prevent people watching them getting a pasting."

"Keep 'em coming, folks.

BTW, have alook at the new 'live one' we have on the Education Forum:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...mp;st=165"

"i don't know which is Jack's most prominent feature: his obstinacy, or his ignorance. "

"Now, I can't speak about Turbo or Lionking, but I do have some small experience with Duane. An example of his open mindedness (modified for comedic value, not a quote, although representaional):

Duane: But NASA never gives any figures for radiation on the Moon. We can't say if they could survive.

EB: Sorry, you are wrong. Here are the radiation figures from the lunar landings.

Duane: Those figures are from NASA - you can't trust them.

EB: Hang on; the only figures available must have been recorded by NASA, but you say NASA figures are invalid and there are no other figures so.....?

Duane: I win. You lose. Thanks for playing."

"I yam what I yam." .... * ( yes you certainly are )

http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cg...user=obviousman

..................

And I think you all get my point .

I not only recommend that Jack White be uncensured , but I also recommend that Evan Burton be removed from moderator status , for "Obviousman " reasons. "

Edited October 3, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Duane Daman]

Duane :

There is a glitch.........Yesterday in one of your posts on the Consp thread you mentioned at that time, about your problems logging in etc, and

you mentioned, that you could no longer log in as invisible....for some reason...

You were assured by I believe the mod, that had nothing to do with anything, words to that effect.....and I then mentioned that I could not either and that

it did not and does not make any difference to me....

But that does prove a point, there is a glitch....as I asked for an explanation of the why I could not.......and none has been forthcoming..and the thread locked.......so, I take it there is a glitch....???

Quote: Duane :

""I'm not sure at this point why Jack still wants to be a member of this forum and have the privilege of posting here , but he does ... ""

I imagine at times Jack perhaps has had that very thought...as well as many others.....

Jack has never given up the fight for over 40 years and he will go on fighting, till the day comes when we will not have access to his knowledge....

Some may not agree with him at all times, or any of the time, everyone has that right.......but his studies and all he has brought forth all these many years

cannot be denied, except by the intellectually impaired.....and or the provacateurs which do exist....

Also perhaps he also would like the opportunity to defend himself, now there is a scathingly brilliant

idea....... in this court that has emerged, I believe he should be entitled....

I only have one question, and that is, has the administration taken the time to check the Hoax Forum, from where you copied

the information posted by the mod of the consp threads.

Where he posted what he did and the related information, concerning the other two members as well....

.....That in so many words came down to.......it is, and was an ongoing Jack Attack, and bragging

about such, and on and on....or have they all been deleted by now to save their sorry you know whats...?

I believe you as I have seen them for myself in past years..as well as others who have...

..Has anyone perhaps contacted you for your information ??

Jack our condolences for your families loss......

Best B & G........

You must wonder when it is all going to end,

and when we can come back home. We have

to stay at it. We must not be fatigued.

--John F. Kennedy, November, 1963

Bernice .... Thanks for your post to me ..

No , no one has answered the question as to why the "log in as invisible" feature was removed from my , Jack's and your log in page ... I don't know if this has been done to any other members .

I don't know if anyone in charge read my post on the political conspiracies thread complaining about the behavior and motives of Evan Burton , so I have copied it and posted it here .

Jack as been targeted to be shut down on this forum , IMO .... and I believe that the post comments made by Burton on the Apollo Hoax forum is proof of that .

Thanks for your concern and condolences about Jack's nephew ... I'm sure he appreciates that very much .

[Craig Lamson]

Craig, I have formed no judgement on Jack's posts on the moon landing photography etc., as I don't consider myself sufficiently knowledgeable on the subject to discuss it. But I like Jack and I know he is earnest in what he believes. Whether he, or you, and/or others are misled or not I really don't know. But Jack should come back asap and post in his own inimitable way.

I think common sense would be to apologise to Evan, who I am sure was trying to behave in a fair and correct manner. And as Kathy (I believe it is) says in her signature, "moderators have opinions, too". Jack has strong views on the subject and I'm sure Evan has, also.

I feel certain that changes will naturally follow on from this episode, and perhaps that's for the best.

Now let's move on.

David

I'm not really senting my comment totally your way, it was just your post that was under my cursor as it were. I should havc made that clear in my post. Sorry.

As to Jack's "beliefs" and how earnest he may or may not be, it matters not a whit. Most of his works fall under some very strict and unbreakable rules that govern the art and science of photography. No "belief" required. Its black or white...right or wrong...period.

[Guest David Guyatt]

I think disinformation can be an artform.

David

Disinformation is by definition a product of the creative process. But unless a given provocation boasts the form, function, and other components and characteristics which, singularly or in the agregate, comprise artistic expression, it is merely creative craft.

On the other hand, I recognize the JFK plot to be art-as-conspiracy. To be specific: the product of dramaturgy. (Ruby/Falstaff, Angel and Leopolod/Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, LBJ/Macbeth [see Barbara Garson's Macbird], etc.).

And you?

Charles

Sorry to admit that my education has not stretched to Macbird, although I confess to being a fan of the Bard, Sir Francis Bacon, his ciphers and the underlying motifs contained therein. I also enjoy Umberto Eco and his The Name of the Rose and being a Brit, I'm obviously very fond of the Rose as a symbol, too.

David

[Charles Drago]

Sorry to admit that my education has not stretched to Macbird, although I confess to being a fan of the Bard, Sir Francis Bacon, his ciphers and the underlying motifs contained therein. I also enjoy Umberto Eco and his The Name of the Rose and being a Brit, I'm obviously very fond of the Rose as a symbol, too.

David

Macbird was produced as an off-off-off Broadway production in the mid-sixties. An original cast LP was issued, and the play was published in paperback.

It's essentially a riff on Macbeth, with an LBJ character in the title role. Need I say more?

I shall: It was ham-handed, but not without its moments.

Bubble, bubble,

Charles

[Len Colby]

Well at least we know and can prove that the PS is a lie.

The rest suggests a rather exaggerated role for this forum to say the least.

I just received this e-mail from Jack and I thought his friends here might be interested in reading it ... I am posting this with his permission .

Duane...Thanks for all your help.

Yesterday about this time, our nephew Mark Cannon was killed

in Afghanistan in Bush's war. Partly responsible are those

on the forum who fight exposure of the official 911 story. The irony

is that Mark was a compassionate Navy medic who was there to save

lives. Thanks.

Jack

PS...I am now totally blocked from posting on the forum.

It would appear that man's inhumanity to man is very much alive and well on this forum .... The lack of concern for Jack's dead nephew is unbelievable .

Does that apply just to Andy or all the other members who failed to express their condolences?

Here is Jack's second e-mail to me explaining the technical problems he is having at the moment when attempting to post here .

[...]

"...I suspect foul play"

I hope this clears up what is happening with Jack's account and stops any more accusations of him lying .

But it leaves him open to charges of rampant paranoia who does he think responsible John or Andy? As has been repeatedly explained the "Mod Squad" doesn't have the power to do this.

Don wrote

…they were very similar to many I've seen here, with Len Colby, Craig Lamson and others, even though the subject matter is usually different (Moon hoax/911 conspiracy).

While I think Jack does himself no favors with the way he responds to his detractors (I'd advise him to try defusing things with humor, or ignore them once in a while), I can understand how he probably feels. Jack has been studying this case for decades, and I'm sure it's hard to be patient with anonymous names in cyberspace who question his expertise and claim to be experts themselves.

I never claimed to be an expert nor do Jack’s other "detractors" here, other than Craig, claim to be photo experts. While PERHAPS Jack deserves special status re: the assassination I don’t think that extends to other matters like 9/11 or Apollo. He has no special claim to expertise as a photo analyst on these issues. Having done some studio work form the ad agency he worked at doesn’t qualify him anymore than anybody else with a working knowledge of photography. With the exception of Craig who AT TIMES has been less than civil his critics are normally polite. But as you seemed to acknowledge he doesn’t react well to having his analysis challenged, he and his supporters classify this as “personnel attacks”, “provocation” and “goading”. But that is besides the point what got Jack in trouble were a) his repeated false accusations against the moderators in general and Evan in particular and continuing to start new thread about moderation issues when he like everyone else was instructed to raise thes issues on a specific thread. He ignored warnings from Evan and John and was put on moderation

I doubt Jack will ever apologize to Evan; he is not one to admit error and seems to enjoy being a martyr. I don’t think it’s a condition for him being taken off moderation. I assume if he starts posting again and refrains from repeating the behavior that got him in trouble after a few weeks that would happen.

Despite irrationally being accused of sharing part of the blame I extend my condolences to Jack’s family over their loss.

Duane wrote:

No , no one has answered the question as to why the "log in as invisible" feature was removed from my , Jack's and your log in page ... I don't know if this has been done to any other members

It’s not available for me either. I’m set to log in automatically but I just logged out and back in to see what would happen. Why not log in normally just like the rest of us? Did you try that before telling Jack you’d been banned? Did he?

I don't know if anyone in charge read my post on the political conspiracies thread complaining about the behavior and motives of Evan Burton , so I have copied it and posted it here .

Jack as been targeted to be shut down on this forum , IMO .... and I believe that the post comments made by Burton on the Apollo Hoax forum is proof of that .

That is an absurd presumption to derive from your “evidence” all it shows is that Evan expresses the same views elsewhere that he does here albeit a little bit less diplomatically. Just as no one here is under any obligation to be polite to non-members he is under no obligation to refrain from his expressing his views about Jack and you (and other HB’s) on a forum you aren’t members of. As Kathy and Steve and the others have said being moderators doesn't mean they give up to express their views, that is especially true on totally different forums. There are literally only about half a dozen people who are members here and AH.

None of his comments indicate he was trying to set Jack up. There is no relation between his comments there and a) his and your inabilities to log in, mistaken beliefs that you’ve been banned or that threads were locked and c) Jack’s unfounded claims that Evan was responsible. It seems his observation that you are trying to get banned here might well be correct. I have a suggestion for you highlight which of Evan’s comments you think are most indicative that he set Jack up and say why post this to the "moderator complaints" thread at the PC forum.

EDITED to fix a formatting error

Edited October 3, 2007 by Len Colby

[Duane Daman]

I have a suggestion for you highlight which of Evan’s comments you think are most indicative that he set Jack up and say why post this to the "moderator complaints" thread at the PC forum.

I have already posted my complaints about Evan Burton being a moderator and linked the Apollo hoax thread where his Jack and Duane bashing takes place .

If the forum owners don't see that as a reason to remove him as a moderator or reinstate Jacks' posting abilities , then there is nothing I can do about it .

I'm sure Jack will appreciate your extended condolences .