In Praise -- and Defense -- of Jack White

[Ashton Gray]

"We will no longer tolerate trolls on this forum."...John Simkin

Let's see.

Welcome back, Jack.

Ashton

[John Simkin]

"We will no longer tolerate trolls on this forum."...John Simkin

Let's see.

Welcome back, Jack.

Ashton

He has never been away. He has not been banned, he is on moderation.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Andy wrote:

I can only imagine however that serious researchers are pulling their hair out about some of the nonsense which has been going on here.

Heck, some are probably bald by now! Excellent observation, Andy!

serious researchers are pulling their hair out

Please define exactly what a "serious researcher" constitutes.

1. Would this be a person who, for whatever reason, can not correlate the medical evidence and must thus conclude that the body of JFK was kidnapped and that his wounds were altered???????

Surely, one can not be "serious", that this is "serious research"!

2. Would this be a person who has in fact, never even bothered to study the WC testimonies and evidence, which has always clearly demonstrated the shooting sequence in Dealy Plaza, and yet thereafter believed the WC's thesis along with their "THE SHOT THAT MISSED", and thereafter placed on the blinders and praised the WC?????????

Surely, one can not be "serious" , that this is "serious research"!

3. Fill in the blank:_______________________________________________________________

(IE: Manhole Man; Black Dog Man; Badge Man; the CIA did it; the FBI did it: LBJ did it; They all did it; etc; etc; etc; etc;

[Charles Drago]

At this point, I'm obviously leaving myself open to a strom of abuse from gentlemen such as Mr Drago to the effect that I'm obviously deficient as a teacher in that I don't re-write the entire curriculum to base it solely on the various conspiracies which have dominated the forum over recent years. But the fact remains that most educators are much more interested in the Battle of the Somme, the Nuremberg Trials, Citizenship Education, and so on, than we are in "chem trails" or "faked photos".

My Dear Mr. Tribe,

Your mischaracterizations of my work and goals, whether attributable to ignorance, malice, or a combination thereof, are as grotesque as they are seemingly interminable.

You provide an all-new, 21st century definition of "lost Tribe." And that's where the cuteness ends.

Until so-called educators en masse come to understand and teach the established truths of the Battle of Dealey Plaza and the Clay Shaw trial, and the importance of cynicism, anti-authoritarianism, and independent thinking to the definition of "citizenship," you and your ilk will continue to turn out the precious little humanettes who must at all costs be protected from verbal profanity even as, defenseless, they are profaned by societal masters and their classroom propagandists.

"Citizenship education." Not since "homeland security" has a term more sickeningly reeked of Fascism.

I witnessed one of the ways that young citizens are "educated" by, in my Constitutionally-protected opinion, a propagandist working on the assassins' behalf when I experienced first-hand a certain American university professor in action. I'll share the saddest aspect of it: The undergraduate students in his Kennedy Assassination and Critical Thinking class were first to rush to his defense when his related work -- in particular his "definitive" material in defense of original NAA conclusions -- was revealed to be fatally flawed -- and, I would argue, based upon events as they transpired, deceitfully presented -- at a JFK conference he co-sponsored.

"Stockholm Syndrome" anyone?

Is there nothing else you can do to earn a living?

Charles Drago

Edited October 8, 2007 by Charles Drago

[Mike Tribe]

At this point, I'm obviously leaving myself open to a strom of abuse from gentlemen such as Mr Drago to the effect that I'm obviously deficient as a teacher in that I don't re-write the entire curriculum to base it solely on the various conspiracies which have dominated the forum over recent years. But the fact remains that most educators are much more interested in the Battle of the Somme, the Nuremberg Trials, Citizenship Education, and so on, than we are in "chem trails" or "faked photos".

My Dear Mr. Tribe,

Your mischaracterizations of my work and goals, whether attributable to ignorance, malice, or a combination thereof, are as grotesque as they are seemingly interminable.

You provide an all-new, 21st century definition of "lost Tribe." And that's where the cuteness ends.

Until so-called educators en masse come to understand and teach the established truths of the Battle of Dealey Plaza and the Clay Shaw trial, and the importance of cynicism, anti-authoritarianism, and independent thinking to the definition of "citizenship," you and your ilk will continue to turn out the precious little humanettes who must at all costs be protected from verbal profanity even as, defenseless, they are profaned by societal masters and their classroom propagandists.

"Citizenship education." Not since "homeland security" has a term more sickeningly reeked of Fascism.

I've witnessed one of the ways that young citizens are "educated" by, in my Constitutionally-protected opinion, a propagandist working on the assassins' behalf when I experienced a certain American university professor in action. I'll share the saddest aspect of it: His students were first to rush to his defense when his Kennedy assassination-related work -- in particular his "definitive" NAA material -- was revealed to be fatally flawed -- and, I would argue, based upon events as they transpired, deceitfully presented -- at a JFK conference he co-sponsored.

"Stockholm Syndrome" anyone?

Is there nothing else you can do to earn a living?

Charles Drago

As I expected, abuse and personal attacks. I don't quite see what the anecdote about allegedly flawed research on the Kennedy assassination has to do with the thread posted last week on Citizenship education. I don't think it was in the least fascist.

If you really believe that "independent thinking" consists of no more than agreeing with you that almost every conceivable event in the history of mankind must -- or even might -- have been the result of a conspiracy, then I think you are mistaken.

Why are you so intent upon being personally insulting? Have I ever cast aspersions with regard to your ability to do your job, whatever it is? Have I made snide references to your family name?

I apologize if I have mischaracterized your work and goals. I will happily replace the list I suggested for the Drago-esque new history curriculum with "the Battle of Dealey Plaza and the Clay Shaw trial, and the importance of cynicism"... No doubt a persusal of his posts to the forum -- something I have no intention of carrying out -- would give a more exhaustive list.

[Charles Drago]

[No doubt a persusal of his posts to the forum -- something I have no intention of carrying out -- would give a more exhaustive list.

Now that, Mr. Tribe, is the definition of scholarship.

[Guest Gary Loughran]

Charles, to be fair to Mr Tribe, you have mischaracterised the role of teachers, educators much more than he has made any mischaracterisation of your work.(which I don't believe he made any real comment on - excepting and accepting the pied piper remark which was specific to your campaign re: Jack - not your work - and further specific to the masses of political conspiracy forum conspiracies not JFK).

You seem to be unduly precious and sensitive about Mr Tribes posts. Your generalised and unfounded comments on his abilities as an educator are considered slights, delivered in a manner which I feel are out of place on this forum.

I think you have just given a new meaning to diatribe

Edited October 8, 2007 by Gary Loughran

[Ron Ecker]

So after 10 contentious pages on the (non)banning of Jack White, the subject himself is posting again.

All's well that ends well?

[Charles Drago]

Charles, to be fair to Mr Tribe, you have mischaracterised the role of teachers, educators much more than he has made any mischaracterisation of your work.(which I don't believe he made any real comment on - excepting and accepting the pied piper remark which was specific to your campaign re: Jack - not your work - and further specific to the masses of political conspiracy forum conspiracies not JFK).

You seem to be unduly precious and sensitive about Mr Tribes posts. Your generalised and unfounded comments on his abilities as an educator are considered slights, delivered in a manner which I feel are out of place on this forum.

I think you have just given a new meaning to diatribe

Hi Gary,

First things first: good line (diatribe)!

Please know that I accept your criticism as constructive and well-intentioned. Nonetheless I'll stand by my critique of Mr. Tribe, one that is based solely upon my interpretations of his commentary herein published.

In essence, I read him as being dismissive of conspiracy "theorists" and patronizing regarding the (non)suitability of, in the case of this Forum, JFK assassination conspiracy studies in our schools.

I know that he wholly mischaracterized my goals, and he unambiguously stated that he would not read my contributions to this Forum even though he ham-handedly denigrates them.

As for my comments on his abilities as an educator: To the degree that he has demonstrated same in his posts, what is there not to criticize? He's just the latest in a long line of naysayers who shout CONSPIRACY THEORY! whenever knowledge and logic are called for.

For what it's worth, this all has gone on long enough. I'm done with this tribe-unal.

Sincerely,

Charles

Edited October 8, 2007 by Charles Drago

[Guest]

So after 10 contentious pages on the (non)banning of Jack White, the subject himself is posting again.

All's well that ends well?

Jack White was never banned from this forum he was placed and remains under moderation

[Ron Ecker]

Jack White was never banned from this forum he was placed and remains under moderation

Well, don't feel bad about it, Jack. On the contrary, you can wear it as a badge of honor. Remember Philippians 4:5: "Let your moderation be known unto all men."

[Tim Gratz]

Barry Goldwater: "Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."

If the attempt to catch Kennedy's assassination is not the "pursuit of justice" I do not know what is!

[Bill Miller]

So after 10 contentious pages on the (non)banning of Jack White, the subject himself is posting again.

All's well that ends well?

Jack White was never banned from this forum he was placed and remains under moderation

Andy, how many times has someone made that point all to clear to the contrary only to have someone still respond in a way that makes it seem that Jack has been banned from the forum - 6 to 10 times maybe? So the next time you and John are wondering if the headaches and cost of having this particular part of the forum is worth while or not, all the while these people are telling you how important it is to keep the forum open to them so they can learn about something as complicated as the JFK assassination, remember these responses and ask yourself if the time and money is being well spent.

Bill

[Ron Ecker]

So after 10 contentious pages on the (non)banning of Jack White, the subject himself is posting again.

All's well that ends well?

Jack White was never banned from this forum he was placed and remains under moderation

Andy, how many times has someone made that point all to clear to the contrary only to have someone still respond in a way that makes it seem that Jack has been banned from the forum - 6 to 10 times maybe? So the next time you and John are wondering if the headaches and cost of having this particular part of the forum is worth while or not, all the while these people are telling you how important it is to keep the forum open to them so they can learn about something as complicated as the JFK assassination, remember these responses and ask yourself if the time and money is being well spent.

Bill

I can't tell if that's an attack on me or not, given my poor English comprehension. In case it is, I would like to point out that I said the "(non)banning" of Jack White. That was a poor play on words, I guess. The subject has often seemed to be the banning of Jack White, when in fact Jack White was never banned, so I put "non" in front of banning, the intent being to say that Jack was actually not banned in spite of some impressions to the contrary. And the intent of my post was to suggest hopefully that the whole contentious episode was over, only to inspire what may be another attack by one member on another. As I say, I'm not sure, 'cause my English comprehension ain't good.

[Bill Miller]

I can't tell if that's an attack on me or not, given my poor English comprehension. In case it is, I would like to point out that I said the "(non)banning" of Jack White. That was a poor play on words, I guess. The subject has often seemed to be the banning of Jack White, when in fact Jack White was never banned, so I put "non" in front of banning, the intent being to say that Jack was actually not banned in spite of some impressions to the contrary. And the intent of my post was to suggest hopefully that the whole contentious episode was over, only to inspire what may be another attack by one member on another. As I say, I'm not sure, 'cause my English comprehension ain't good.

No Ron, my remarks were not directed at you and I am sorry that I allowed your remarks to get caught up in my response if it somehow mislead anyone to thinking I was talking about you.

Bill