Jack White Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 What is the connection between "Peters" and "Miller"? Who are they and why do they spend so much time debunking research and researchers? What is their motive? Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 (edited) What is the connection between "Peters" and "Miller"?Who are they and why do they spend so much time debunking research and researchers? What is their motive? Jack White <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Jack - the same could be asked about you ... why do you do you spend so much time doing sloppyresearch? For many of us there is a desire to show a conspiracy, but not at the risk of having us looking like complete idiots by the nonconspiratorial side. This is why when someone makes a claim - many of us need to know if it is valid or not. Those same people are not finding fault with your backyard photo work or your Badge Man work because it is supported by the evidence that we see. If you are asking people to explain why others like myself just do not blindy accept what you say, then include Robert Groden, Gary Mack, Harold Weisberg, Anthony Marsh, Josiah Thompson, and many, many other researchers in that list because they have all faulted many of your off-the-wall claims. Dave Curbow and I are friends, Royce Beirma and I are friends, Debra Conway and I are friends, Tony Cummings, and I are friends. Mike Hogan and I are friends and etc., and not all of us can agree on everything about the JFK assassination, but all of us have agreed that the poor research you have done in recent times has hurt the JFK assassination community. Look at you now ... you are so paranoid that you are more concerned about why JFK researchers know one another than you are about the actual evidence of the case. Is it no wonder why Copa or Lancer will not allow you to present at their conferences any longer. The bottom line is that many of us want to show that there was a conspiracy if there was one. Many of us believe the latter to have been the case in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. What we want however is to be able to show that there was a conspiracy by showing well thought out positions based on factual and reliable evidence. If that means that we may not agree with you or feel the need to show your mistakes, then so be it. With notioriety comes responsibility. Your research in recent years has not been conducted responsibly in many of our views. If you go look at the critique I did on "TGZFH" on Lancer you will find one place in the book where you refer to a photo as genuine in one claim and not genuine on another. That's the kind of research you have been bringing to the table and it is not acceptable in many of our opinions. The photo you posted was taken in Canada on a non-related JFK project. As I recall, there was about a dozen or more of us up at Lake Harrison where a documentary was being filmed at that time. Again, it was non-JFK related. We plot our conspiracy against you (Jack White) in the U.S. at secret locations that "The knights of the Anti-Jack Society" picks out for us! (eyes rolling~) Edited March 3, 2008 by Kathy Beckett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted September 3, 2004 Author Share Posted September 3, 2004 (edited) What is the connection between "Peters" and "Miller"?Who are they and why do they spend so much time debunking research and researchers? What is their motive? Jack White <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Jack - the same could be asked about you ... why do you do you spend so much time doing sloppy research? For many of us there is a desire to show a conspiracy, but not at the risk of having us looking like complete idiots by the nonconspiratorial side. This is why when someone makes a claim - many of us need to know if it is valid or not. Those same people are not finding fault with your backyard photo work or your Badge Man work because it is supported by the evidence that we see. If you are asking people to explain why others like myself just do not blindy accept what you say, then include Robert Groden, Gary Mack, Harold Weisberg, Anthony Marsh, Josiah Thompson, and many, many other researchers in that list because they have all faulted many of your off-the-wall claims. Dave Curbow and I are friends, Royce Beirma and I are friends, Debra Conway and I are friends, Tony Cummings, and I are friends. Mike Hogan and I are friends and etc., and not all of us can agree on everything about the JFK assassination, but all of us have agreed that the poor research you have done in recent times has hurt the JFK assassination community. Look at you now ... you are so paranoid that you are more concerned about why JFK researchers know one another than you are about the actual evidence of the case. Is it no wonder why Copa or Lancer will not allow you to present at their conferences any longer. The bottom line is that many of us want to show that there was a conspiracy if there was one. Many of us believe the latter to have been the case in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. What we want however is to be able to show that there was a conspiracy by showing well thought out positions based on factual and reliable evidence. If that means that we may not agree with you or feel the need to show your mistakes, then so be it. With notioriety comes responsibility. Your research in recent years has not been conducted responsibly in many of our views. If you go look at the critique I did on "TGZFH" on Lancer you will find one place in the book where you refer to a photo as genuine in one claim and not genuine on another. That's the kind of research you have been bringing to the table and it is not acceptable in many of our opinions. The photo you posted was taken in Canada on a non-related JFK project. As I recall, there was about a dozen or more of us up at Lake Harrison where a documentary was being filmed at that time. Again, it was non-JFK related. We plot our conspiracy against you (Jack White) in the U.S. at secret locations that "The knights of the Anti-Jack Society" picks out for us! (eyes rolling~) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> By all means fill us in on the details of this DOCUMENTARY BEING FILMED by Miller, Peters and a dozen or more "others" in Canada. What was the subject? How to disrupt the internet? Why did more than a dozen guys travel to Canada to film a documentary. Where will this film be shown? Or was it strictly for agency use only? Did Peters travel there from Ireland, where I am told he resides? Thanks for all your help in understanding agency disruption techniques. Jack White Edited March 3, 2008 by Kathy Beckett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted September 3, 2004 Author Share Posted September 3, 2004 What is the connection between "Peters" and "Miller"?Who are they and why do they spend so much time debunking research and researchers? What is their motive? Jack White <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Jack - the same could be asked about you ... why do you do you spend so much time doing sloppy-assed research? For many of us there is a desire to show a conspiracy, but not at the risk of having us looking like complete idiots by the nonconspiratorial side. This is why when someone makes a claim - many of us need to know if it is valid or not. Those same people are not finding fault with your backyard photo work or your Badge Man work because it is supported by the evidence that we see. If you are asking people to explain why others like myself just do not blindy accept what you say, then include Robert Groden, Gary Mack, Harold Weisberg, Anthony Marsh, Josiah Thompson, and many, many other researchers in that list because they have all faulted many of your off-the-wall claims. Dave Curbow and I are friends, Royce Beirma and I are friends, Debra Conway and I are friends, Tony Cummings, and I are friends. Mike Hogan and I are friends and etc., and not all of us can agree on everything about the JFK assassination, but all of us have agreed that the poor research you have done in recent times has hurt the JFK assassination community. Look at you now ... you are so paranoid that you are more concerned about why JFK researchers know one another than you are about the actual evidence of the case. Is it no wonder why Copa or Lancer will not allow you to present at their conferences any longer. The bottom line is that many of us want to show that there was a conspiracy if there was one. Many of us believe the latter to have been the case in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. What we want however is to be able to show that there was a conspiracy by showing well thought out positions based on factual and reliable evidence. If that means that we may not agree with you or feel the need to show your mistakes, then so be it. With notioriety comes responsibility. Your research in recent years has not been conducted responsibly in many of our views. If you go look at the critique I did on "TGZFH" on Lancer you will find one place in the book where you refer to a photo as genuine in one claim and not genuine on another. That's the kind of research you have been bringing to the table and it is not acceptable in many of our opinions. The photo you posted was taken in Canada on a non-related JFK project. As I recall, there was about a dozen or more of us up at Lake Harrison where a documentary was being filmed at that time. Again, it was non-JFK related. We plot our conspiracy against you (Jack White) in the U.S. at secret locations that "The knights of the Anti-Jack Society" picks out for us! (eyes rolling~) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> By all means fill us in on the details of this DOCUMENTARY BEING FILMED by Miller, Peters and a dozen or more "others" in Canada. What was the subject? How to disrupt the internet? Why did more than a dozen guys travel to Canada to film a documentary. Where will this film be shown? Or was it strictly for agency use only? Did Peters travel there from Ireland, where I am told he resides? Thanks for all your help in understanding agency disruption techniques. Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 (edited) By all means fill us in on the details of this DOCUMENTARY BEING FILMED by Miller, Peters and a dozen or more "others" in Canada. What was the subject? How to disrupt the internet? Why did more than a dozen guys travel to Canada to film a documentary. Where will this film be shown? Or was it strictly for agency use only? Did Peters travel there from Ireland, where I am told he resides? Thanks for all your help in understanding agency disruption techniques.Jack White Jack - the only disrupting going on is coming from an idiot named Jack White who is posting non-related JFK threads on a JFK forum even after John Simkin asked us to move on ... think about that for a minute. If you wish to debate the evidence in the JFK assassination, then I am still here and waiting. It seems you are the one wanting to talk about everything else, but JFK related issues. Your comment asking why a dozen guys went to Canada to film a documentary is just why it is senseless to explain personal matters to you because you cannot keep the facts straight. I said, "As I recall, there was about a dozen or more of us up at Lake Harrison where a documentary was being filmed at that time." In other words, we did not go into Canada to shoot a documentary as your question implied. The documentary crew was affiliated with the Symposium. That particular year there was a symposium in Vancouver British Columbia that people all over the country went to. But mostly people interested in Anthropology to Cryptozoology went. Part of that Symposium offered an overnight camping trip to Harrison Lake. Now I know this doesn't feed into your paranoia, but that's the way it goes. Like I said it was non-JFK related. By the way - You'll find that Larry says in his bio on Lancer that he lives in the state of Washington. When I read through the threads when first coming onto this forum - I had noticed that all those stupid remarks about posting times, time zones, and different countries for where Larry must live came from you and David Healy. Your "Amazing Kreskin" like memory must have forgotten that. Edited September 4, 2004 by Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Simkin Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 I am not trying to stop you gentleman from discussing this issue but it does not seem to be a very productive debate. I take the view that Jack has done some very important research into the JFK assassination (although I do not always agree with his conclusions). However, I do not think that Larry Peters or Bill Miller are disinformation agents. In fact, like Jack, they have carried out some very important research into the assassination. Surely it would be better if all concerned concentrated on their own research rather than making personal attacks on other researchers. I believe there is the need to debate the role of the disinformation agent. A sensible debate about this is taking place here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1522 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James R Gordon Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 I am not trying to stop you gentleman from discussing this issue but it does not seem to be a very productive debate. I take the view that Jack has done some very important research into the JFK assassination (although I do not always agree with his conclusions). However, I do not think that Larry Peters or Bill Miller are disinformation agents. In fact, like Jack, they have carried out some very important research into the assassination. Surely it would be better if all concerned concentrated on their own research rather than making personal attacks on other researchers. I agree John, however I would like to make this point. Jack White knows exactly who Bill Miller is and he knows Bill is not a disinformation agent. Jack and Bill have argued over this case for years and whatever else jack may think about Bill, he knows he is not someone whose purpose is to disrupt. The notion that Bill Miller works for some Agency is quite the stupidest idea I have heard. It is also worth pointing out that this is not the first thread that Jack has started that refers to Bill Miller. On the current page 2 is another thread started by Jack and who's object in the thread is Bill Miller. I like this forum and I believe it has much to offer for JFK research. However threads like this one and the other one on Page 2 appear to me to be disruptive in nature. I don't believe they benefit the forum, and I don't believe they enhance the author of the threads. I have no idea what prompted jack to start either thread, but I would be happy if he would desist from further such threads. James. 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