Jump to content
The Education Forum

John Simkin and the JFK Research Forum


Recommended Posts

I am not aware that Mr. Simkin was ever banished from

the DellaRosa forum, as he claims. I do not remember

him ever posting there, and Rich makes a public posting

when anybody is banned for cause (Thompson, Lamson,

Marsh, Wim, Miller and several others). I check the forum daily,

and have never seen a banishment of Simkin. I cannot

imagine Rich banishing him. Rich only banishes someone

for abusive behavior or trying to sabotage the website.

Twice Rich traced forum failures to some of the above

persons.

Jack

I was banished for criticizing Bob Vernon. At the time, the dominant ideology of your forum was to support the views of Bob over Wim concerning James Files. I expect Bob was making donations to the running of the forum and his views had some influence over Rich. Not that I was supporting the James Files theory. It was just that I was giving Wim the freedom to post his views on my forum.

This is false. Rich DellaRosa was opposed to ALL the garbage of BOTH

Vernon and Dankbaar. NEITHER OF THEM SUPPORTED RICH'S FORUM.

Neither of them had any influence over Rich, and both repeatedly

violated forum rules. Rich booted Wim, but I think Vernon left on his

own after he sold all his nonsense to Wim.

Most of the researchers on Rich's forum were opposed to the

nonsense about Files and Judyth being spread by first Vernon and

then Wim. In effect, the two of them, along with Judyth, were

hijacking the forum. Rich played along with Judyth for nearly

a year to see whether she could provide proof of her nutty claims.

She could not.

I find that I was mistaken about Simkin's dismissal...it was not for

misconduct like Miller, Lamson, et al, but for cross-posting messages

from Rich's forum to this forum without permission (another violation of rules),

and failing to cease when requested.

One of the persons booted from Rich's forum used technical electronic

means to bring down Rich's forum. Rich was able to trace the hacking

to a particular computer...but has never pressed charges as he

could have done. Rich is an invalid in failing health and is not up

to such nonsense.

Jack

Excerpted from Rich DellaRosa, with his permission:

Quoting someone who is a member of both forums:

Normally I don’t believe this would be a proper topic for discussion on this forum. And of course Rich can delete a post he sees as inappropriate or against the rules. However, this forum has recently been a topic of discussion on another internet venue.

On the UK forum run by former forum member, John Simkin, it has been stated that John was banished from this forum because he sided with Bob Vernon in some type of disagreement with Wim Dankbaar. That is not the way I remember it.

A current member of this forum stated on this other internet venue that he doesn’t recall John Simkin ever posting on this forum.

John Simkin was indeed a member of this forum until he was banned. My memory is that he was banned for violation of forum rules, in that he copied posts from this forum to his own.

...when false or misleading statements are made anywhere on the internet regarding this forum I think it is a good idea that any confusion be cleared up.

Name Deleted

Rich DellaRosa's response:

Simkin was booted for two reaons:

1. He used this forum's member list to send unsolicited emails to

advertise his forum. While some members didn't mind receiving

them, other members complained that they considered those

emails as spam. I so advised Simkin more than once but he

ignored my requests that he refrain from using our member

info for his solicitation purposes. [This wasn't even an original

idea since Bill Miller had done the same thing a few years earlier

to entice participation on the Lancer forum.]

2. As [you] noted, Simkin was copying messages posted here

which were written by other members and without their

permission cross-posting them on his forum. (I have

always, from Day 1, believed that members here are entitled

to copyright privileges for their material and that they feel

secure that they may post without concern that their posts

would find unintended audiences). Again, Simkin ignored

repeated appeals to cease doing so. All he had to do was

request permission from the original posters to use their

material. From his behavior I could only assume that such

a courtesy was more than he was willing to give.

No one has ever been booted from here for breaking forum rules

one time. In every case their bannishment occurred only after

repeated infractions and repeated warnings to cease.

In one unfortunate instance over a year ago, a member

copied a post made by another member here and cross-posted

it to Simkin's forum. The post contained an old article. I was

subsequently contacted by the author of that article and

threatened with legal action which could be averted by sending

a payment of $10,000. As the operator of this venue I am

protected from members possibly infringing on the copyrights

of others by the Digital Millenium Copyright Act passed by

Congress a few years ago. But suffice to say that cross-

posting other people's material can be potentially dangerous.

...deletion of some material on different topic...

...encouraging dissent & debate would generate more traffic.

(I know this first hand from the days when folks like Miller,

Lamson, Thompson, Dankbaar, et al. had things stirred up here).

I might also xxxxx other venues and use their member information

to invite others to participate here. I might help myself to info

posted elsewhere and cross-post them here in order to generate

more interest, debate, dissent, disruption, etc. This forum wouldn't

much resemble the place we have all come to know and appreciate.

And ---- that is exactly why I won't do it.

END OF DELLAROSA QUOTE.

That is the other side of the story.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Looks like Jack is still comfortable attempting to make excuses. The Della Rossa forum is extremely intolerant of those daring to expose the truth about their pet theories. One would think that without a T&T windshield hole there was no conspiracy.o

Edited by Pamela McElwain-Brown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This information above appeared on the Maria Oswald thread. I am afraid it is another example of Jack White rewriting history. The problem for Jack and Rich is that this story has been archived on this Forum. For those who wish to read the gory details I suggest you read the following two links:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2433

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2453

I should point out that I originally set-up the Forum in an effort to unite the research community. I believed that if you brought together the best researchers in the field, you could solve the assassination of JFK. At that time there were two main research forums: Debra Conway’s JFK Lancer and Rich DellaRosa’s JFK Research. Some people, like James Richards and I, were members of both forums. However, we were fairly unusual. JFK Lancer imposed no restrictions on membership and the postings showed that a wide variety of different opinions existed on the forum. I think that Debra deserves great praise for this policy.

The JFK Research forum was different. Only members were allowed to view the discussions that took place on the forum. You also had to have your membership approved by the administrators. Reading the posts suggest that most members followed a similar line on the assassination. This was especially true of the Zapruder film being altered. I did not see any criticism of the theories of its key members.

I therefore attempted to create a forum that would enable researchers with all different theories, including those who believed in the truth of the Warren Commission. I also wanted to bring together the authors of books that had dealt with issues surrounding the assassination. I have been fairly successful in this and the following are now members of the forum: Anthony Summers, Peter Dale Scott, Alfred McCoy, Joe Trento, Lamar Waldron, Gerald McKnight, William Pepper, Joan Mellen, G. Robert Blakey, Barr McClellan, Josiah Thompson, Matthew Smith, Jim Feltzer, Don Bohning, William Turner, Jim Marrs, William Reymond, Dick Russell, Nina Burleigh, Larry Hancock, Walt Brown, Craig Roberts, Daniel Hopsticker, Nick Cullather, David Lifton, Robert Parry, etc.

I also encouraged witnesses and even suspects to join the forum so they could be questioned about what they know about this and other aspects of America’s secret history. This has included Gerry Hemming, Tosh Plumlee, Judyth Baker, Harry J. Dean, Adele Edisen, Vaughn Marlowe, Angel Murgado, Nathaniel Weyl (now deceased), Manuel Ray, Howard K. Davis, Daniel Marvin, Doug Caddy, Alfred Baldwin, etc.

This attempt to bring people together with diverse views on the assassination has brought about some heated debates. Virtually every day a member emails me demanding that another member be removed from the forum.

It is true I have promoted this forum and my website on the JFK assassination on JFK Lancer and JFK Research. I have done this when something on the forum is of interest of all researchers. I have also promoted events being run by other forums such as the JFK Lancer conference. I have also used the forum to promote books published by JFK Lancer. This is what you do if you are really interested in solving the case. I do not see this forum as being in competition with other forums. Nor do I think Debra takes this view.

It is true I have contacted members of JFK Lancer and JFK Research by email. JFK Lancer has not complained about this but according to Jack White’s posting this was one of the reasons why I was banned from JFK Research. This might be the case, but I was not told this was the case at the time. The real reason for being banned by JFK Research was because of Bob Vernon.

During the summer of 2004 Bob Vernon, who was a member of the forum at the time, tried to get me to ban Wim Dankbaar, Tosh Plumlee and Judyth Baker from the forum. He called them liars and claimed that as I was giving them the rights to publish their views on the forum I was using the “forum to brainwash students”.

Why did Bob Vernon feel so strongly about the need to ban these characters? It seems it was to do with the James Files case. A few years ago he became convinced by the James Files story. So convinced was he invested time and money in the case. 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, who had become the leading promoter of the James Files story.

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 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.

In November, 2004, Vernon sent me an email asking to be readmitted (remember he had originally asked to leave the forum). He claimed he was a reformed character and he would not abuse fellow members. 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.

As a result Vernon continued to post his attacks on me on JFK Research. On 29th November, 2004 he started a thread: “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 revealed he had carried out an investigation into Gibson. He claimed that Gibson is not who he says he is. What is more, he contacted Gibson’s father and threatened him with legal action. He also reported him to Rhode Island State Police.

Vernon also made the point that I am allowing members to break the rules of the forum by posting false information about themselves. It is of course was the sort of accusation that I have been trying to prevent by urging members to post biographies and using photographs as avatars. I accepted Gibson’s claim that he was only 14 years old and that his parents had refused him permission to post his photograph.

On 4th December, 2004, Bernice Moore, someone I think is involved as an administrator of JFK Research, posted on this forum that I was wrong to say Bob Vernon had posted a picture of Gibson Vendettuoli on its forum.

I replied:

I can assure you there was a photograph yesterday morning. It showed a man of about 19 with an older man. Vernon claimed that the photograph was taken in some music session. He had got it from some website about a music tour of Australia that had been organized by a man called Ryan.

The adding of the photograph might well have caused Vernon problems. Especially from Gibson's parents who Vernon was threatening him with legal action.

As you know, it is very easy to remove a photograph after it has been posted. This is what Vernon has done. No big deal. I am just surprised that you are so easily fooled. Maybe you are one of those who still believe what Vernon tells you.

Bob Vernon continued to make attacks on me on JFK Research (it seemed that at this stage his membership at JFK Lancer was suspended). It included this posting:

Anyway, this is what Vernon said about the forum.

It would appear at this point that Simkin has been caught in falsehoods himself, again. This is very sad for a man of his alleged educational background who also claims his forum educates children.

Rich runs the most valuable JFK forum on the Internet, Simkin. The folks that come here are highly credible and provide accurate research to a community that has seen it all for over 41 years. Good folks like Jack White and Jim Fetzer and others here have forgotten more facts about the JFK assassination than you know.

Of course, Simkin, your forum also has some online seminar posts by very credible researchers such as the meticulous Larry Hancock, the great Allan Eaglesham and others and the children who are unfortunate enough to be led or baited into your forum at least have the opportunity to read the work of these valid researchers.

Sadly, Simkin, your forum features posts by people who, long ago, were sent packing by Rich and these valid researchers here. The kids that visit Simkin, like the poor misguided kid from Rhode Island, believe a lot of what they read there. These kids are very impressionable and their minds and the growth of their minds deserve the truth. The truth from their parents and friends and the truth from where they go to seek education.

And that is why, tomorrow morning, I will be contacting the good folks in the United Kingdom that regulate and are the watchdogs for the educational system in that country. I will be sending them information regarding the problems with the Simkin forum that I see and have experienced and several other researchers have contacted me privately to ask me if I would consider doing this to try to help the children that are lured there. I certainly will. Be glad to do so.

If any of the members of this esteemed forum have any suggestions as to how I should word my communications to the officials in the UK or have any further evidence of falsehoods being presented on the JFK part of Simkin's forum, please do not hesitate to contact me via private email and I will gladly forward your information along with mine and I won't even use your names to do so unless you want me to.

I now adhere to Rich's request and I suggest strongly to you Simkin that you do, too. Besides, if you listen here and learn here Simkin, perhaps even you, one day, will have a forum as credible as this one. But you've got a long, long way to go.

As I replied on the JFK Research forum with the following: “I am not sure who he will be contacting. However, there is no educational institution in the UK who has any control over me. Not that any educational institution would take any notice of Bob Vernon. We do things differently in the UK.”

Later I posted:

This is of course just another attempt at trying to stop me from allowing people like Wim Dankbaar, Tosh Plumlee, Judyth Baker and Daniel Marvin from posting on the forum. Although I may not agree with what these people say, I am determined to give them the freedom to say it.

It is ironic that members of the JFK research community should use such methods. After all, one of the reasons we have been unable to discover the truth of these events is that the perpetrators were able to use threats like these to intimidate people into silence. I would therefore like someone to post the following message on the JFK Research Forum.

I am an ex-teacher and so the Department for Education and Employment does not have a great deal of power over me. At the age of 65 I am due a pension from them so I suppose you could try to get that stopped. I don’t think you will have much success in this. In the UK we believe in freedom of speech and therefore it is highly unlikely they will respond to your request. However, please try it, it might educate you in the ways that European government's behave. They are far from perfect but I doubt very much if they would sink to those methods.

Here are the details you will require:

Department for Education and Employment

Sanctury Buildings

Great Smith Street

London

SW1P 3BT

http://www.dfes.gov.uk/

complaints.peu@dfes.gsi.gov.uk

It was because of this response that I was banned from JFK Research. Bob Vernon was soon celebrating his success at manipulating the administrators at JFK Research. This is a message he posted on the alt.conspiracy.jfk newsgroup.

So that lurkers will know... John Simkin of the "educational forum" for children was booted off of the JFKResearch forum, a highly credible forum, and he now has his cronies, Wim Dankbaar, a known fabricator of the truth (www.bobvernon.com/lie.htm), Judyth Baker, Ozzies' self professed "chickie on the side", Tosh Plumlee (the man who has changed his story a MINIMUM of 4 times in 24 years), Nancy Eldreth...

That is the story of me being removed from the JFK Research forum. Don’t worry Jack, I will not be banning you or your supporters. However, nor will I be banning those who give you such a hard time on this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John:

I remember all this from when Vernon was threatening you. I am not on the other forum so was not aware of the trouble you went thru there, but I wish to say that you are most tolerant here in you allowance of free speech. If people do not wish to read the lone nutters like Purvis (for example) or the never ending debate about the alleged Z film alteration, one can avoid such, (and I do), but you do what you say you will do and that is promote educational debate. I believe you have added greatly to the general knowledge of this case and that writers of such stature as the ones who have come here are a testament to this forum.

Of course you do not and should not take threats of legal action lightly. But even there you are quick to give the person a second chance. I am referring to of course Tim Gratz. He made such a threat and you allowed him time to reconsider and when he did not he was banned. And rightly so.

I have been calling for "uniting" the research community forever it seems and believe that the conspirators derive great satisfaction in seeing all the infighting and ego tripping. (I do believe the powers that be closly moniter such forums as these as well as the books). I would even go so far as to say that some books are actually doomed from the start. I think this is true for Carl Oglesby's brilliant Yankee Cowboy War: Conspiracies from Dallas to Watergate, and I believe The Politics Of Heroin and SouthEastAsia (Dr. Alfred McCoy) met with a similar fate. I am sure dozens more examples can be given.

So please folks can we all -again- listen to John here and UNITE in our true goal: that of getting this case solved. Isn't this far more important than our petty differences? Since the corporate media is aiding and abetting the conspirators it's always been up to the research community to forge ahead and seek the truth.

Please let's not lose sight of this and instead lose the bickering.

Thanx,

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Pamela McElwain-Brown' wrote:

Looks like Jack is still comfortable attempting to make excuses. The Della Rossa forum is extremely intolerant of those daring to expose the truth about their pet theories. One would think that without a T&T windshield hole there was no conspiracy.o

__________________

dgh: you need to stretch, Pamela -- those of us at the DellaRosa forum have ALWAYS been intolerant of THE (deleted) and those that insist on preservering questionable DP photo history -- the topic of the forum is RESEARCH which leads to ideas and original thought, that dear lady make some very uncomfortable...

NO excuses at all, just struggling for truth in a already messed up field of play, for which you've provided no clarity...

And I was there for ALL the nonsense that went on there -- You've a way to go in trumping Doug Weldon's research...

David Healy

I have deleted swearing. Please do not use this language on this forum. (John Simkin)

Edited by John Simkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the way I remember it. FWIW:

Saturday, December 04, 2004 5:54:39 AM

Lee,

As you know, Bob Vernon has been making attacks on myself and the JFK Forum for several months on the JFK Research Forum. As is my way, I have been challenging the statements being made by Vernon. However, I was warned by the administrators that I should not do this. I continued to do so and today my membership was cancelled. This means that I am not able to reply or see the comments he is making.

This seems strange behaviour from an organization that claims it is seeking to discover the truth about the Kennedy Assassination. Anyway, they have this right to cancel my membership but I am concerned that I will not be able to read Bob Vernon’s attacks on me.

I know that several members of the JFK Assassination Forum are also members of this forum. Please keep me informed of what attacks he might make on me. I suspect they will get worse now that he knows I can’t reply.

In his last posting he said the following:

Sadly, Simkin, your forum features posts by people who, long ago, were sent packing by Rich and these valid researchers here. The kids that visit Simkin, like the poor misguided kid from Rhode Island, believe a lot of what they read there. These kids are very impressionable and their minds and the growth of their minds deserve the truth. The truth from their parents and friends and the truth from where they go to seek education.

And that is why, tomorrow morning, I will be contacting the good folks in the United Kingdom that regulate and are the watchdogs for the educational system in that country. I will be sending them information regarding the problems with the Simkin forum that I see and have experienced and several other researchers have contacted me privately to ask me if I would consider doing this to try to help the children that are lured there. I certainly will. Be glad to do so.

If any of the members of this esteemed forum have any suggestions as to how I should word my communications to the officials in the UK or have any further evidence of falsehoods being presented on the JFK part of Simkin's forum, please do not hesitate to contact me via private email and I will gladly forward your information along with mine and I won't even use your names to do so unless you want me to.

This is of course just another attempt at trying to stop me from allowing people like Wim Dankbaar, Tosh Plumlee, Judyth Baker and Daniel Marvin from posting on the forum. Although I may not agree with what these people say, I am determined to give them the freedom to say it.

It is ironic that members of the JFK research community should use such methods. After all, one of the reasons we have been unable to discover the truth of these events is that the perpetrators were able to use threats like these to intimidate people into silence.

As you are a member of the JFK Research Forum you might like to post the following for me in response to Bob Vernon's threats to contact the UK Education Department:

I am an ex-teacher and so the Department for Education and Employment does not have a great deal of power over me. At the age of 65 I am due a pension from them so I suppose you could try to get that stopped. I don’t think you will have much success in this. In the UK we believe in freedom of speech and therefore it is highly unlikely they will respond to your request. However, please try it, it might educate you in the ways that European government behave. They are far from perfect but I doubt very much if they would sink to those methods.

Here are the details you will require:

Department for Education and Employment

Sanctury Buildings

Great Smith Street

London

SW1P 3BT

http://www.dfes.gov.uk/

complaints.peu@dfes.gsi.gov.uk

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello all.I ,too, was banned/deactivated from Della Rosa's forum several years ago...I never made a post but enjoyed reading the topics and discussions as well as viewing his extensive photo archive,one of the best i've ever come across....A short time after registering,i received an email or viewed a post that said Rich was in need of money to run his forum.I communicated with Rich and/or Shelby stating that i would shortly be sending a donation but in the mean time i was deactivated....I didn't worry about it and moved on. At the time,i was a bit disgusted but realized the JFK assassination is a billion dollar industry and Rich wanted his piece of the pie.

Now,as an impartial observer to the JFK Research forum and John Simkin's Education forum,it's clear that John has no agenda other that covering as much info as possible and asks for nothing in return from his members.Rich on the other hand,wants the members to pay for his forum and imo,attempts to regulate,apparent, first hand info he has about Elm st on 11/22/63 in regards to the " other film"...In a nut shell,Rich claims to have witnessed another film of the assassination,of higher quality that the z film or any others but is suprisingly mum with his generic description........What we have is 2 Forums,2 Moderators....One forum moderator asks for nothing from his members and distributes relevant info as it becomes available and a second forum moderator that has his hand out,if you want to be a member of his forum, and attempts be vague when describing the "other film".......The "other film" is the smoking gun of all smoking guns which proves the z film has been altered and the entire scenerio on Elm st is a total fabrication.

John,you've created the most credible, superior message board and data base on the internet, in regards to the JFK assassination and other controversial conspiracy topics.Keep up the good work.

Thanks again,Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner

What kind of storied ego belives that "The good folks in the UK that regulate and are the watch dogs for the educational system in that country"are going to pay a blind bit of notice to the ravings of Mr Vernon LOL.

"I have been fairly successful in this" John Simkin.. Yes, I think you can claim that John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What kind of storied ego belives that "The good folks in the UK that regulate and are the watch dogs for the educational system in that country"are going to pay a blind bit of notice to the ravings of Mr Vernon LOL.

"I have been fairly successful in this" John Simkin.. Yes, I think you can claim that John.

The history of civilization has proven many things to many people, one consensus, [if there is such a thing, anymore; lol] is that when individuals who are very intelligent, and/or 'successful [see: large ego's] gather together, the first casualty is humility, and the disappearance of 'manners.' This dynamic can be shown in various instances throughout the time-space continuum as in:

Peace Talk's which, come to a standstill due to heated discussions over the shape of the bargaining table, et cetera. There is an old adage, "No good deed goes unpunished" if you are not sure what it means ask John Simkin, I am sure he is well acquainted with the meaning of the phrase.

While adult's who once were students, may intensely dislike the 'authority figures' who rapped knuckles, [if they survived, chances are most did] now, at least in America one has the opportunity to see the other side of the coin, where the first stage in entering a school is passing through metal detectors.

If humility is considered virtuous, it is because it [supposedly] helps create stability in various modes of society. The ability to say "I respect your opinion, even though I do not agree with you," or 'I am sorry." The two comments represent an inversion of the principle of self-adulation and self-glorification. Before the era of Moral Relativism was popularized, there was a perception that individuals who displayed little respect or tolerance for the rights or feelings of other's were 'pathetic figure's.'

But in the third millenium it appears that the new conceptualization of communication asserts 'whoever shout's loudest will prevail.'

Oh well, onward to Utopia.

Edited by Robert Howard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Participation in a forum where the moderator lacks the

integrity to enforce his own rules against ad hominem

attacks is counter productive. I have better uses to

make of my time.

The coverup provocateurs win again!

Jack

C'mon Jack, that seems a bit of an over-reaction. There are two sides to every story. It seems likely that Rich was not too pleased with Simkin's behavior to begin with, and then Vernor got into a tiff with John and convinced Rich to take his side. That doesn't mean Rich is a bad person. I do not know the man.

In truth, I understand completely what Vernon was talking about. It's not exactly clear that giving a forum to controversial figures, people potentially after nothing but money and/or self-aggrandizement, helps the public understand the case. Which is why a good forum needs people who are willing to do their homework and confront these people, not just groupies and fans. This forum benefits both from those like yourself, who bring in new ideas, as well as others who analyze these new ideas to see if they really make sense. You are correct, obviously, in that all too often this degenerates into insults. This is unfortunate, and can usually be circumvented through humility and humor. Ron Ecker is particularly adept at this, IMO. When someone disagrees with him and things start to turn ugly, he makes a joke of it and the tension quickly dissipates.

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote: John Simkin

””On 4th December, 2004, Bernice Moore, someone I think is involved as an administrator of JFK Research, posted on this forum that I was wrong to say Bob Vernon had posted a picture of Gibson Vendettuoli on its forum.”

Why do I see this as some sort of a slant John?? Why did you follow up with the following posts ,along with this remark, seeing

you brought my name into this, that were made in regard to this photo matter?.. You never replied to my last post made to you re Gibson’s photo, though you had to be aware of such as you posted again just below in that thread??

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2433

As far as being involved as an administrator of JFKresearch…… wrong .

I am not, and never have been in any way…just a member..I have never had the time, nor would I have the patience..

And if so, so what if I were ?? There are members on here who are and or have been involved

in such on other Forums, what has that to do with anything??

None of this had to do with me, in anyway shape or form, so why the mention..? What point were you trying to make…??

Quote: John Simkin.

“”The JFK Research forum was different. Only members were allowed to view the discussions that took place on the forum. You also had to have your membership approved by the administrators. Reading the posts suggest that most members followed a similar line on the assassination. This was especially true of the Zapruder film being altered. I did not see any criticism of the theories of its key members.””

Membership must be approved by the administration on this F also, using their real name and real email address, as far as I was aware so ? There is only one administrator on the JFKresearch Forum and that is Rich . There are some moderators of some of the different threads, but they are not administration..

As far as Bob Vernon was concerned he was full of it…as far as Rich ever backing him, forget it…he never did, he allowed him to post his FOS on that Forum..and yes he got into it by going too far…and if memory serves me correctly, did get deleted at times….as you say you do on here…at times….as far as there not being any discord ,and or all being in perfect harmony with their views on the JFKresearch, I wish…..

As far as paying a membership fee to join the JFKresearch yes, there is a … as all are very well aware of….it seems to be continually mentioned by some..why ??

Rich lives on a disablility pension, and he pays for all out of his own pocket…..

He has no advertising, and therefore does not have any , support from such every time the site gets a hit, such as this one, so many hits a month, so much money paid out to whatever site, as so many do now….Forums are a very expensive endeavor……….this has been explained in the past several times, I do believe on here….

This is the way he runs his forum, you run yours with advertisement, so ?? On Lancer, Debra, sells many CDs, and Books, and copies of the Lancer Magazine, so what ? , that helps to divert some cost of that Forum..you have advertisement, so what?…..Rich has of late sold a few of his privately owned ,in perfect shape used videos….to help divert some of the cost…..so what ??

All your free individual choices…as it should be…..

Whatever occurred between you and Bob V. I have no idea, and was not involved in anyway….you did copy and pasted posts from that forum to this one, they are still here in the archives unless they have been deleted…by now, don’t know , was not involved in that either…you did not ask permission of that poster, that is all I know, you were repeatedly warned, that was posted, but continued to do so…that I do recall….then you were gone, entirely up to you, as far as I was concerned..still had nothing to do with me..

So why the mention…?? Because you thought I was part of the JFKresearch administration and you have perhaps it in for those, who may be because you got booted from that Forum.??

If so, you are way off base….

Read all the posts below, people and get it straight……and smile, Lordy your all on candid camera..

Jack don't you go anywhere, but to take a little break perhaps....never say never.... B)

B.. :blink:

Posted by: Bernice Moore Dec 2 2004, 12:14 AM

Hi John:

There is none, and has not been any photo of Gibson posted at the J.F.K Research Forum...

I was there earlier yesterday and read that post, no photo, late last evening, I checked it, no photo, and just now, no photo... and Rich has stated there has never been a photo of Gibson posted on the Forum, and he reads each and every post...

There never was one.

Perhaps you should check your source. Hope this clears up this matter.

B

Posted by: John Simkin Dec 2 2004, 08:20 AM

QUOTE(Bernice Moore @ Dec 1 2004, 11:14 PM)

Hi John:

There is none, and has not been any photo of Gibson posted at the J.F.K Research Forum...

I was there earlier yesterday and read that post, no photo, late last evening, I checked it, no photo, and just now, no photo... and Rich has stated there has never been a photo of Gibson posted on the Forum, and he reads each and every post...

There never was one.

Perhaps you should check your source. Hope this clears up this matter.

Posted by: John Simkin Dec 2 2004, 08:20 AM

John Simkin:

I can assure you there was a photograph yesterday morning. It showed a man of about 19 with an older man. Vernon claimed that the photograph was taken in some music session. He had got it from some website about a music tour of Australia that had been organized by a man called Ryan.

The adding of the photograph might well have caused Vernon problems. Especially from Gibson's parents who Vernon was threatening him with legal action.

As you know, it is very easy to remove a photograph after it has been posted. This is what Vernon has done. No big deal. I am just surprised that you are so easily fooled. Maybe you are one of those who still believe what Vernon tells you.

Posted by: Bernice Moore Dec 2 2004, 08:57 AM

Hi John:

You were adding your posts as I was making out mine....as I stated when I went, there was none, and there is none now.....Rich has stated that there was none when he read the posts...I believe him.

If something was posted earlier than he checked in and much earlier than I,and then deleted, as happens on here also, then of course no administrator can control such as,to what he has not seen...the same on this Forum if deletions are made when you are asleep in the middle of the night such as the thread the other evening, you did not have a chance to see such until you were awake, if deletions had been made or changes then of course you would never know, just common sense.........

Of course no administrator has control at such times....nor members what they see or do not see..and even members that fool the adm. with their information, pertaining to their membership.... as has happened here.... it happens......and no fooling about that.....seeing that there are hours in time difference between countries....so as does happen on here, things can change without being seen, by those in control.

I wish you had thought to have gotten the photo...for all....along with the information, that would have clarified the problem....but then perhaps you would not have wanted to post such.....but as you say it is from the link, then perhaps it is still available..

Thanks for your information.........B

P.S...I don't believe anything anyone tells me, until I see the proof for myself, and or documentation...and that is what I am after ....was there or was there not a photo....As far as Rich not seeing it, yes I believe him....I did not either..

B

Edited by Bernice Moore
Link to comment
Share on other sites

those of us at the DellaRosa forum have ALWAYS been intolerant of THE xxxx disturbers and those that insist on preservering questionable DP photo history -- the topic of the forum is RESEARCH which leads to ideas and original thought, that dear lady make some very uncomfortable...

When the RDR people can't take the heat they 'ban' a researcher and then start ad hominem attacks to 'explain' their actions. Apparently there are some a bit too naive to perceive this.

And I was there for ALL the nonsense that went on there -- You've a way to go in trumping Doug Weldon's research...

Au contraire. The RDR group couldn't deal with the fact that their pet theory didn't hold up to scrutiny.

In addition, the Weldon 'witness' was retelling his interpretations of Vaughn Ferguson's experiences with SS-100-X. So happens there were a number of stories circulating around FMC. Ironically, there are others who have attempted to do the same. But then, burying oneself in the RDR forum doesn't lead to debunking of pet theories, does it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Participation in a forum where the moderator lacks the

integrity to enforce his own rules against ad hominem

attacks is counter productive. I have better uses to

make of my time.

The coverup provocateurs win again!

Jack

Right, Jack ... your time seems better spent asking people to post pictures of themselves with beards or questioning why they should be viewing the forum at the same wee hour of the morning you were using it. Maybe you might feel more comfortable going back to the looney forum for there you can say two opposite things and no one will point out your mistake.

Bill Miller

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...