Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Is J Simkin 2000's Penn Jones? I am asking because LNs seem out to lunch?  (Read 5478 times)

Offline Mark A. Oblazney

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
Advertisement
Of course, Michael, I took for granted you were unaware. I hope I have presented a fair presentation of what happened when self importance influenced by a taste of celebrity and some cash benefit resulting from publishing reacts to the proverbial nobody posting from a bed in his mother's basement, so to speak.

From Oct., 2015 to Aug., 2016, every reader comment appearing at jfkfacts.org was read and approved by me. I got an even better appreciation for the fallout caused by sloppily written, CT authors. I corrected comments after approving them intact and then replying to them. Needless to say, the reaction, according to Jeff Morley when he suddenly ushered me out in August, 2016, was that visitor traffic had dropped by some undisclosed degree. Actual facts do not attract to the same degree sloppily documented or long assumed to be accurate, LORE attracts.

When I found appreciable comment submission under many names originating from just a few IP#s linked to Toronto, CA, I informed all readers who might be interested, which past comment strings were infected/distorted. The trolls were debating each other and generating artificial jfkfacts.org visitor stats, but probably not to a relevant extent.

(It is always about the Benjamins, sad to say....)

Michael, Larry Hancock and Denis Morisette are your friends.... judging from how they present. I advise  this despite my deep discomfort with the cooperation Larry and Rex have offered to the Boston hedge fund millionaire (a now dormant EF poster, first name, Oliver) (introduced to Mary by her friend, the late Robert Chapman) who bought the maryferrell archive (and Rex) and who sponsors the web services resulting in the existence of the jfkfacts.org website, but all of that is for another day.... I have a bigger mouth than most because I have no rep. or commercial interest or salary from that millionaire, to protect, first and foremost. Once in awhile, I help Mom change the sheets on my wellworn bed!

(My research resulted in the fact that Oliver's dad was prominent in the Kodak film research lab by the early 1960s and was very close (at least in 1963, he was) to a claymation pioneer, FWIW...)

Amazing how few individuals are aware of all the new evidence concerning 'Team Janney', Tom.  Yet, they just go on, pretending the facts do not exist.  Cognitive dissonance at its finest, oui?

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Mark A. Oblazney

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
I lost your optimism a long time ago. He had an opportunity, well before the 50th anniv., but he did and does consider constructive criticism to be personal attack,  even when it came from one of his own moderators (me), and later, from his friend and forum admin. (Gary)


The situation and outcome presented above was a direct result of objections to learning verifiable facts because the facts conflicted with personal relationships dynamics.

And... if you accept Simkin's later claim that his emphasis was on maintaining a cordial, inviting atmosphere for prominent book authors, i.e., the experts, I have a bridge to sell that you absolutely must consider buying!

Absolute utter hogwash. Cord Meyer was apparently enraged at my well-researched book, and I cannot believe he would sit down with Heymann, no matter how near death.

At the end of his life, Cord had a very disfigured visage from mouth and jaw cancer - you would think Heymann would have mentioned that fact if he had seen him in the flesh.


Here is an excerpt from the second, (Autumn, 2013) face saving, edition of the book Simkin was touting.:

Author Janney sidekick, Doug Horne, wrote a glowing Amazon review of Janney's book. In the second page of comments in reaction to my FACTS SUPPORTED, negative Amazon review (August, 2012) Horne resorted to shooting the messenger.:





The patience of goin' fishin'.  It's all about the bait, mate !!  Reel her in !!  The Old Man & The Sea+

Offline Tom Scully

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1216
The patience of goin' fishin'.  It's all about the bait, mate !!  Reel her in !!  The Old Man & The Sea+

Mark, it seems the personal price of authoring a book is thin skinned defensiveness and a closed mind. According to Janney, in reaction to presentation of facts
he firmly asserted in his book were unavailable, I am a "DiEugenio protégé." According to DiEugenio, in reaction to presentation of the fact that "CIA people" David Baldwin, and his brother Edward are first cousins of Garrison's wife and David Baldwin disclosed to Clay Shaw in a March, 1967 letter, that he was also Garrison's wife's godfather, and the fact is that David Baldwin's wife was step-sister of "CIA paymaster in NOLA." Stephen B Lemann, and of his brother, Thomas Lemann (father of Nicholas B Lemann) I must be a stooge of Shaw biographer, Donald Carpenter.

The truth seems as often as not, a poor stepchild in the eyes of those who find it to be inconvenient.

Lord Gordon has issued a new edict, aimed at David von Pein. It is now "enshrined" at this link, that Gordon himself does not consider David von Pein to have
committed any offense prompting his banning.: http://archive.is/pAbhg

NordVPN recently offered a three year deal via Rakuten.com that rebates $43 of the $107.99,
three year fee that would be a more convenient option for David than two other options Mr. Gordon indicated unfamiliarity with. www.archive.org and the more recent and more useful, www.Archive.is , offering a snapshot, complete with working links on the web page image captured and archived. It was conceived to solve the problem of disappearing, linked cites included in Wikipedia articles. Here is an example of the latter.: http://archive.is/Fu9hl (the newly obsolete, Hargrove description and status of Donald O. Norton.) E-Zee P-Zee! Unlike Hargrove, von Pein does not, (to the best of my knowledge) appropriate, without attribution, the original research of others.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2019, 11:50:28 PM by Tom Scully »

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Mark A. Oblazney

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
Re: Is J Simkin 2000's Penn Jones? I am asking because LNs seem out to lunch?
« Reply #11 on: September 03, 2019, 04:55:53 PM »
Mark, it seems the personal price of authoring a book is thin skinned defensiveness and a closed mind. According to Janney, in reaction to presentation of facts
he firmly asserted in his book were unavailable, I am a "DiEugenio protégé." According to DiEugenio, in reaction to presentation of the fact that "CIA people" David Baldwin, and his brother Edward are first cousins of Garrison's wife and David Baldwin disclosed to Clay Shaw in a March, 1967 letter, that he was also Garrison's wife's godfather, and the fact is that David Baldwin's wife was step-sister of "CIA paymaster in NOLA." Stephen B Lemann, and of his brother, Thomas Lemann (father of Nicholas B Lemann) I must be a stooge of Shaw biographer, Donald Carpenter.

The truth seems as often as not, a poor stepchild in the eyes of those who find it to be inconvenient.

Lord Gordon has issued a new edict, aimed at David von Pein. It is now "enshrined" at this link, that Gordon himself does not consider David von Pein to have
committed any offense prompting his banning.: http://archive.is/pAbhg

NordVPN recently offered a three year deal via Rakuten.com that rebates $43 of the $107.99,
three year fee that would be a more convenient option for David than two other options Mr. Gordon indicated unfamiliarity with. www.archive.org and the more recent and more useful, www.Archive.is , offering a snapshot, complete with working links on the web page image captured and archived. It was conceived to solve the problem of disappearing, linked cites included in Wikipedia articles. Here is an example of the latter.: http://archive.is/Fu9hl (the newly obsolete, Hargrove description and status of Donald O. Norton.) E-Zee P-Zee! Unlike Hargrove, von Pein does not, (to the best of my knowledge) appropriate, without attribution, the original research of others.

Lord Gordon's edicting...... he mentored well under ol' King John, eh Robin Hood?

Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4993
Re: Is J Simkin 2000's Penn Jones? I am asking because LNs seem out to lunch?
« Reply #12 on: September 03, 2019, 05:03:12 PM »
If there is ever a nationwide competition to play the Kevin Bacon game, you would be hard pressed to team up with anyone more suitable than Tom.  His penchant for wedding announcements linking folks in some unspecified but presumably sinister manner can only be marveled at.  This tireless information tsunami in every post borders on the surreal.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Is J Simkin 2000's Penn Jones? I am asking because LNs seem out to lunch?
« Reply #12 on: September 03, 2019, 05:03:12 PM »


Offline Tom Scully

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1216
Re: Is J Simkin 2000's Penn Jones? I am asking because LNs seem out to lunch?
« Reply #13 on: October 14, 2019, 11:05:24 AM »
Mr. Parnell, when I saw the Ed Forum thread about a fairly recently debunked Armstrong "myth" speculating as to whether or not an actor who later played a detective on the Barney Miller Show, sitcom, resembled Oswald, or not,  I wondered how the dying embers of that "lunacy": could be fanned back into a flame.

Although I played a part in supporting your rebuttal and dismantling of that particular "two Oswald" tale and know much more than the average reader about the "nuts and bolts" of it all, your treatment of it gave me a new appreciation of the effort you put in to wrest the actual truth out of such a intricate mess.:
http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/armstrong-evolving-landesberg-theory.html

My first reaction to John Butler's near blind faith in the reliability of John Armstrong's assertions, especially after you provided both links to your research and several patient explanations, was annoyance, especially Butler's resistance to the overwhelming evidence Landesberg (not the actor) was insane, but by the time I got to the end of your page, I linked to above, I no longer was critical of John Butler.

I learned something about myself. Although the details are nearly impossible for me to wrap my mind around, I discovered and contributed what I did to your gargantuan effort, I think now, because of the KISS approach. I am not capable of thinking like Armstrong or even reading his "feed" without my eyes glazing over as my mind wanders. It just does not seem worth it.

In you, however, John Armstrong has definitely met his match! Where I look for a key vulnerability and pursue it, more often than not finding what I am after, inside of a week, or not, and then I put it down, moving on, sometimes coming back to it at a later date, you manage to master and address the entire, steaming pile!

The Ed Forum is definitely getting worse, suspicion rising, informative posts or threads, declining, and the institutional core of the place is disappearing. Butler mentioned how impressed he was with the 2004 threads he was reading.

In my experience, much of what was assumed reliable in the majority of those early threads has been debunked or revised/refined to a degree that makes them nearly useless reads.

In closing, reading just that single page of your work makes me feel I have been lazy, superficial. I cannot even suggest how you could pare or simplify your presentation. You are addressing Armstrong's pile, so far-fetched, intense, elaborate, who could respond to it all, adequately.

W. Tracey Parnell, please do not give up! Yes, readers are unappreciative to the point of resenting the proof put in front of them. They are looking to confirm their biases and react with frustration and disappointment, while all you are doing is helping them put aside what you've proven to be a complete waste of time. They resist moving on. The work needs to be done, but the satisfaction arising out of doing it is mostly self satisfaction. "I wish you hadn't told me the well supported truth," is not the reaction I hope for, but you certainly, too, have come to expect it. Our present political divide seems made of similar stuff. Forty percent "Hargroves" and fifteen percent, "undecided".
« Last Edit: October 14, 2019, 11:15:07 AM by Tom Scully »

Online Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1434
Re: Is J Simkin 2000's Penn Jones? I am asking because LNs seem out to lunch?
« Reply #14 on: October 14, 2019, 02:30:17 PM »
Reading an over-the-top endorsement like this should make everyone's BS detector max out.

It does not take state-of-the-art research, like tracking who's cousin supplied the icing for the Oswald's wedding cake, but just a five minute look at the Parnell postings to come up with this one:

Scully endorsing a Warren Commission fanboy who calims to know "the facts in the JFK case" is hard to beat -- ROFL
What does Tracy Parnell's opinion on the Warren Commission have to do with his research/information dispelling Armstrong's claims of "two Oswalds"? Parnell's work on the "two Oswalds" theory stands or falls on its own and isn't contingent on his views on who shot JFK or whether there was a conspiracy.

If he suddenly became a conspiracy believer and said he rejected the WC conclusions then does his work on the "two Oswald" claim suddenly become valid? Why?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Is J Simkin 2000's Penn Jones? I am asking because LNs seem out to lunch?
« Reply #14 on: October 14, 2019, 02:30:17 PM »


Offline Tom Scully

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1216
Re: Is J Simkin 2000's Penn Jones? I am asking because LNs seem out to lunch?
« Reply #15 on: October 14, 2019, 04:17:50 PM »
What does Tracy Parnell's opinion on the Warren Commission have to do with his research/information dispelling Armstrong's claims of "two Oswalds"? Parnell's work on the "two Oswalds" theory stands or falls on its own and isn't contingent on his views on who shot JFK or whether there was a conspiracy.

If he suddenly became a conspiracy believer and said he rejected the WC conclusions then does his work on the "two Oswald" claim suddenly become valid? Why?

Yesterday, on Dr. McAdams's Google Newsgroup, he posted the announcement of a new documentary series based on
author Jim DiEugenio's "Destiny Betrayed". McAdams put the word "Documentary" in his post's title, in quotes.

This morning, Dr. McAdams was kind enough to approve my reply, critical of Jim DiEugenio's work on the topic of Jim Garrison, his investigation, and his prosecution of Clay Shaw.:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/alt.assassination.jfk

Otto, Mr. Parnell is smarter than I am and works much harder than I have, and is more polite to those who disagree with him than I am able to be. I saw no harm in letting him, and everyone else who reads this thread, know that. I am very confident that Mr. Parnell would share any exculpatory evidence he finds, related to Oswald, as well as any malfeasance committed by the WC or about errors in the WCR.

Put this in perspective. In June, 2013, Mr. Simkin bounced me from his forum, along with Jim DiEugenio, posting that he, Simkin, had failed to protect his friend, author Peter Janney, from the criticism of Jim and I. In September, 2013, author Janney issued a second edition of his book, naming me and describing me as a "DiEugenio protege". Earlier this year, Jim DiEugenio posted this in a thread on DPF.....

Quote
Tom Scully posted 09-01-2019, 08:51 PM

Quote
Originally Posted by Jim DiEugenio
Tom, I like you personally and I think you usually do good work and I defended you when people were attacking your approach at EF.

But I am at a loss to explain how you fell for Carpenter. This is a guy who writes for Max Holland.....
IOW...
I'll Do the Thinning Around Here, Baba Looey

Well, enough time has passed now to reliably observe that Jim did a "drive by" on me. (Imagine how different this might have gone down if he did not like me....)

Isn't another way of saying what Jim conveyed to me?
Quote
Tom, I like you personally.... unfortunately you are stupid enough to fall for the pronouncements of Max Holland's lackey, Donald Carpenter...

Otto, do not take any of this more seriously than it deserves.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2019, 04:22:17 PM by Tom Scully »