What News Comes From The Newsgroups?
Several people have asked why I avoid participation in Kennedy assassination newsgroups. In my view, they don't seem to accomplish much of anything. I do admit that on a rare occasion someone will mention something of interest or value, such as an upcoming TV special or release of documents, but overall most subjects under discussion are reduced to name-calling, personality clashes and opinion. In short most newsgroup participants appear incapable of resolving any issue.
As far as I'm concerned, if "researchers" wish to be considered researchers, they should want their work to be scrutinized and reviewed by others. For this reason, I sometimes end my articles with a statement similar to, "It is my hope others will reply publicly, showing where my details or logic are inaccurate."
I find it odd someone who considers themselves a researcher would ask a question or make a supposed statement of fact then get defensive and/or abusive when the answer to the question isn't exactly as expected or the statement of fact is disputed. I also find their status within the newsgroup is often based upon quasi popularity polls conducted by their loyal supporters.
Here are a just a few examples:
From A CTKA Story?
Would someone care to show me where I've reached an improper conclusion in my last paragraph?
In the same press release, one finds the following charge, "'It seems to be a document that has been deliberately suppressed by the Dallas police,' says White"
I questioned Mr. White's allegation and asked him to provide evidence that the Dallas police had deliberately suppressed the document. Instead of answering the questions directly and providing the appropriate documentation, Mr. White has remained silent for years preferring to label me a disinformation specialist.
Here is the transcript of a portion of Bob Vernon's interview of James Files:
On my web site I have posted documentation, including screen shots of the appropriate newspapers, showing that neither the Dallas Morning News nor the Dallas Times Herald indicated a last minute change in the route. In fact the source of the error can be traced to a specific Dallas Morning News reporter, Carl Freund. Neither Bob Vernon nor James Files have been able to explain the disparity between Files' version of events and the historical record. Since Mr. Vernon has never been able to show where I am in error he has concluded I am an un-patriotic government agent and a traitor.
Several individuals including Robert Harris claim Mary and Ray LaFontaine were the ones who confirmed the Ricky White/Roscoe White story to be a hoax. The proof, they believe, lies in Chapter 11 of their book, Oswald Talked. Oswald Talked bears a copyright date of 1996. If you check Oliver Stone's JFK The Book of the Film you will find it carries the copyright date of 1992. On page 20 there is a notation that Stone, based upon information supplied by this writer, had already dismissed the White story as a hoax. In essence, the LaFontaines were four years late with their revelation.
Additionally, study the letter dated January 14, 1991 from Mary LaFontaine to Texas Attorney General's investigator Ned Butler. After you review the letter you can decide if the LaFontaines were as ready to discredit the Ricky White story as a hoax as they now claim. As a point of information this document was obtained from the Texas Attorney General's office under the Texas Open Records Act.
Would someone care to show me where I am in error with respect to the statement in Stone's book or Mary LaFontaine's letter to the Attorney General? Since they appear unable to resolve this enigma, the LaFontaines and their supporters prefer to label me a liar and an amateur sleuth.
Am I correct in my belief that these three individuals are engaged in MARKETING their assassination-related product(s) for profit? I understand Mr. White tries to sell his videotapes through, as his letterhead shows, Jack White JFK Educational Research. Mr. Vernon has been attempting to advance the James Files story as a pay per view production for years. He has solicited funding for the project through Investigative Concepts Unlimited. Mary LaFonatine's company is Desperado Productions. She must receive at least a marginal profit from the book Oswald Talked.
Now some may argue these individuals have not made a substantial amount of money. However, it's not for lack of trying and certainly they are not giving their product away for the cost of postage. It seems the more one finds these "researchers" and their supporters unable to bolster their claims, the louder and more vitriolic the "newsgroup" protest becomes. I'm sure the anti-conspiracy forces find it laughable.
Dave Perry 11/27/99