PAMELA BROWN SAID:
[John] Simkin is pretty mellow; I would think you would have had to really cross a line to actually get kicked out of there [The Education Forum].
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Oh, come now, Pam. Let's be reasonable. No LNer lasts very long there. Ask Brendan Slattery.
And, AFAIK, there isn't a single LNer posting there as of this date [1/13/2010]. At least not any regular posters that I have seen. Not one.
To be perfectly clear (and fair) here:
I was ejected from Simkin's forum in July of 2006 (after posting for four days), and "officially" the reason I was given for my dismissal was because I had not added a photograph of myself to my profile. (John Simkin has a rule where every member who posts at the Education Forum must have a photo of himself/herself; it "personalizes" the experience for other readers, per Mr. Simkin. And that's fine. I didn't/don't particularly like that rule; but, after all, it is Simkin's house of kooks, so he can decide on the rules and regulations.)
However, several other long-time members as of that time (in July 2006) were not complying with the "photo" rule, which I pointed out to Mr. Simkin, which made John crack down on the rule immediately after I pointed out to him that other members didn't have personal pics either. He had evidently been lax in enforcing the rule up to that time.
I was e-mailing John back and forth a couple of times, trying to work out a compromise of some kind regarding the "personal photo" rule, because I did not have a photo of myself that I could use at all. (And I still don't have one to this day.) [EDIT: But I did later find a super-tiny picture of myself to use as a profile photo at the Education Forum when I re-joined that forum as a member in August of 2010. Amazingly, unlike last time, I wasn't booted out the door after just a few days either.]
If I recall correctly, John seemed to be willing to compromise on the picture rule for a certain period of time, allowing me to possibly use a "filler" picture until I could obtain and upload a decent picture of myself (which ain't easy with a mug like mine). ;)
So, I continued to post for about two more days or so (posting lots of actual evidence and citations from the witnesses and common sense, etc.), when suddenly I was banned from the forum via a very short and terse e-mail from Mr. Simkin.
So, make of that explanation what you will. But, IMO, the brevity of my stay at The Education Forum was based more on the "Lone Assassin" content of my posts than it was the silly "photo" rule.
YMMV.
PAMELA BROWN SAID:
How anyone can objectively examine all the information we have about the Zapruder films and not ask questions is beyond me.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
"Films"? As in "more than one"?
~shrug~
Well, Pamela, you and all other people who even BEGIN to suspect that Abraham Zapruder's home movie might have been "faked" or "tampered with" SHOULD be asking yourself the $64,000 question (to which there is no logical and reasonable and SANE answer whatsoever if the film was faked to ELIMINATE ALL SIGNS OF A CONSPIRACY; and what other possible reason could there be for anybody to want to fake the film other than that?), and that $64K question is this one:
WHY IS THE REAR HEAD SNAP STILL VISIBLE IN EVERY SINGLE COPY OF THE ZAPRUDER FILM THAT EXISTS TO THIS DAY?
I await a logical, reasonable, and BELIEVABLE answer to the above inquiry.
To date, I've yet to hear such an answer.
David Von Pein
January 13, 2010
