Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
Alan Ford, Brian Doyle and 50 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Prayer Woman  (Read 16122 times)

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 90
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #300 on: June 14, 2018, 08:25:16 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Brian,
As surely evident, again without reliable evidence supporting the LeeHarveyOswald/PrayerManTheory, the presented evidence indicating PrayerPersonImage to be a female, then employed at the TexasSchoolBookDepository building, continues to be "discounted", and disputed.

Sadly, now even SarahDeanStanton has been labeled as a "liar", simply because she indicated herself to have seen LHO on the second floor, just before her going down to the first floor, and onto the entrance landing.


Edited:For RayMitcham.

Again there is only circumstancial(unreliable) evidence for PM being a female and/or LHO.
Now in which statement did she say she saw Oswald and what makes you trust it?


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #300 on: June 14, 2018, 08:25:16 PM »


Online Brian Doyle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #301 on: June 14, 2018, 08:40:48 PM »
Bart Kamp has made a new entry on his Prayer Man website and the Education Forum pointing-out a woman down on the east steps as being Stanton and is claiming victory from this...

No one on the Education Forum points-out to Kamp that the video Hargrove linked shows Frazier emphasizing that Stanton was on the top step space (landing) and was deep into the shadows...

Not only is Kamp's Stanton too far behind and below Frazier to be Stanton, but she is way out into the sun and can't possibly be deep in the shadows...Kamp's Stanton is also several steps down and isn't on the landing as Frazier clearly explained...

Stanton also said she could not see the limousine during the shots...The person Kamp points-out has a clear view of the limousine from that spot...

When is the research community going to admit to itself it has allowed a highly uncredible person into unquestioned leadership of its ranks?
« Last Edit: June 14, 2018, 10:50:06 PM by Brian Doyle »

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 90
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #302 on: June 14, 2018, 08:42:24 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I seem to recall, as seen elsewhere, that someone aka AS, has a computerized TSBD Entrance/Landing area, with mannequins "inserted" in positions, apparently according to his analysis for "placement"(?).

And then, as evidence, he "refers to his own analysis" as proof of where entrance area occupants were standing?

The reason it's good is because we are too limited by the photographic evidence to understand clearly who stood where, in which position and/or step. I like it, it's an interesting project and seems useful.

Offline Duncan MacRae

  • Administrator
  • Jr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 55
    • JFK Assassination Videos
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #303 on: June 14, 2018, 10:02:02 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bart Kamp has made a new entry on his Prayer Man website and the Education Forum pointing-out a woman down on the east steps as being Stanton and is claiming victory from this...



Look at the size of his Pareidolia induced Sanders head in his posted image, It's tiny in perspective comparison to every other real person's head in that image, and his Stanton ID looks like a begging dog standing on its hind legs...sheeeeeesh, or should that be Woof! Woof!










Offline Michael Walton

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #304 on: June 14, 2018, 10:52:56 PM »
As I said before, the EF is going downhill and fast.  And I said that *before* I got banned there, so my saying that is not hindsight. It's one vast echo chamber of crazy theories and "atta boys."

In actuality, it may just be reverting back to its original mission of being a place where paid authors can shill their books to mere mortals like me. Of course, there are some good authors there like Jim DiEugenio, who focuses mainly on Kennedy's foreign policy and civil rights histories, among other things.

But scam artists like Lifton are also there. I'm pretty sure Lifton is the scammer who got me banned there when I xxxx him off about his upcoming scam theory.

Vince the Secret Service "Expert" is another one that comes to mind. How much of an "expert" do you have to be about the Secret Service? What a xxxxing joke.

All of the folks who provided good honest rebuttals to the crazies over there have either been banned or have left.


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #304 on: June 14, 2018, 10:52:56 PM »


Online Brian Doyle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #305 on: June 15, 2018, 12:13:21 AM »
DiEugenio asked Kamp where he thought Stanton was?

Kamp responded with this obviously absurd claim...

You can see what the obvious follow-through questions are on Kamp's absurd location for Stanton in my post...

We'll see how DiEugenio responds...

If he follows his usual pattern he won't respond and Kamp's asinine location for Stanton will go un-commented on...

The moderation will also have no complaint about this absurd mis-use of the board and willful ignoring of my better evidence...

The video of Frazier I had Hargrove post on the Education Forum makes clear that Frazier insisted Stanton was up on the landing and in the shadows...Kamp contemptuously ignores this and the board moderation keeps the better evidence from being posted while claiming it is "sensitive to quality of content"...

Kamp contemptuously ignores that his correct insistence that Shelley & Lovelady are walking up the Elm St extension forces him to admit that Frazier is talking to Stanton at the exact moment seen in Darnell, since testimony says Calvery spoke Shelley & Lovelady before they left the steps...Kamp needs to ignore this because he knows it disproves what is he showing...

If DiEugenio were competent and honest he would ask Kamp:  "How do you relate Frazier's description of Calvery and her having communicated Kennedy's being shot to your location of Stanton vs Frazier's description?"

This is a necessary follow-through from the evidence I showed...Do you think Jim will ask it?
« Last Edit: June 15, 2018, 12:31:22 AM by Brian Doyle »

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 101
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #306 on: June 15, 2018, 01:43:26 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The reason it's good is because we are too limited by the photographic evidence to understand clearly who stood where, in which position and/or step. I like it, it's an interesting project and seems useful.

Then how does he know where to place his mannequins? How does he identify the images represented by his mannequins?

The PrayerPersonImage has never appeared to me to resemble LeeHarveyOswald. And, additional evidence is needed to correctly identify said image.

Recently, additional evidence has been presented that strongly indicates PrayerPersonImage to be SarahStanton, but no evidence indicates PPI to be LHO.

Believe what you wish, but "looks like", along with claims of eyewitnesses being "liars" is not evidence.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2018, 02:23:11 AM by Larry Trotter »

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 101
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #307 on: June 15, 2018, 02:10:58 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Again there is only circumstancial(unreliable) evidence for PM being a female and/or LHO.
Now in which statement did she say she saw Oswald and what makes you trust it?

If you wish to continue your refusal to acknowledge prepared and provable information relative to the PrayerPersonImage correct identification, that is your choice. But, you need to answer with evidence to disprove what has been presented, along with actual reliable evidence relative to your PPI identity, if you want to debate any conclusion I have made.

Especially, you need to review the recent information presented by BrianDoyle, and explain how and why it is wrong, while presenting your conclusions, and the basis for such.

The comment about what SarahStanton reportedly said was actually a reference to her being labeled a liar. But, I trust it to be what she "reportedly"said because of relative factors/incidents.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2018, 06:38:51 PM by Larry Trotter »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #307 on: June 15, 2018, 02:10:58 AM »


Online Brian Doyle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
Prayer Woman
« Reply #308 on: June 15, 2018, 04:33:22 PM »
iEugenio wrote:   
Quote
To my knowledge Doyle has been suspended from this site. I think it was over his vitriol towards other members. 
No, it was because I posted good evidence that started to disprove the favored Prayer Man posters and the moderation couldn't have that so they bullied me off the board...

Quote
  Jim, you may not know who troppocrat is, but everything he wrote there sound just like Doyle.  Of course Doyle may have used someone else since he does all kinds of things in order to get on places he is banned.  But the fact that its him is revealed by his reference to the PW page. He used you to give some info on Stanton, hoping it would then jimmy open the PM thing.  Which it did.  So what you have done, apparently unawares, is you have given hims a chance that he would not have had to insult Bart, Andrej, and Gordon and the Mods.

Here is dirty Jim trying to exploit the false reasons why I was banned by reducing it to that level in order to avoid the evidence I posted...Jim is a really cowardly dirty player...He ignores the arguments of evidence I have offered and their value towards understanding the Prayer Man issue in order to reduce my postings to "an effort to insult Bart, Andrej, and Gordon" and in doing so proves my point that the Education Forum has been taken over by the Prayer Man bullies who are using brute tactics and defamation to avoid evidence..."Doyle" is now the equivalent to "Fetzer"...

In his cheap defamation of me Jim ignores that my e-mail that was posted by Hargrove possessed a serious new witnessing of Oswald being seen by Stanton drinking a Coke by the lunch room...Jim is so zealous in his defamation and bullying that he ignores important break-through information in the assassination and therefore proves my point...Kinda dumb...I didn't "use" Hargrove...Hargrove volunteered after seeing the abuse Jim and his ROKC gang committed against me...Jim is a full ROKC supporter now...A group banned by Deep Politics...Yet he doesn't post on their board...When I asked Lauren why he allows Jim to front for a group that was banned by Deep Politics he banned me instead of answering...
Quote
The incredible thing about this is that Doyle got into all this when he was snookered by Duncan's manufacture of PW out of PM.  What Duncan did to create that confection has been  exposed by several people including David Josephs.  But yet, Doyle hangs on to it like a talisman.  And this is what I find so odd, he unites  himself with someone as WC obsessed as McRae in his jihad on this issue.  Now he lives on FB and continues his Ahab crusade there.  I have never liked people who campaign so self righteously on issues that there is simply legitimate debate about. And then unites with someone like Duncan who campaigns for an idea that there really is no debate about--Oswald did not shoot JFK.  Period. 
         

Jim is not being honest here...He tried to smear me via Duncan on DPF...When I told him the woman's face in Wiegman was discovered by Chris Davidson he ignored it...David Josephs is a fraud...He did not debunk Davidson's image nor could lying Jim here show where he did...When Davidson posted his metadata Josephs and every other Prayer Man supporter were dead quiet to a man and could not answer it...For 2 years I demanded Jim answer Davidson's metadata on the DPF board...He refused and Lauren acted against his own site rules by refusing to make him...Now DiEugenio is right back to his old dirty tricks just like none of this ever happened...He is a very dirty player who maximizes a person not being able to respond through unfair banning and censorship...

I am not "united" with Duncan...If he holds Lone Nutter views I separate myself from them (as Jim already knows)...Jim is just trying to smear me as a Lone Nutter in order to avoid answering my evidence...Even worse, Jim backed Kamp's claim that Carolyn Arnold was lying...So while Jim is falsely accusing me of Lone Nutterism, it is actually himself who backs the FBI's alteration of Carolyn Arnold's statement...That's just about the worst offense you could commit as a CT...When I asked Lauren to enforce the DPF rules and call Jim out on this Lauren attacked me, deleted my posts, and banned me...He protected Jim from answering this and he never did...Jim is the type of character who lets people lose their public ability to post over his wrongdoing and stays quiet...
         
What Jim does here is exploit personal defamation and slander to the max in order to not answer good evidence...And the Education Forum moderation allows him...If you look at what Hargrove posted and compare it to Jim's response he has succeeded in methodically avoiding answering the points of evidence I emphasized...Jim uses defamation to avoid admitting the Davidson enhancement is good and proves Prayer Man is a woman (Sarah Stanton)...Jim and his ego are not afraid to bully people into majorly wrong evidence that misleads the world on the assassination... 

At least Duncan allows opposing opinions - which is better than the Murphy bullies who banned every poster who opposed them on the Education Forum, making up cowardly excuses for it...And not caring about the good evidence they excluded in the process...
Quote
As I have said before, until someone gets a first gen copy of the film, no one knows for sure who the figure is, but the idea that its a female is really out there.

If Jim bothered to honestly answer the evidence I've shown instead of flagrantly ignoring it he would see that we can validly determine the identity of Prayer Man from the current films we have...He is calling for better scans in order to bail out the Murphy theorists and do damage control for them...It is also quite obvious to me that Jim does not possess the skill to participate at this level of technical examination...Jim is trying to use fancy writing to get around evidence he's flagrantly ignoring in public and it isn't working...Jim holds the clearly seen woman's face in Davidson in contempt in order to refer to his fancy writing...       
Quote

So Doyle used someone else's research to find Stanton's survivors and now claims this as his own.  But the point is, his argument does not really stand on them, it stands on Frazier.  And he spins what he says to make it declarative.  When he was shown  the figure at the ARRC conference, Frazier had it a few inches from his face.  He said that the copy was not good enough to decipher.  But now, according to Doyle, its the female Stanton.

That's a false accusation that I should sue Mr DiEugenio for...All I did was follow-through on a name posted on a public site...Mr DiEugenio is obviously a cheap smearer who uses low tactics to make someone look bad to avoid answering their legitimate evidence...

Mr DiEugenio is a liar...Anyone can listen to Frazier's comment in the video I posted and there is nothing in there that I spun...My quotation of Frazier's references to Sarah are accurate and are true to Frazier's context...

Jim is dishonestly trying to force Frazier's failure to directly identify Prayer Man when asked as the only allowable evidence...Like Kamp he is dishonestly doing that because he's trying to avoid answering what Frazier is clearly saying in the video Hargrove forwarded...DiEugenio is dodging having to answer where Frazier is putting Stanton when he is allowed to go back to his memory freely...Jim is using this dishonest defamation approach to avoid honestly addressing what Frazier is more than clearly outlining...When allowed to go back to his memory freely Frazier describes in repeated detail, in multiple accounts, looking at Sarah and asking her what Calvery had said...What Jim is flagrantly avoiding here is that Graves & Larsen have correctly located Calvery at the base of the steps...Both Calvery sons told me they thought the woman Graves identified was their mother...Shelley & Lovelady spoke to Calvery before they left the steps...Couch/Darnell shows Shelley & Lovelady about 4 seconds after leaving the steps...Common detective work then references Frazier's saying he asked "Sarah" what Calvery had said...Don't play dumb Jim, with shots going off at a president Frazier did not take more than 4 seconds to turn to Sarah and ask her what Calvery said...Couch/Darnell shows Frazier and Prayer Man still because they are talking to each other...That makes Prayer Man Stanton and there is just no way around it, and calling for better copies won't spare you from credibly answering it...The timing given by Frazier in his accounts that you are ignoring forces him to be speaking to Sarah in the clips...

The Education Forum allows Jim to use a very dirty trick in his response...Jim cites the video but then switches in his response to Frazier's failing to identify Prayer Man when asked...Those are two completely different things and dishonest Jim dodges answering what Frazier clearly said in the video via this deliberate deception...I'm sure if he responds to this he'll dodge it once again by saying I am insulting him or some other such evasive garbage that the Education Forum moderation gives him full leave to post while those who call him on it are banned...Jim fails to answer where Frazier puts Sarah in the video...He does that on purpose because he knows exactly where Frazier puts her...
   
Jim accuses Gilbride and myself of not being sincere but anyone can see that he has exploited bully-like unfair banning to defame and slander in order to avoid answering legitimate points of evidence...This can all be reduced to one point...The Education Forum moderation and Jim DiEugenio should ask Kamp to please answer where he puts Stanton in relation to Frazier's statement in the video...Kamp is just ignoring that Frazier makes clear Stanton is on the landing ("space" as Frazier puts it) and in the shadows...Kamp is in contempt of Frazier's clear location for Stanton and places her down on the east steps out in the bright sun...Two places she clearly couldn't be according to Frazier's description...Frazier couldn't talk to her down there either...Kamp also ignores that Stanton said she couldn't see the limousine at the time of the shots...That perfectly matches Prayer Man's position where the west wall of the portal blocks the view...Kamp's Stanton has a clear view of the limo...So Jim serves as cover for Kamp and Stancak and bails them out once again from actually answering the evidence - and he does so via cheap slander...Very dirty and very dishonest...
« Last Edit: June 15, 2018, 05:25:27 PM by Brian Doyle »

Online Brian Doyle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #309 on: June 15, 2018, 06:02:25 PM »
 
Quote
Ask your pal Brian Doyle to explain the following:

Doyle uses Frazier's claim to have spoken with Gloria Calvery (of which there is no visual ID btw) in an imaginary time line to disprove Prayer Man.

How can this be when

1/Joe Molina spoke with her in the lobby, and is seen in Darnell next to Frazier!  On P273.

2/Frazier did not even speak to her at all! He overheard her just before going back in.

Go on thrill us all. If you want to be the errand boy then you may as well deliver some quality.


It is bizarre that the Education Forum moderation and members allow Kamp to get away with this kind of response...In his Garrison Trial testimony Frazier described the event in better detail...He said Calvery ran up to the steps shouting the president had been shot...He said he didn't hear what she said so he asked Sarah what Calvery had said...Sarah responded "I think she said the president has been shot"...Kamp knows this...He's just dishonestly playing dumb in order to avoid what he knows to be true and the Education Forum moderation and its members are letting him...

The Education Forum has allowed Kamp to get away with this cheap tactic of going on the offensive with disingenuous questions to avoid answering the point for years now and it has been quite effective at helping him avoid answering the correct evidence...Kamp actually uses the child-like tactic of focusing on the semantics of Frazier "hearing" or "speaking to" Calvery instead of answering the point and the Education Forum lets him...

Kamp's point here is idiotic and avoids answering what Frazier clearly described in the video...No one asks Kamp to please answer what was originally written...That Calvery's being located at the base of the steps means she has already made her run and shouted and therefore Frazier has already heard her...This is reinforced by the fact Shelley & Lovelady spoke to Calvery before they left the steps...Kamp's response makes no effort to answer that Couch/Darnell shows Shelley & Lovelady headed up the Elm St extension...They have left the steps about 4 seconds before Couch/Darnell...That means the timing forces Frazier to be well in to the process of asking Sarah what Calvery had said...

Kamp scoffs that this is an "imaginary timeline"...But he ignores that it perfectly matches all the established witnessing and testimony...This is what Kamp does...When he gets to evidence that refutes him he mocks it and dismisses it...But the truth is that evidence is good and he hasn't credibly acknowledged it or answered it...And this is all just fine with the 95% majority on the Education Forum who endorsed Murphy...And now Kamp has the great Jim DiEugenio acting as muscle for him and his childish entries...

The Education Forum once again allows Kamp to enter a highly uncredible response that holds the best argument of the evidence on the internet in contempt in order to avoid answering the points that were put to him...Any credible look at this issue shows that Frazier has made the timing of when he spoke to Sarah more than apparent in his video interview...Kamp is obviously making efforts to avoid acknowledging this because he knows it forces researchers to admit that Couch/Darnell shows Frazier looking at and speaking to Prayer Man at the moment Frazier describes himself as talking to Sarah...

A serious researcher would make his best objective effort to gauge where exactly Sarah is according to Frazier's statement...Anyone can see Kamp is making petty excuses and is deliberately avoiding this because he already knows what it shows...
« Last Edit: June 15, 2018, 06:15:28 PM by Brian Doyle »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #309 on: June 15, 2018, 06:02:25 PM »