Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 13 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Prayer Woman  (Read 211118 times)

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2395
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #70 on: April 17, 2018, 05:25:55 PM »


Dawn responded to Gilbride's intelligent site rules and material-based protest by saying "I don't give a rat's ass" and calling for its removal (censorship)...DPF rules #2 & 13 say the site is a free speech site where the moderators are held accountable at the same level as members...

So much for the DPF rules...

When Duncan showed his Davidson enhancement on the Education Forum 2 years ago the moderator James Gordon allowed it to be trolled and ignored even though it was clear proof that Prayer Man was Sarah Stanton...Duncan was put on indefinite suspension under the justification that he was posting only to taunt the good research of Kamp and Stancak...





Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2395
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #71 on: April 19, 2018, 07:24:57 PM »
Oswald probably flinched from the lunch room vestibule door window when he saw Baker...I personally think Baker knew Oswald was standing right there in position in the window observing the goings on on the landing...The reason Baker fuzzied this up in his account was because Oswald standing in position in the vestibule window with his feet out to the landing meant he was probably there for a while...Additionally I think Truly and Baker saw that Oswald was set up eating lunch in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room...For Oswald to be standing stationary in the door window and have his lunch on the table means there is no way Oswald just ran down from the Sniper's Nest...What the major dummy DiEugenio fails to realize is THIS was the reason for the lack of details in Baker's first day affidavit...Even worse Baker pushed Oswald, as a nameless employee, further up in the Depository in order to further blur this dangerous witnessing...In my opinion only fools ignore this evidence of Baker being in on the conspiracy by the time of his affidavit...Sharper detectives would realize Baker telling Marvin Johnson that the man he saw was Oswald, but not including it in his report, is evidence of Baker being aware of the need to omit the full details of his 2nd Floor Lunch Room Encounter...
« Last Edit: April 19, 2018, 07:29:32 PM by Brian Doyle »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #71 on: April 19, 2018, 07:24:57 PM »

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #72 on: April 19, 2018, 07:57:19 PM »
Having determined that the PrayerWoman discussion is far from over, after "developing" some type of "technical issue" on another forum(?),I did a re-think about my decision about not joining any other forum. It is my wish to contribute to this conversation, and possibly a couple of others, in a truthful manner, and based on conclusions developed after careful study.

In any event, I appreciate the opportunity to join the discussion(s), and it is not my wish to agree, or disagree, but to enhance, and express my relative understanding of the JFK Assassination and related events.


For clarity, it is my firm belief/drawn conclusion, that the LeeHarveyOswald as PrayerMan Theory, is simply a theory that lacks any reliable provable evidence. And, statements and/or testimony by known eyewitnesses and/or TSBD Bldg Elm St entrance landing area occupants during the motorcade passing and/or shooting strongly indicates that PrayerPersonImage represents a female then employed at the TSBD Bldg.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2019, 10:34:18 PM by Larry Trotter »

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2395
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #73 on: April 19, 2018, 10:11:51 PM »
Hey Larry:   Good thing Peter Lemkin has all those practicers of the Deep Politics "ethos" over there on DPF and got rid of the troublemakers like myself (who happen to post correct evidence that disproved Lauren and Jim D)...Trust me, this isn't about somebody suffering wicked injustices for posting the truth against an ignorant, hypocritical majority while following the posted site rules...No...It is an obsessed member who refuses to understand the greater principles Jim, Peter, and Lauren embody...


You have to understand that posting sophisticated evidence that disproves 95% of the community on a major controversial issue is something that Peter and his sensibilities can't tolerate and it isn't just Peter banning somebody because he posts evidence that Peter's too stupid to understand...Dawn too...

The one thing it definitely isn't is power-abusing site authorities abusing their moderator power to not admit they were wrong...That is the one thing we know it couldn't be...
« Last Edit: April 19, 2018, 10:41:43 PM by Brian Doyle »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #73 on: April 19, 2018, 10:11:51 PM »

Offline Anthony Clayden

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 68
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #74 on: April 19, 2018, 11:07:54 PM »
Larry,

Please identify which of the TSBD female employees you think it is?
If you take out the absent staff, the people in groups on the 3rd and 4th floors, people who said they were elsewhere, people in large groups away from TSBD who testified to beign together and the people we can see in the photos with PM, the list gets very small....

My guess would be Geneva Hine ducked out the front.

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2395
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #75 on: April 20, 2018, 01:13:08 AM »
Anthony:

Any chance, since Frazier said he was talking to "Sarah" when Calvery ran up, and the Couch/Darnell film shows Calvery at the foot of the steps, that Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #75 on: April 20, 2018, 01:13:08 AM »

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #76 on: April 20, 2018, 03:46:36 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hey Larry:   Good thing Peter Lemkin has all those practicers of the Deep Politics "ethos" over there on DPF and got rid of the troublemakers like myself (who happen to post correct evidence that disproved Lauren and Jim D)...Trust me, this isn't about somebody suffering wicked injustices for posting the truth against an ignorant, hypocritical majority while following the posted site rules...No...It is an obsessed member who refuses to understand the greater principles Jim, Peter, and Lauren embody...


You have to understand that posting sophisticated evidence that disproves 95% of the community on a major controversial issue is something that Peter and his sensibilities can't tolerate and it isn't just Peter banning somebody because he posts evidence that Peter's too stupid to understand...Dawn too...

The one thing it definitely isn't is power-abusing site authorities abusing their moderator power to not admit they were wrong...That is the one thing we know it couldn't be...

Well Brian, I certainly have difficulty trying to reconcile a stated agenda with actual DPF moderating practices. Case in point, the PrayerPerson discussion, that was relegated to the DPF BearPitForum, but yet when certain posters steered the SecondFloorLunchRoomEncounter thread into the PrayerPerson debate, it appeared as though moderation did not apply. But, enough about DPF, except I am still "concerned" as to why my access was blocked. Not banned, or put on moderation, as no rule violation warranted any action. So, after switching to another computer/IPA I was then able to access at will. But, after "signing on", and posting once or twice, all of a sudden that computer/IPA was knocked off-line, and site access ability was again lost. So, still investigating that situation. But, as stated, no need for tying up threads discussing another forum, and if need be, we can seek a seperate discussion venue.

Online Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2395
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #77 on: April 20, 2018, 05:44:03 PM »
Larry:

The Prayer Man issue on the Deep Politics forum is not about the truth of the shadowy figure's identity...The issue is whether certain members, because they have a moderator, founding member, or administrator avatar, can shirk their own rules and the purpose of their website and operate outside their own posted sites rules as infallible members...

Lemkin is especially pathetic because he turned against me and made up non-existent rules in order to justify my banning...Lemkin said I was violating the Deep Political "ethos" the board was based on...What a pathetic liar...He obviously did that because he knew there was no site rule I had violated and needed to come up with a reason...The board rules very specifically state that a valid reason is needed to ban a long term member...Any intelligent person who watched the debate would see that the real reason was I had successfully shown that the moderators had mismanaged the board and not followed their own rules...The board is supposed to run by a very formal and intelligent set of democratic site rules...Dawn's reaction to this lynching? "I don't give a rat's ass"...There you see the true face of DPF and its dirty clique...

Lauren is a liar too...He pre-empted my banning by saying I was not being banned for my Prayer Man evidence...Any reading of the involved threads will see that my banning was solely based on the Prayer Man issue and Lauren is lying...It goes to show what a shallow-minded character he is that he would ban a person with much more intelligent talent than himself on the dishonest and unintelligent basis of "repeated behavior"...Again, any reading of the involved threads would see that 'repeated behavior' was my insisting that Lauren obey his own site rules as moderator in regard to the Prayer Man issue...Lauren spent over 2 years abusing his moderator power in order to not have to admit he was wrong on the Prayer Man issue and had abused the member who proved the correct evidence as his own rule #14 encourages...If you examine Lauren's moderation he never references the site rules like he is required to do...Lauren is a liar and his input was an exercise in avoiding the evidence each time it was brought up for over 2 years (because he knew he was wrong but didn't want to admit it)...Magda put a real ******* in charge of the forum and she is at fault...Magda, of course, agreed with Lauren that Prayer Man was Oswald 2 years ago shortly before my 3 month vacation from the site... Both Peter and Lauren complained about my "obsession" with the topic...Both of them being too stupid and dishonest to realize their failure to admit the correct evidence and obey their own site rules was the source of the problem...Magda allows Lauren to run the board like his own personal website...She is the one to blame...This issue was 100% based on Magda and Lauren abusing their site power in order not to admit they were both wrong on Prayer Man and therefore were running their site backwards according to their own rules...They all avoided the site rules in my banning because they knew they came in in my favor...

Any intelligent person will see that the problem arises from the fact Lauren isn't smart enough to evaluate evidence...He uses Jim DiEugenio as a guide to technical evidence and doesn't want to be exposed as being incompetent...Lauren got his meanest when members pointed out the rules he was violating...Magda allowed Lauren to delete and lock threads where members cited the rules and asked Lauren to obey them as those same rules require...Lauren was allowed to convert an issue where he was clearly in the wrong and abusing his moderator power way beyond its intended purpose to the victims being wrong and his never having to answer for his wrongdoing...He moderated the board backwards and against the rules...He managed to exploit the conflict of interest of the phony insider members and their need to not admit they were not up to snuff in living up to their own rules...The Prayer Man issue was converted to Lauren struggling not to expose his incompetency and abusing his moderator power...That's a complete destruction of the site's credibility and purpose but those insider phonies don't care as long as they are in charge...Dirty Jim D is very happy with this and congratulates the moderators for their dirty lynching after staying out of the discussion that proved he was wrong...Jim is now infallible thanks to Lauren and doesn't have to answer for his deliberate promotion of bad evidence and contemptuous violation of the DPF rules...

The DPF board isn't about credible discussion of evidence and determining the true facts of the JFK assassination...It is about serving the avatar-bearing members of DPF and their rank contempt for their own rules as overseen by one major dumb-ass and bully known as Lauren Johnson...The board is mis-labeled...It should be called the Jim DiEugenio fan club...Lauren doesn't know what he is doing and he shouldn't be moderator...Lauren moderates by serving Jim D and the other avatar-bearers and therefore has a permanent job...He's a low-intellect social media-type and popularity mugwump who is unfit for research oversight...Truth be damned...   
« Last Edit: April 20, 2018, 07:33:46 PM by Brian Doyle »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #77 on: April 20, 2018, 05:44:03 PM »

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #78 on: April 22, 2018, 09:13:23 PM »
In Reply while still getting used to this format, as I recall, some years back now, probably about 2013, I read a claim on another forum that the virtually impossible to identify image seen in shadow on the Elm St entrance landing to the Texas School Book Depository was actually accused Lone Gunman Assassin LeeHarveyOswald.

For various reasons, I failed to see any validity for said claim, especially being made some 50 years after the 11/22/'63 assassination of USP JohnFitzgeraldKennedySr, and critical wounding of TG JohnBowdenConnallyJr. It just doesn't seem possible for LHO to have been among several occupants, most, if not all who knew him, or at least recognized him, and yet after 50 years to then be "discovered" standing on the landing as the shooting occurred, and therefore could not have been a LGA.

To me, the image as viewable, appears more likely female and not male, but there is sufficient landing area occupants/eyewitnesses that testified that LHO was not on the landing at the time of filming within seconds of the shots being fired.

But, there is more evidence that the pictured/filmed image is not LHO, as DPD Motorcycle Officer MarrionLewisBaker, along with TSBD Building Superintendent RoySansomTruly testified that they encountered LHO on the 2nd floor, at the lunchroom, at about 90 seconds after the last shot. And, he was there when they reached said floor.

To claim that the image is of a male is one thing, but to promote the LeeHarveyOswald is PrayerManTheory is to me in defiance of common sense. Far too much evidence indicates otherwise.

That said, I base my conclusion about PrayerWoman on what little I see, added to known area occupants/eyewitnesses testimony regarding the steps/landing area at or about 12:30pm CST on 11/22'63. And, said conclusion indicates to me that Ms PaulineRebmanSanders and Ms SarahDeanStanton are  the two most likely candidates, with a slight edge to Ms Stanton as PrayerWoman.

That said, I have yet to place any accuracy and/or validity to any "produced picture enhancement" that I have seen so for. But I do wonder, as I wander, if any effort has and/or can be made to "enhance" the shaded entrance landing area as seen in the Tina Towner Film of the JFK Sr Motorcade as it turns onto Elm St just seconds before the shots were fired.

For clarification, I make no claim to be the first to dispute the LHO as PM Theory. And, I am confident that I am not. However, I do not recall ever not disputing said theory, and I am confident of that as well.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2019, 04:06:13 PM by Larry Trotter »

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #79 on: April 24, 2018, 09:54:32 PM »
As time flies, with all said and done
Be not surprised, should she be the one




JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #79 on: April 24, 2018, 09:54:32 PM »

 

Mobile View