+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Challenge (/thread-14618.html)
Challenge - Alan Ford - 01-04-2016
Ray Mitcham Wrote:Nice post, Alan.
Don't expect any specific details from Conehead.
What a delightful surprise! Look whose back! Hey, Jerry, one cold Guinness please, and bring this distinguished gentleman whatever he wants. Good to see you, Mr. Mitcham. Enjoy your day sir. Cheers!
*back later to add yet another instance placing the wrongfully accused right where he said he was, quote, "out with Bill Shelley in front" (Wow! multiple specifics in a single sentence) There's a reason for that.
Meanwhile, deep into Day Four of this Challenge, (0) specifics for prayer woman, prayer person, prayer thing, prayer it, prayer boy, prayer girl, prayer teen, prayer ghost, prayer add a choice.,,(0) specifics four days into this Challenge (there's a reason for that).
*Credit Ace Card JFK-Assassination Researcher Sean Murphy
Challenge - Alan Ford - 02-04-2016
Hi there! How are you today?
Now, entering Day Five (5) of the Challenge, let's recap briefly to determine where we stand.
Still standing at only one entity offering any evidence based specifics, Prayer Man. There's a reason for that.
"The [TSBD]superintendent [Truly] would recall later that he & a policeman met Oswald as they charged into the building after the shots were fired."
[FONT=&]*credit Ace card researcher Mr. Murphy (Sean) for producing the above three years ago via Mr. Biffle (Kent), a news reporter, Dallas Morning News, tailing Mr. Truly as the assassination aftermath unfolded.
We know Captain Fritz didn't jot down a notation in his interrogation notes w/the wrongfully accused to suggest he himself was, quote, "out with Bill Shelley in front" Why did they hide this airtight alibi from public view/consumption for decades? There's a reason for that.
*Credit Ace Card Researcher Sean Murphy
"They saw no one there" (There's a reason for that) The fix was in, and the framing of an innocent party was well underway.
A better understand of the origins and background information relative to Prayer Man is just a click away folks -----> http://www.reopenkennedycase.org/prayer-man-faq
Enjoy your day. Cheers!
[/FONT]
Challenge - Alan Ford - 02-04-2016
There's been some discussion relative to Sarah Stanton's whereabouts on the afternoon in question. On two separate instances, given by two different people (Mr. Frazier, Buell Wesley and Mrs. Sanders, Pauline), Ms/Mrs. Stanton is positioned polar opposite of Prayer Man's specific position.
An additional detail relative to the heavy set Ms. Stanton, 41, who works on the 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] floor comes via Billy Lovelady's engagement with FBI agents on the evening of the assassination relative to the Altgen's 6 photo…
*Credit Willy Loman site
Did you note what Mr. Lovelady said in reference about the lady who works here on the 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] floor?. Yes, she is shading her eyes from the Sun. Let's take a look at Mr. Frazier's and Mr. Lovelady's 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] floor heavy set lady shading her eyes --Ã
https://willyloman.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/altgens-6-ue-large-best-proc1.jpg
Please note that in yet another revealing detail, both figures shading their eyes are dressed in light tops, completely opposite of Prayer Man's dark shirt.
Moving along now, on the matter with Captain Fritz's interrogation of the wrongfully accused, here is a floor plan of the 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] floor of the Dallas Police Department Headquarters ---Ã
*Credit top shelf researcher Mr. Griggs (Ian) w/a dip of the hat to exemplary research team RoKC as I borrow their relevant material
Upon Locating Captain Will Fritz's office. Did you note what is housed directly across from his office? Yes, a professionally designed/equipped Interview Room. Here we have the most high profile case in the history of their department, let alone their State, the nation and world, yet there was no audio and/or video footage of the wrongfully accused's interrogation period (twelve+ hours). Why?
There is a reason for that.
It is much easier to frame an innocent party with hearsay "evidence" than dare to allow him/her access to a public forum (i.e. audio and/or video footage). It's even easier when someone is dead, with no recourse at all to address any falsehoods (To wit, I remember that time E. Howard Hunt (RIP) instructed me to break the murder weapon into many separate pieces and have one of our underlings take a boat out on the Potomac River and simply drop each piece down into the murky depths one by one several miles apart in the distance shore).
Why would audio and video footage of this high profile case be avoided like the plague? There's a reason for that.
Why did they hide the wrongfully accused's airtight alibi from public view/consumption for decades? There's a reason for that.
Why did Captain Fritz lie about the existence of these interrogation notes? There's a reason for that.
There's also a reason why to date amid this Challenge that only one entity has recorded specific evidence based instances where he is precisely where he says he was when a barrage of gunfire erupted in Dealey Plaza that afternoon.
On the eve of Day Six (6) of this Challenge, The combined efforts of prayer woman, prayer person, prayer thing, prayer it, prayer ghost, prayer _______, etc., still stands at (0) specifics. There's a reason for that. No specific name to offer into evidence to be examined under closer inspection, no credible explanation around the "any strangers" litmus test, essentially they have nothing (0). Tomorrow is a different day, let's see what unfolds, more (0's) or some specifics with substance.
Challenge - Alan Ford - 04-04-2016
On the eve of Day Seven (7) of this Challenge, The combined efforts of prayer woman, prayer person, prayer thing, prayer it, prayer ghost, prayer _______, etc., still stands at (0) specifics. There's a reason for that.
No specific name to offer into evidence to be examined under closer inspection, no credible explanation around the "any strangers" litmus test, essentially they have nothing (0). There is a reason for that.
Prayer Man, however, was met at the front entrance by Officer Marrion Baker and Mr. Truly ----> "The [TSBD]superintendent [Truly] would recall later that he & a policeman met Oswald as they charged into the building after the shots were fired."
[FONT=&]*credit Ace card researcher Mr. Murphy (Sean) for producing the above three years ago via Mr. Biffle (Kent), a news reporter, Dallas Morning News, tailing Mr. Truly as the assassination aftermath unfolded.[/FONT]
Prayer Man told his interrogators he was, quote, "out with Bill Shelley in front" (a statement filled with multiple specifics).
Further evidence running counter to the fairytale script about Mr. Oswald's guilt comes via an article in a Cincinnati newspaper dated November 28, 1963, where policemen reported early on in this case that the wrongfully accused, quote, "Some policemen say he was seen sulking" in the building during the assassination aftermath. I'll have to read the article in its entirety to determine it's validity, but it's hard to believe a cold-bloodied killer would be sulking inside the building where he supposedly committed his deed. Didn't he have a bus and cab to catch as he made a hasty getaway? More to follow.
Meanwhile, in respect to this thread's Challenge, tomorrow is a different day, let's see what unfolds, more (0's) or finally some specifics with substance about prayer woman, prayer person, prayer thing, prayer it, prayer ghost, prayer__________, etc.
*Credit Ace Card Researcher Mr. Murphy (Sean)
Challenge - Ray Mitcham - 04-04-2016
Alan Ford Wrote:Ray Mitcham Wrote:Nice post, Alan.
Don't expect any specific details from Conehead.
What a delightful surprise! Look whose back! Hey, Jerry, one cold Guinness please, and bring this distinguished gentleman whatever he wants. Good to see you, Mr. Mitcham. Enjoy your day sir. Cheers!
Thank you for your welcome, Alan. I might take you up on that offer, if we ever meet.
Challenge - Alan Ford - 04-04-2016
Ray Mitcham Wrote:Alan Ford Wrote:Ray Mitcham Wrote:Nice post, Alan.
Don't expect any specific details from Conehead.
What a delightful surprise! Look whose back! Hey, Jerry, one cold Guinness please, and bring this distinguished gentleman whatever he wants. Good to see you, Mr. Mitcham. Enjoy your day sir. Cheers!
Thank you for your welcome, Alan. I might take you up on that offer, if we ever meet.
You're certainly welcome, Mr. Mitcham
It's individuals like yourself that prompts me to genuinely consider putting some travel expenses aside to actually attend an event someday. November is still yonder there on the horizon, so hopefully a major event is in the works/planning stages, where researchers may convene for a few days. Learn, fellowship, relax and unwind, etc. Securing a panel of speakers, securing comfortable accommodations, etc. must be a logistic challenge I'm sure, but what a wonderful lifetime experience to fellowship with some of the best and finest in one setting. I won't hold you to it but you strike me as an ideal Master of Ceremonies, engaging yet wise in a time management sense as well, moving the proceedings along smoothly at an adept pace, while making the audience and panel alike feel comfortable.
Moving along now to the seventh day of this Challenge, here's yet another instance bolstering the wrongfully accused being none other than Prayer Man:
(A) in their initial same day notes, Inspector Thomas Kelly and FBI agent James Bookout place Mr. Oswald downstairs on the first floor eating his lunch in the domino room, with one saying the wrongfully accused ate alone, while Mr. Kelly said the wrongfully accused claimed to eat with a couple of his fellow employees, notably James "Junior" Jarman; however, after the wrongfully accused's death, Mr. Bookout suddenly alters his initial same day notes to infer (unlike his earliest FBI report bearing no mention of the wrongfully accused being stopped by a police officer) that Oswald encounters a policeman in the 2nd floor lunchroom. (Much easier to create "evidence" after someone is dead).There's a reason for that.
(B) Now, getting back to Inspector Kelly's notes where he claimed the now deceased wrongfully accused said he ate lunch with Mr. Jarman, nothing could be further from the truth. All the wrongfully accused said was he saw Mr. Jarman and another "short Negro" whose name he didn't know. The truth here is that as late as 12:25PM as Mr. Jarman and his short friend made their way around to the back of the building to head up to their final destination to view the parade up on the 5th floor, the wrongfuly accused saw them, nothing more, nothing less; however, because the fix was in they tainted this encounter with a self-serving lie: suggesting that the wrongfully accused claimed he had lunch with these men. Why did the encounter on the first floor have to be watered down to discredit the wrongfully accused? Because if he lied about having lunch with Mr. Jarman, he must be lying about everything else.
Curiously enough, Warren Commission counselor Ball in his exchange with Mr. Jarman made sure for the record to ask him if ate his lunch with the wrongfully accused. Without batting an eye surely Mr. Jarman's response would be "no", because, after all that is the truth. Oh, how clever to paint the wrongfully accused as a sneaky liar though. However, on a good note, both Mr. Jarman and his shorter friend, within their respective Warren Commission testimonies do place the wrongfully accused down on the first floor as late as 12:25. That presents a real problem for the fairytale script of his guilt. If these gentlemen place the wrongfully accuse downstairs as late as 12;25, then it begs the question, Who are the two individuals Mr. Rowland (Arnold) sees handling guns in the windows above at 12:15PM?
As the excitement outside ramped up, its not frivolous to believe the wrongfully accused simply left the domino room sometime between 12:26-12:30 and stepped outside on the entrance stairs to view the parade. Given the position he takes up, and the movement of Mr. Lovelady's head as depicted in film to acknowledge a sudden movement/presence, he simply had no choice but to take that position given the crowded steps. Hold on a sec have to open a jar of salsa for Em more to follow...
Over this seven day Challenge, specific evidence, from officialdom and his coworkers alike, has been shared daily bolstering the chances that Prayer Man is the wrongfully accused. To date, we have yet to hear any specifics at all related to prayer woman, prayer person, prayer thing, prayer it, prayer ghost, prayer ______, etc. There is a reason for that. None of those entities have specific names, nor a credible explanation to explain away the "any strangers" litmus test. Essentially, they have nothing (0).
*Credit Ace Card Researcher Mr. Murphy (Sean)
[FONT=&]
[/FONT]
Challenge - Albert Doyle - 04-04-2016
Gilbride has posted an intelligent synopsis of my height argument on the Education Forum that cuts through Alan's too easily accepted, tedious ROKC propaganda and also proves Josephs and DiEugenio ignored good science and therefore violated their research ethics.
Gilbride didn't go far enough with the sun glow evidence which proves it beyond a doubt.
Trask says Darnell is 70-75 feet from Frazier which means Drew's trigonometry comes into play (which is the real photogrammetry here). So much for not bringing enough to the table.
Challenge - Ray Mitcham - 04-04-2016
Hey, Albert/Brian/Ralph/Conehead, Buttons, tell us how a person standing in front of a person of the same height will appear shorter, in a photograph due to perspective. Use your "scientific " methods.::rofl::
Challenge - Albert Doyle - 04-04-2016
Ray Mitcham Wrote:Hey, Albert/Brian/Ralph/Conehead, Buttons, tell us how a person standing in front of a person of the same height will appear shorter, in a photograph due to perspective. Use your "scientific " methods.::rofl::
Ray is confused and is misquoting what I said.
What I said was since Fratini's Tie Man was standing inside the foyer and Prayer Man was up at the front of the landing, that their appearing as equal in height would mean - by perspective - that Prayer Man would be shorter than Tie Man.
Ray has no idea of what he is talking about so he attacks this ignorantly because he doesn't understand it. Really, ignorance like this is the main problem with this issue.
Challenge - Alan Ford - 04-04-2016
Good afternoon, Mr. Mitcham
In respect to height/measurements, you are on solid ground in spite of any protest to the contrary.
Moreover, though I won't share it at this time, I do have an image with Prayer Man and officialdom's Doorway man on the same plane. The problem that presents for anyone still believing Prayer Man isn't taller than 5'6" is upon comparison alongside Doorway Man he is the taller figure. So, if Doorway Man aka Billy Nolan Lovelady is 5'8", and Prayer Man presents an inch taller in the same picture, then Prayer Man cannot be only 5'6". Again, I am choosing to hold onto the image and allow as many people to jump upon the measurement "evidence" if they so choose. There's a time and place for presenting the image in question.
Right now though, we are still looking for some specific, substantial evidence-based material for prayer woman, prayer person, prayer thing, prayer it, prayer ghost, prayer ______, etc. That said, Mr. Mitcham, I find it rather interesting that prayer woman--still some nine months later--does not have a specific name. Nor does she offer a credible explanation to explain away the "any strangers" litmus test. There's a reason for that.
This Challenge was extended to determine if the other entities she has spawned (prayer person, prayer thing, prayer it, prayer ghost, etc.) could fair any better. Thus far nada (0)
Only one figure since this Challenge's introduction a week ago has managed to provide specific evidence-based facts surrounding his whereabouts that afternoon. Every other prayer ______ To date has failed miserably to offer even one specific, let alone any credible, substantial, evidenced based ones at all.
There's a reaon for that.
*Credit Ace Card Researcher Mr. Murphy (Sean)