(09-04-2024, 07:42 PM)Brian Doyle Wrote: You're a troll Mr Ford, as your trollish answers above show...You ignored the elbow-length sleeve in Owens matching the elbow-length sleeve on Prayer Man...You can't do that and still be credible...
On the contrary, Mr. Doyle, I haven't ignored the so-called elbow-length sleeve in Owens (Who is Owen & and What are you talking about?)
The only problem here is a lack of moderation to remove you from further trolling serious posts...
Trust me, Mr. Doyle, don't humour yourself, IF your posts were indeed serious, the exemplary moderation here on this site and elsewhere would have no issue with addressing me and/or anyone else if deemed necessary to do so sir.
Recently someone (Davidson?) noticed that there was a clear frame in Darnell...Davidson used his digital filters to enhance the clearly-seen female dress neckline on Prayer Man in that image...If you go to my Prayer Woman Facebook page you will see that I even found the bottom edge of that same neckline in Murphy's more blurry Prayer Man frame from Darnell...That neckline and bare female chest skin is in both images and is a done deal...The Prayer Man people are using their corrupted control to ignore this and they are tolerating trolls like yourself...The research community doesn't want to admit the embarrassing fact that it went to mob mode when it banned me in 2016 for refuting Prayer Man...That mob is still in charge...
Please don't use Mr. Davidson's name in vain, because IF Mr. Davidson (Chris) had indeed noticed, quote, a clear frame in Darnell, unquote, he would do the honourable thing akin to the exemplary researcher he is and immediately shared his indisputable evidence that Prayer Man is indeed a female. Ask yourself why he hasn't done that, Mr. Doyle? Answer: You are making that frame "clear" to fit your self-serving narrative, nothing more, nothing less. Sarah Stanton isn't a male figure, Mr. Doyle, no matter how much you huff and puff sir.
Sandy Larsen was appointed moderator on the Prayer Man-only Education Forum because Gordon knew he would back-up his Prayer Man bullshit dependably...
I disagree, Mr. Doyle, Has it ever occurred to you that Mr. Larsen (Sandy) inherited his duties due to his lengthy tenure as a member in good standing? Nothing more, nothing less, IF he was promoting your Sarah Stanton fantasy you wouldn't have any issues with him. Truth is, Mr. Doyle, you have a hard time admitting when you are wrong. Sarah Stanton isn't a male figure nor did she stand in his position atop those entrance steps to the TSBD.
Kathy Beckett is a research non-entity and is only good for teasing the unfairly banned in order to bolster her social media relationships...She has no research skill or resume...She is the type who would let herself be used as an excuse to prevent a cracking of the case and isn't credible...You'll never see Beckett say "Don't ban that obviously important evidence on my account" and that is the main problem here...
On the contrary, Mr. Doyle, Ms. Beckett has more research acumen than you care to admit.
I get that that's a fact that doesn't align with your fantasy about what you yourself deem as "important evidence". There was a time when I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, initially reasoning that you cared more about where the actual evidence would lead in this case as opposed to crafting phantom "evidence" to fit your self-serving narrative.
Until next time, Mr. Doyle, I leave you with this quote from a man and musician you admire, in the hopes you care to listen & learn more moving forward as the JFK Research Community dares to shed light, truth and justice in this 60+ yrs old mystery surrounding the untimely death of a duly elected representative of the People on Friday, November 22, 1963...
"Knowledge speaks, but Wisdom listens" -- Jimi Hendrix
|
Moderator Sandy Larsen
|
 
11-04-2024, 06:02 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-04-2024, 06:16 PM by Brian Doyle.)
On the contrary, Mr. Doyle, I haven't ignored the so-called elbow-length sleeve in Owens (Who is Owen & and What are you talking about?)
It is always a mistake to give the dignity of a response to a troll however, the Owens Film image of Sarah Stanton exiting the Depository after she was questioned is seen in the linked Education Forum post...Morissette thinks Owens was 2 hours after the shots...The first thing that should be noticed is the fact Stanton is hugging the west wall of the portal in her exit - just like she did when she was standing in that same spot during the assassination...Stanton liked that spot and she stood in it on both occasions...She was probably waiting for a ride home... If you observe Morissette's linked thread you will see that he posted the images and asked for discussion from two of the main Prayer Man people...He never got any response from them because they were well aware that the new Owen's Film images of Sarah Stanton disproved Prayer Man...The Prayer Man people suddenly got gun-shy and did not respond to the proof Morissette was showing them...You see, when you have dirty moderators covering for you you don't have to respond to the proof you were calling for that disproved you...When you use banning to remove the people who posted it you don't have to respond to the correct evidence you were calling for...The Morissette thread shows that the Education Forum strategically uses censorship and banning to avoid recognition of correct evidence...The only reason I am being kept off the Education Forum is because the crook administrator there knows that if my evidence is given the place it has earned that their favored Prayer Man theory will be refuted and that crook Gordon is not going to allow that to happen as long as he has the banning knife at the throat of his members... While the Education Forum is full of technical experts like Chris Davidson and the Rube Goldberg analyst Andrej Stancak you will notice that none of them made any attempt to apply their photogrammetry to the Owens Film image of Stanton...They avoided it because they are fully aware that if they do a size and shape technical analysis of Stanton in Owens that she will perfectly match Prayer Man in Darnell...Especially in girth and height...Even Morissette didn't have the backbone to follow-through on his own proof and the opposition's cowardice and he meekly withdrew from his own thread...That asshole Gordon comes in with thundering threats and hopes you don't notice that him and his fellow crooks couldn't let Morissette's thread slide to oblivion fast enough...Morissette didn't get DiEugenio's click count with that one... If you look at the second frame Morissette posted from Owens you can just make out an elbow-length sleeve on Stanton where her skin is clearly divided from her dress sleeve...Compare this to the sleeve length on Prayer Man and it perfectly matches... Even though Gordon pretends to be interested in enforcing "correct evidence procedure when told" with life banning you'll notice that Morissette's technical proof was ignored by himself and he allowed Roger Odisio to post the wrong evidence on the Education Forum after they buried Morissette's thread...The Prayer Man people have hijacked the Education Forum so they use their dirty moderators to help slide the threads that refute Prayer Man off the board while lying about the reason for the banning of those who proved it... The Prayer Man people are desperately trying to avoid Owens...Even though the Prayer Man people did lengthy painstaking analysis of the Prayer Man photography on other films and photos they didn't touch the Owens Film at all and did nothing on it...No one is going out and looking for better frames from Owens and Davidson is not applying any of his digital enhancement processes on it to bring out more features...No one is looking for an Owens frame that shows the female dress neckline seen in Darnell...The only thing Gordon offers to account for the abject cowardice and dishonesty of the Education Forum's members is to say my nonsense would no longer be tolerated and I would not be let back on the EF (even though I offer by far the best analysis that settled the issue)...And, of course, there is no comment from "keep your record clean for Gordon" Sandy over all this or what the punishment would be for dirty moderating and member abuse... Alan Ford is a sick nut and a troll...He might even be Duncan MacRae himself...So I seriously doubt he'll give any other response to this conclusive evidence besides the obnoxious trolling he has already posted: https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic...ent-482788
The following two statements from Commission Exhibit 1381 rule out Sarah Stanton standing anywhere near let alone in the position maintained by Mr. Murphy's (Sean) Prayer Man male figure...
"I, Mrs . Robert E . (Pauline) Sanders, Sr ., freely furnish the following statement to Eugene F . Petrakis and A . Raymond Switzer, who have identified themselves to me as Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation . "I am a Caucasian female employed as a clerk-accountant at the Texas School Book Depository, 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Texas . I have been so employed for the past 61' years I reside at 4226 Delmar Street, Dallas, Texas, and was born November 6, 1908, Moran, Kansas . "At approximately 12 :20 PM on November 22, 1963, I left the lunchroom on the second floor of the building and went out the front entrance to await the arrival of the Presidential Motorcade which I knew was due to pass the Depository building at about 12 :30 PM . I took up a position at the top of the front steps of the Depository building facing Elm Street . To the best of my recollection I was standing on the top step at the east end of the entrance . "I recall that while standing there I noticed Mrs . Sarah Stanton standing next to me, but I am unsure as to the others . Mrs . Stanton is likewise an employee of the Texas School Book Depository . "To the best of my recollection I did not see Lee Harvey Oswald at any time on November 22, 1963, and although I knew him by sight as an employee of the building I did not know him by name and had never spoken to him at any time . "I do not recall seeing any strangers in the Texas School Book Depository building at any time on the morning of November 22, 1963 . "After the motorcade par carrying President John F . Kennedy passed, I remained a moment on the steps, then walked out to the concrete island in front of the Depository building to see what had happened . I remained there a moment and then returned to the Depository building through the main entrance . I then walked to the second floor where I usually work . and now this one... "I, Sarah D . Stanton, make the following statement to Thomas T . Trettis, Jr ., who has identified himself as a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation I presently reside at 227 North Ewing Street, Dallas, Texas . was born on 6-9-22 at Grand Prairie, Texas . I am a white female and am employed as a clerk at the Texas School Book Depository Building "When President John F . Kennedy was shot I was standing on the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository Building *WITH Mr . William Shelley, 126 South Tatum, Dallas, Mr . Otls Williams, 3429 Southwestern., Dallas, Mrs . R . E . SANDERS , 4226 Delmar, Dallas, and Billy Lovelady, 7722 Hume Drive, Dallas . All of the above are employed at the Texas Sc4,oo1 Book Depository Building . I heard three shots after the President's car passed the front of the building but I could not see the President's car at that time . I cannot say positively where the shots came from . I did not see Lee Harvey Oswald at that time or at any time during that day "I did not see any person in the Texas School Book Depository Building on the morning of 11-22-63 who was a stranger to me . "I left the Depository building about 2 :20 on the afternoon of 11-22-63 after giving the police our names and addresses . "I have read the above two page statement and St is true and correct to the best of my knowledge . "/s/Sarah D . Stanton,3/18/64, Dallas, Texas "Witnessed : /s/Thomas T . Trettis, Jr ., Special Agent, FBI, 3-18-64 Dallas, Texas "/s/E . J . Robertson, Special Agent, FBI, 3-18-64, Dallas, Texas ." Mr. Doyle continues to bend these factual statements in a desperate attempt to force his self-serving narrative upon the JFK Research Community, and then have the audacity to wonder Why?! no one believes his claim that Sarah Stanton was standing all alone in the Prayer Man figure position (even though she and Mrs. Sanders themselves--folks actually--in real time-- on the scene that fateful afternoon--say otherwise). Go figure. To his credit, cannot say Mr. Murphy (Sean) did not warn us way back in 2013 that some researchers, upon not being able to account for the lone male figure standing atop those entrance steps, would resort to desperation and have the audacity to insinuate he is a female. Mr. Doyle, be careful about asking others to present facts when you don't care to adhere to the same. Moving forward, I would suggest you make a good-faith effort to put a name on the male figure rather than take words out of the mouths of Mrs. Sanders & Mrs. Stanton mentioned above who were actually right there on the scene that fateful afternoon. If you are unable to put a Texas School Book Depository male employee to account for the Prayer Man male figure's position, I fully understand as there's a reason for that. The wrongly-accused did not shoot anybody. Anybody. (11-04-2024, 06:02 PM)Brian Doyle Wrote: On the contrary, Mr. Doyle, I haven't ignored the so-called elbow-length sleeve in Owens (Who is Owen & and What are you talking about?) Lest you forget to read, Mr. Doyle, take in these factual statements and try to let them sink in sir... The following two statements from Commission Exhibit 1381 rule out Sarah Stanton standing anywhere near let alone in the position maintained by Mr. Murphy's (Sean) Prayer Man male figure... "I, Mrs . Robert E . (Pauline) Sanders, Sr ., freely furnish the following statement to Eugene F . Petrakis and A . Raymond Switzer, who have identified themselves to me as Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation . "I am a Caucasian female employed as a clerk-accountant at the Texas School Book Depository, 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Texas . I have been so employed for the past 61' years I reside at 4226 Delmar Street, Dallas, Texas, and was born November 6, 1908, Moran, Kansas . "At approximately 12 :20 PM on November 22, 1963, I left the lunchroom on the second floor of the building and went out the front entrance to await the arrival of the Presidential Motorcade which I knew was due to pass the Depository building at about 12 :30 PM . I took up a position at the top of the front steps of the Depository building facing Elm Street . To the best of my recollection I was standing on the top step at the east end of the entrance . "I recall that while standing there I noticed Mrs . Sarah Stanton standing next to me, but I am unsure as to the others . Mrs . Stanton is likewise an employee of the Texas School Book Depository . "To the best of my recollection I did not see Lee Harvey Oswald at any time on November 22, 1963, and although I knew him by sight as an employee of the building I did not know him by name and had never spoken to him at any time . "I do not recall seeing any strangers in the Texas School Book Depository building at any time on the morning of November 22, 1963 . "After the motorcade par carrying President John F . Kennedy passed, I remained a moment on the steps, then walked out to the concrete island in front of the Depository building to see what had happened . I remained there a moment and then returned to the Depository building through the main entrance . I then walked to the second floor where I usually work . and now this one... "I, Sarah D . Stanton, make the following statement to Thomas T . Trettis, Jr ., who has identified himself as a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation I presently reside at 227 North Ewing Street, Dallas, Texas . was born on 6-9-22 at Grand Prairie, Texas . I am a white female and am employed as a clerk at the Texas School Book Depository Building "When President John F . Kennedy was shot I was standing on the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository Building with Mr . William Shelley, 126 South Tatum, Dallas, Mr . Otls Williams, 3429 Southwestern., Dallas, Mrs . R . E . Sanders, 4226 Delmar, Dallas, and Billy Lovelady, 7722 Hume Drive, Dallas . All of the above are employed at the Texas Sc4,oo1 Book Depository Building . I heard three shots after the President's car passed the front of the building but I could not see the President's car at that time . I cannot say positively where the shots came from . I did not see Lee Harvey Oswald at that time or at any time during that day "I did not see any person in the Texas School Book Depository Building on the morning of 11-22-63 who was a stranger to me . "I left the Depository building about 2 :20 on the afternoon of 11-22-63 after giving the police our names and addresses . "I have read the above two page statement and St is true and correct to the best of my knowledge . "/s/Sarah D . Stanton,3/18/64, Dallas, Texas "Witnessed : /s/Thomas T . Trettis, Jr ., Special Agent, FBI, 3-18-64 Dallas, Texas "/s/E . J . Robertson, Special Agent, FBI, 3-18-64, Dallas, Texas ." Stop bending these factual statements in a desperate attempt to force your self-serving narrative upon the JFK Research Community, and then have the audacity to wonder Why?! no one believes your claim that Sarah Stanton was standing all alone in the Prayer Man figure position (even though she and Mrs. Sanders themselves--folks actually--in real time-- on the scene that fateful afternoon--say otherwise). Go figure. The wrongly-accused did not shoot anybody. Anybody.
11-04-2024, 07:02 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-04-2024, 12:56 AM by Brian Doyle.)
Answer the Owens Film Mr troll...
You can't get away with intentionally-misrepresented statements to get out of answering the firm proof in Owens... You are quoting witnesses out of context...Those people are talking about where Stanton was standing 5 minutes before the shots...At the time of the shots Frazier made clear that "heavy-set" Stanton was over in the Prayer Man position...We know this because we can see Prayer Man pivot towards Frazier from the Wiegman Film to the Darnell Film...This was at the exact moment that Frazier said Stanton turned to him to tell him "I think she (Calvery) said the president has been shot"...Lovelady also confirmed this when he said that when the limousine passed the front steps that Stanton was "next to me to the far right of the entranceway"...You are trollishly ignoring this in order to intentionally misquote the witnesses and you shouldn't be allowed to do that on this site...The Hughes Film shows Prayer Man in the same spot Lovelady said Stanton was in at that time...The photo evidence also disproves you because if Stanton was to the left of Frazier, like you falsely quote, then we would clearly see her in Altgens because Altgens shows everything to Frazier's left in clear detail...She ain't there...She's "deepest in to the shadows" in the Prayer Man spot where Frazier more than clearly put her... "I could not see the President's car at that time ." The position to Frazier's left over by Pauline Sanders can see the limousine at the time of the shots...The Prayer Man position cannot and is blocked by the west wall of the portal...The Prayer Man trolls are so warped by their cult-like belief that they don't even realize when they are proving my evidence... And we haven't even mentioned the clearly-seen female dress neckline seen on Prayer Man in Darnell that the Education Forum moderators buried... If I was moderator, and you contemptuously ignored the Owens Film proof like you are doing above, you would be gone... (11-04-2024, 07:02 PM)Brian Doyle Wrote: Answer the Owens Film Mr troll...
12-04-2024, 06:38 PM
Alan Ford wrote:
" The Owens film does not represent any semblance to Mrs. Stanton. Lest you forget, Mr. Doyle, Mrs. Stanton's grand-daughter (W****) & I shared email exchanges. In one of those exchanges she shared pictures with me of Mrs. Stanton. The Owens film doesn't align with the excessive weight of Mrs. Stanton in 1963, nor does it align with her large girth and her expansive forearms either. A bit of advice, not that you will take it, stop forcing the "evidence" to fit your self-serving narrative. " You're nuts... The figure seen hugging the west side of the Depository front entrance is conclusively Sarah Stanton...You aren't credible if you think you can get away with not answering the fact that no member of the public would be allowed to stand in that position if they didn't have a reason to be there with all the cops you see in the same image...The person Morissette showed in Owens is very definitely Sarah Stanton and it is when she was allowed to leave after being interrogated on the second Floor...Morissette thinks it is 2pm...Wanda Daniel will most certainly confirm this despite Mr Ford's obnoxious trolling... Even though you lie and say the figure doesn't represent Stanton anyone can see it is clearly Stanton from her white hair and chubby-ness...If you observe this link you will see the figure in Owens perfectly matches Stanton and shows her face on that woman and maybe even the same dress: https://ibb.co/pnjvXWj The moderators on the JFK internet reserve the dirty trick of allowing obvious trolls like Alan Ford to chew you alive unopposed even though they are committing outright trolling like denying the woman in Owens is Stanton...Those moderators allow trolls like Ford to come in and troll that the woman isn't Stanton and then stand back and say nothing...There is no credible moderation or Peer Review on the Kennedy internet... I cannot proceed when the opposition is allowed to lie and troll that the woman in Owens isn't Stanton... Even though the Prayer Man people regularly post technical analyses on the Prayer Man photography they avoided doing so with Owens because they realized the woman in Owens would perfectly match Prayer Man in height and shape...Morissette was asking Davidson and Stancak to do such an analysis in his thread title and they declined...So much for "obeying correct evidence procedures when told"... Larsen and Gordon dishonestly ushered that thread off the board as quick as possible and did not take responsibility for what it showed... The JFK internet is organized around deliberate, strategic censorship and ignoring and isn't based on objective recognition of evidence...The clique...
15-04-2024, 05:08 PM
Larsen Wrote:
"I am opening this topic up to discussion. Any suggestions? What can be done to increase participation?" Well, if you are really asking, the first thing that should be done is an abusive moderator who is only interested in polishing his royal balls by abusing his moderator power should be controlled and have his powers reduced so he can't get away with beating down on certain posters under the guise of moderation...Especially when he is doing it to keep correct evidence off the board... A certain suck-up secondary moderator should not be allowed to get away with agreeing with every wrong decision that moderator makes and backing it up and never disagreeing with that main moderator's decisions...Nor should life bans be enforced over what is obviously the enforcement of friendships developed between moderators - which is just another form of moderator abuse...An unfairly banned member should not have a life ban enforced due to calling a moderator who left the forum long ago a bad name on a totally unrelated website...That's obviously an excuse and serves as moderator abuse and those moderators should not be allowed to get away with it...Especially when they are doing it in order to dumb-down the board and prevent important evidence...Those moderators offer the public a "Kennedy Assassination Evidence Debate Board" and then ban those who debate the best and prove the correct evidence...How does that work???...And then keep them off the board for life by means of the obvious bogus excuse of "name-calling"... And a new "administrator", who was only chosen because he would enforce the bogus Prayer Man Theory, should stop taking himself so seriously and stop enforcing the abusive moderation of those other aforementioned mods...That new administrator has yet to give a straight or honest answer as to why the correct solution for Prayer Man is still being disallowed on the site and disallowed by bogus excuses and moderation abuse...And saying Kathy Beckett was called a bad name on McAdams' website is not a valid reason... (12-04-2024, 06:38 PM)Brian Doyle Wrote: Alan Ford wrote: Mr. Doyle, Just a few questions for you to answer if you Dare: (A) IF the Owens image is of Sarah Stanton as you claim, Why is she now wearing white rather than the dark clothing donning the male figure in the Prayer Man position? She cannot be in a dark dress with a noticeable hemline according to your self-serving narrative and then suddenly donning a white blouse...make up your mind, Mr. Doyle. (B) Why is Prayer Man's hair dark while Mrs. Stanton's in contrast is obviously white? Make up your mind, Mr. Doyle, you cannot have your cake and eat it too. © Why is Mrs. Stanton's physique 3x the size of the Prayer Man male figure? Moreover, as he is captured in Mr. Darnell's (Jimmy) filming his forearms are 3x smaller than Mrs. Stanton's rather pronounced forearms, Why is that, Mr. Doyle? Both his forearms--in Darnell--put together don't come even close to just one of hers. Looking forward to you either ignoring these questions altogether as you cower away, Or, do what you do best and start playing musical chairs with timing sequences amid crafting a sudden crafty introduction of an onsite TSBD clothing-boutique-changing-booth. Facts matter, Mr. Doyle, dare you to answer the above questions. If you cannot, no great surprise, there's a reason for that. The wrongly-accused did not shoot anybody. Anybody.
16-04-2024, 05:48 PM
The meek Denis Morissette, who failed to defend his own discovery against those who were trying to ignore it on the Education Forum, decided to put me on block after he mismanaged his attempt to discuss Stanton in Owens...So I can't go ask him to come here and inform the troll Alan Ford that the woman in Owens has irrefutably been proven to be Stanton...This is a good example of the demented input that Duncan MacRae and Greg Parker's websites encouraged in the credible research community...The troll Alan Ford is getting away with taking one of the only refuges for serious research down to the Cinque/Parker level by denying that the obvious image of Stanton seen in Owens is Stanton...
This is where the dirty moderation on the Kennedy internet shows its true purpose...Alan is a sick troll who should be automatically banned...In a credible community Stanton in Owens would be promoted and discussed in order to prove what it shows...In the current research community dirty moderators, who should never be let anywhere near JFK research, abuse their authority in order to disappear correct evidence by means of thread-sliding...In a healthy research community the issue of that woman's identity goes right to the Education Forum and a consensus of serious researchers establish that it is obviously Sarah Stanton...This current research community allows Larsen, Knight, and Gordon to abuse their authority and deliberately ignore the issue...The researcher with the correct proof is left to flap in the wind and be chewed to death by trolls while the violators bask in censorship-enforced false authority...When this wrongdoing is brought to the attention of those moderators they abuse their authority by switching the subject to trumped-up claims of site rules violations - never answering the main point of how they justify disallowing the most important correct evidence... In a credible community the fact that the woman in Owens is Stanton is responsibly brought to the fore and its significance is responsibly discussed...In this community the formats are hijacked and we are forced to listen to the personal grudges of abusive moderators being falsely transformed in to moderation actions...Those same moderators, however, never explain how they justify disallowing the correct conclusions on Prayer Man... Any credible analysis of Stanton in Owens would show that as soon as any of those Rube Goldberg photo analysts put their talents to size-comparing Stanton in Owens to Prayer Man in Darnell that they would match perfectly in height and shape...They know this, which is why they avoid doing it and the mods protect them...In the second frame Morissette presented you can see Stanton's dress sleeve ends at her elbow exactly like Prayer Man's...
Mr. Doyle,
Just a few questions for you to answer if you Dare: (A) IF the Owens image is of Sarah Stanton as you claim, Why is she now wearing white rather than the dark clothing donning the male figure in the Prayer Man position? She cannot be in a dark dress with a noticeable hemline according to your self-serving narrative and then suddenly donning a white blouse...make up your mind, Mr. Doyle. The Prayer Man male figure is wearing dark clothing... (B) Why is Prayer Man's hair dark while Mrs. Stanton's in sharp contrast is obviously white? Make up your mind, Mr. Doyle, you cannot have your cake and eat it too. © Why is Mrs. Stanton's physique 3x the size of the Prayer Man male figure? Moreover, as he is captured in Mr. Darnell's (Jimmy) filming his forearms are 3x smaller than Mrs. Stanton's rather pronounced forearms, Why is that, Mr. Doyle? Both his forearms--in Darnell--put together don't come even close to just one of hers. Looking forward to you either ignoring these questions altogether as you cower away, Or, do what you do best and start playing musical chairs with timing sequences amid crafting a sudden crafty introduction of an onsite TSBD clothing-boutique-changing-booth. Facts matter, Mr. Doyle, dare you to answer the above questions. If you cannot, no great surprise, there's a reason for that. The wrongly-accused did not shoot anybody. Anybody. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
| Possibly Related Threads… | |||||
| Thread | Author | Replies | Views | Last Post | |
| Why Mark Knight Should Never Be Allowed To Be A Moderator | Brian Doyle | 6 | 1,161 |
14-06-2024, 05:15 PM Last Post: Brian Doyle |
|
| Would someone give this info to Sandy Larson at the Ed Forum please! | Scott Kaiser | 40 | 32,054 |
17-12-2016, 02:20 AM Last Post: Scott Kaiser |
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)