10-03-2016, 02:55 AM
Albert Doyle Wrote:Drew,
The doubters are ignoring Fratini's Allen photo that showed a man just behind the glass in the portal. The foyer where that man was standing is on the same level as the portal landing. Fratini took the Darnell frame of Prayer man and aligned it next to the Allen photo of this man so they were side by side. Although Prayer Man's shins and feet are not visible this juxtaposition made it absolutely clear that this man in the Allen photo and Prayer Man had perfectly matching body proportions. What this means is Prayer Man was 100% standing on the landing and not on the first step down. Parker and Kamp have a problem because they said they thought Prayer Man was standing on the first step down because he was obviously too short. They said this obvious lack of height was explained by Prayer Man being on the first step down. Fratini's Allen photo evidence is brilliant because one look at it instantly makes clear that for Prayer Man to be on the first step down would require a grotesque extension of his legs from the shins down. Parker has a problem because he admitted he saw that Prayer Man was too short. Once Fratini proved Prayer Man was on the landing Parker had no comment. Parker doesn't want to admit he himself just proved Prayer Man can't be Oswald.
I think the landing is 4 feet wide because the glass door doesn't go past it when opened if you look at photos of the portal.
http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/ind....4144.html
.
I guess the only thing "off topic," is comparing Hargrove's reaction to Von Pein's penchant, with my pointing out this?:
http://www.ctka.net/2016/ArmstrongMailOr...rders.html
IOW, is every thread, in every forum, about Doyle's opinions related to his fixation?
When this thread was young, Alan Ford was sounding the alarm!
Quote:Heads Up!
With a tip of the hat to Mr. Hargrove (Jim), for caring enough about the research community to sound the alarm, please be aware folks that your comments may be in jeopardy of conveying more or less than what you are actually sharing, given the less than forthcoming tactics shared here --Ã ....
Mr. Ford reacted quite negatively to my point that at least when Von Pein copied the comments of others, he attributed their comments to them, and that Mr. Hargrove, himself, recently had not..... yet he was protesting about Von Pein.... Mr. Ford decided my point was somehow off topic.
Alan Ford Wrote:.......
Well said, Mr. Cross, appreciate the sensible reply chock full of wisdom.
That said, I respectfully ask a Moderator to shut my thread down at this point, before it's original premise is lost in the potential mushrooms that may form or evolve around it.
However, as we shut this down in hopes that should anyone have any further disagreement(s) over Mr. Armstrong's research with someone else they take the matter up via PM mode.
That said, don't let it be lost upon anyone, actual members and/or "Guests" reading along to what great length how the researcher Mr. Hargrove warns about would rather "win" with the last word however contrived or bias towards his fellow researchers. Thought I'd never see the day when someone wants to "win" so bad that misconstruing the words/context of others is more important than arriving at the genuine truth?!
Lee Harvey Oswald is an innocent victim.
At least Scott has some excuse for his blindness.
Peter Janney's uncle was Frank Pace, chairman of General Dynamics who enlisted law partners Roswell Gilpatric and Luce's brother-in-law, Maurice "Tex" Moore, in a trade of 16 percent of Gen. Dyn. stock in exchange for Henry Crown and his Material Service Corp. of Chicago, headed by Byfield's Sherman Hotel group's Pat Hoy. The Crown family and partner Conrad Hilton next benefitted from TFX, at the time, the most costly military contract award in the history of the world. Obama was sponsored by the Crowns and Pritzkers. So was Albert Jenner Peter Janney has preferred to write of an imaginary CIA assassination of his surrogate mother, Mary Meyer, but not a word about his Uncle Frank.