04-03-2017, 06:53 PM
Albert Doyle Wrote:The hijackers on the Education Forum are on a jihad and are now putting Bill Miller on ignore because he dared point out the truth on the Murphy material that is now transforming correct Assassination history. This is being initiated by Prudhomme who has learned the trick that if you pretend haughty offense and violation of supposed research standards that you can bully people away from having to answer their points. Larsen, being one of the weakest participants sees the opening and joins right in. These people are Murphy zealots who will use any trick or logic to push their bogus Murphy-inspired theories through. They have the approval of Ray Mitcham, who, as usual, shows up to troll the victim right on time while offering no serious input towards the subject.
The Murphy gang are missing an important point. The woman seen running to the portal is Gloria Calvery, so where she is out on Elm is interesting, but unimportant in the overall conspiracy evidence. When reading the Murphy-ites' material it is important to keep in my mind that they are doing this solely for the purpose of compromising the main evidence in order to bring enough doubt to allow their Prayer Man theory to fly. A smart person who watches their approach will see that when they get caught by evidence they respond by dodging the direct matter they've been called on and focusing on the next link in the chain in order to avoid directly answering and to keep the Murphy doubt going. Right now Prudhomme has succeeded in his dramatics and aggression to avoid the fact Miller has reasonably shown that it is indeed Calvery who is seen running up to the portal in the Couch/Darnell films and that the testimony of others reasonably shows that she indeed did follow Baker up and in around 30 seconds after the shots. If you pay attention to the method used by the Murphy-ites when Miller posted the witnessing of Piper and West that attested to Truly entering with a cop whom the timing necessitates to be Baker, Prudhomme mocked Piper and West as being unreliable (straight out of ROKC's playbook) but didn't really show any valid reason to doubt their witnessing. Prudhomme's mocking those witnesses is good enough and becomes precedent. No one points out to Larsen and Prudhomme that that response isn't good enough and they haven't adequately or honestly addressed Miller's evidence. This dishonest and uncredible non-answer then becomes the foundation upon which excuse-seeking Larsen and Prudhomme then condemn Miller and put him on ignore. This is the same dishonest business they used against me in the Prayer Man threads. It is obvious to credible posters that Larsen and Prudhomme are two pro-Murphy con-men who are using aggressive dishonesty to compensate for the failures in their arguments without anyone calling them on it because of the dishonest bias existing on the subject. The two people who are losing the argument are using more than obvious disingenuous sophistry and defense lawyer techniques to avoid the obvious evidence that shows Baker went up the steps and into the building. The reason their are gaps in the testimony on this is because at the time it was assumed this obvious act didn't need any further detailing. The only reason the demand arises now is because of persons like Prudhomme have made strong efforts to force incriminating meaning on those gaps with the assumption that they indicate radical departure from the previously assumed events.
This business has gone on for too long and is now more a failure of community and moderator oversight than failure of those who promote Murphy. There has to be a point where a decision is made that the Murphy based hocus pocus is not credible and does not disprove the previously accepted definition of things like Lovelady and Shelley and Truly and Baker. Do the members and moderators of those sites realize that these Murphy research thugs have now aggressively gone after Bill Miller for exclusion when in fact Bill has made a very good case that every single issue they raised was not based on sound evidence and in turn the official accounts they were questioning almost certainly turn out to be the way they were described? These Murphy posters need to be brought under control because they have succeeded in creating and unstable and damaging situation within the core of the research community. Bob Prudhomme is full of crap and his entries are mostly based on disingenuous protest that we don't have any evidence in response to reasonable evidence that he hasn't adequately answered. More credible internet JFK researchers would see that although Bob has brought great doubt on Lovelady and Shelley being caught walking down the Elm St Extension, the simple film provably captures them doing so immediately after the shots. This should end the question with most reasonable researchers, but not for Bob who doesn't want to give up the years of time-wasting bogus theories he has pumped in to these Kennedy research websites over the last 4 years. It turns out that Bob's presumptive speculation based on the testimonies was wrong as simply proven by the film evidence. This creates a final answer that in turn allows more reasonable people to put the Depository scenario together. But Bob can't allow that because his game only involves hacking the evidence and creating perpetual doubt that he can then work his Prayer Man theory into. What we have is Murphy-crazed posters with less skill being allowed to regressively force reasonably debunked claims perpetually without any final determination. If you view Bob's input he avoids answering that the plaid of Lovelady's shirt has been adequately identified and that Shelley's head was matched to the other man.
Larsen is now trying to pose himself as the man who showed Baker did not run to the steps. He's doing so because the Darnell film cuts off right as Baker veers. The truth is this phenomenon is probably caused either by lens-edge distortion or more likely the fact the people on the sidewalk forced the running Baker to jump right at the last moment. Typical of the Murphy-ites they take immediate advantage of what is out of visibility to force a completely unevidenced counter scenario that has absolutely no evidence behind it except for their imaginations. Again, this is all done under the motive of loosening the evidence in order to insert Oswald into Sarah Stanton's body up on the landing. A situation now exists where the moderators have allowed these Murphy zealots to attack good posters and wage an exclusion campaign against them when in fact they are the ones who showed the better evidence. Miller's claims have testimony and witnessing behind them. The necessary witnessings that Larsen's and Prudhomme's counter scenarios require do not exist. Zero. It is actually Larsen and Prudhomme who are guilty of what they accuse others of, with the moderators standing by and letting them do it. Meanwhile what you are seeing in Darnell is Baker veering right to avoid piling into the people lined up to go up the steps. He then went around them and proceeded up the steps and in as testified. Prudhomme's repeated, self-serving "where is the evidence for that?' is not an adequate counter to what all the rest of the evidence reasonably shows. His defense attorney play-acting isn't working and doesn't serve as any adequate honest approach to the evidence. And his aggressive response to this basic point doesn't get him around it. The reason Bob refuses to honestly crunch the necessary conclusions the 3 minute delay being debunked leads to is because he knows it disproves his imaginary bs in the portal. Larsen and Bob's other pro-Murphy pals help him get around that and are now making their final thuggish move on Miller (based on principle of all things!).
Really? Oh, what should we do ?