03-10-2017, 06:56 PM
Magda:
Tom Bowden has not offered one word of technical analysis on the issue. He hasn't addressed the Prayer Man evidence or the site rules that back our debunking of it. While Peter accuses us of being childish with our serious protest and analysis, the moderation then approves of a poster who mocks "water pistols at dawn" as his sole input to one of the most serious evidence issues in the JFK research community. This is entirely unfair and violates the Deep Politics site rules - only from the moderator side.
Meanwhile a serious issue of DPF members violating the rules and posting already-disproven bad evidence goes ignored. What this comes down to is a 95% majority of internet JFK researchers fell for the bogus Murphy Prayer Man theory, including Lauren and yourself, who, 2 years ago similarly posted an approval of the Murphy theory in the Prayer Man thread. I was then scolded for not heeding the "experts" David Josephs and David Healy and found myself on unexplained moderation for several months with the administrator not responding to my inquiries why (a violation of rule #13). Subsequently Chris Davidson posted a digital enhancement of the Wiegman film that undoubtedly proved Prayer Man was a woman. Analysis of Buell Frazier's 2013 6th Floor Museum interview showed Frazier acknowledged he was talking to Sarah at the time of the infamous Darnell shot of Prayer Man. It is beyond doubt that the woman seen in Davidson's enhancement is Depository employee Sarah Stanton. Those who openly endorsed the Murphy theory have been reluctant to admit they ridiculed and mistreated a member who happened to be correct. The board rules are there for a purpose and clearly they are not there for the reason of being ignored. Rule #13 requires moderators respond on an equal basis and we are now well in to the area of realizing the moderators acted improperly and did not respond to their own rules. We have presented a sound case for Prayer Man being Sarah Stanton that will confirm at the top levels of research that are the normal means of vetting practiced in the community and also regularly practiced by Jim DiEugenio.
Lauren sent me a PM saying he believed Prayer Man was not Oswald. He also said he didn't want to ban me because my other material was so excellent. Lauren never admitted that on the board and continued to punish material he privately admitted to. That's moderator abuse and a violation of the board rules. Lauren was not being honest about where he learned Oswald wasn't Prayer Man. It was from the member whose posts he was deleting and putting on suspension. Meanwhile Jim D was permitted to post ROKC Prayer Man material that Lauren privately admitted he didn't agree to.
This board was formed as a sanctuary from Education Forum corruption. When I posted my Prayer Man evidence over there I was banned by moderator James Gordon in an identical way. Gordon refused to respond to why I was banned, what rules it was based on, and what material justified it? Gordon practices a sort of social club moderation where he determines who he favors and simply promotes them as the preferred posters. An honest interpretation of the DPF site rules shows they were designed as a democratic guard against that very type of corruption. Gordon eventually shut down ROKC's case on the Education Forum saying they were not responding to correct criticism of their material. So Gordon did what Lauren did. He learned from me but then responded by putting me on moderation.
The Davidson enhancement is sound evidence for Prayer Man not being Oswald. By proving this I have served the Deep Politics board directive of not prolonging the discussion. I have disproven bogus evidence similar to Cinque and ended the issue, helping researchers determine that Oswald was in the 2nd floor lunch room during the shooting as the credible evidence suggests. As much as Lauren wants me to be some sort of disruptive troll, actually I am the leading research figure that debunked a theory 95% of the community fell for, and done so by credible scientific means that Jim D is being allowed to ignore. Yesterday I called Robert Groden and he told me Mrs Reid was visibly scared. He said her genuine fright was detectable and that he knew her witnessing was real. She was genuinely scared of what she had witnessed and its threat to her.
I'm sorry but I just don't see myself as being guilty here when all the objective facts and site rules are fairly considered. And it is entirely unfair to not let someone defend themselves openly.
Tom Bowden has not offered one word of technical analysis on the issue. He hasn't addressed the Prayer Man evidence or the site rules that back our debunking of it. While Peter accuses us of being childish with our serious protest and analysis, the moderation then approves of a poster who mocks "water pistols at dawn" as his sole input to one of the most serious evidence issues in the JFK research community. This is entirely unfair and violates the Deep Politics site rules - only from the moderator side.
Meanwhile a serious issue of DPF members violating the rules and posting already-disproven bad evidence goes ignored. What this comes down to is a 95% majority of internet JFK researchers fell for the bogus Murphy Prayer Man theory, including Lauren and yourself, who, 2 years ago similarly posted an approval of the Murphy theory in the Prayer Man thread. I was then scolded for not heeding the "experts" David Josephs and David Healy and found myself on unexplained moderation for several months with the administrator not responding to my inquiries why (a violation of rule #13). Subsequently Chris Davidson posted a digital enhancement of the Wiegman film that undoubtedly proved Prayer Man was a woman. Analysis of Buell Frazier's 2013 6th Floor Museum interview showed Frazier acknowledged he was talking to Sarah at the time of the infamous Darnell shot of Prayer Man. It is beyond doubt that the woman seen in Davidson's enhancement is Depository employee Sarah Stanton. Those who openly endorsed the Murphy theory have been reluctant to admit they ridiculed and mistreated a member who happened to be correct. The board rules are there for a purpose and clearly they are not there for the reason of being ignored. Rule #13 requires moderators respond on an equal basis and we are now well in to the area of realizing the moderators acted improperly and did not respond to their own rules. We have presented a sound case for Prayer Man being Sarah Stanton that will confirm at the top levels of research that are the normal means of vetting practiced in the community and also regularly practiced by Jim DiEugenio.
Lauren sent me a PM saying he believed Prayer Man was not Oswald. He also said he didn't want to ban me because my other material was so excellent. Lauren never admitted that on the board and continued to punish material he privately admitted to. That's moderator abuse and a violation of the board rules. Lauren was not being honest about where he learned Oswald wasn't Prayer Man. It was from the member whose posts he was deleting and putting on suspension. Meanwhile Jim D was permitted to post ROKC Prayer Man material that Lauren privately admitted he didn't agree to.
This board was formed as a sanctuary from Education Forum corruption. When I posted my Prayer Man evidence over there I was banned by moderator James Gordon in an identical way. Gordon refused to respond to why I was banned, what rules it was based on, and what material justified it? Gordon practices a sort of social club moderation where he determines who he favors and simply promotes them as the preferred posters. An honest interpretation of the DPF site rules shows they were designed as a democratic guard against that very type of corruption. Gordon eventually shut down ROKC's case on the Education Forum saying they were not responding to correct criticism of their material. So Gordon did what Lauren did. He learned from me but then responded by putting me on moderation.
The Davidson enhancement is sound evidence for Prayer Man not being Oswald. By proving this I have served the Deep Politics board directive of not prolonging the discussion. I have disproven bogus evidence similar to Cinque and ended the issue, helping researchers determine that Oswald was in the 2nd floor lunch room during the shooting as the credible evidence suggests. As much as Lauren wants me to be some sort of disruptive troll, actually I am the leading research figure that debunked a theory 95% of the community fell for, and done so by credible scientific means that Jim D is being allowed to ignore. Yesterday I called Robert Groden and he told me Mrs Reid was visibly scared. He said her genuine fright was detectable and that he knew her witnessing was real. She was genuinely scared of what she had witnessed and its threat to her.
I'm sorry but I just don't see myself as being guilty here when all the objective facts and site rules are fairly considered. And it is entirely unfair to not let someone defend themselves openly.