Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened

[Albert Doyle]

It is quite apparent that the effort to attack BillMiller is in full force on the EF. But, I am not a member of that forum, and remain firm on my decision to not join any more JFK AssassinationForums. I do believe I have learned my lesson well.
::

As happens to anyone who speaks the truth about the bogus Prayer Man theory. Gordon prefers Miller because Miller does not challenge his incompetence. Miller offers a weak hand by not citing my evidence and is therefore a safe poster who won't show that Gordon is incompetent and did not see the obvious flaws in what his favored ROKC knucklehead posters were offering.


The Education Forum is a dirty room because the rest of the members are fine with the one person who can end the issue being manhandled off the board by a crooked moderator and use that dirty trick as a tool to not look at evidence they don't want to admit. The Education Forum has been shown good evidence to prove that Prayer Man can't be Oswald. Gordon banned the people who pressed this and the dishonest pro-Murphy majority pretended not to notice. They are not interested in the evidence they call for and prefer pro-CT politics over facts.



Who gives the last word to ROKC?

[Albert Doyle]

Doyle is foaming at his mouth at DPF and that is because, like you, he is done. It's that deep state denial that only prevents both of you realising that it is over. No point in further debating this, neither of you has any support for your assertions. Do you understand this? Doyle doesn't......

The CT community has decided to destroy its credibility by giving credibility to this clown Kamp. Once given cowardly last say through censorship by the dirty moderator Gordon, Kamp is now having a field day boasting about his "victory". Miller has made it clear that Kamp is the one who is guilty of not having any support for his evidence bending that is solely designed to force the Prayer Man theory through no matter what.


It will be to the eternal detriment of the CT community that they gave credibility to this nut and didn't call him on his obvious bullshit. Kamp directly feeds off this corrupted indifference and depends on it in his methodical avoidance of the real evidence. The true point we left off is where Gordon was forced to ban me because his "Excellence In Research" hacks couldn't respond to my evidence. Contrary to Kamp's childish taunting that we have no support for our claims, we actually proved that Prayer Man was standing on the landing and was therefore provably too short to be Oswald. That Davidson's enhancement showed the face of a woman (Sarah Stanton), and that the Dunkel clip shows Gloria Calvery running to the portal right at the same time as the Darnell image on the cover of Dane's book. Our research shows that Buell Frazier was quoted as saying a woman ran up shouting the president had been shot but he didn't hear it so he asked Sarah what she said and Sarah replied "I think she said the president has been shot." If you look at the Darnell image, Frazier is facing Prayer Man exactly at the time he was quoted as saying he was talking to "Sarah". So, as Kamp childishly taunts, this is done. Only we aren't the one's lacking the support for our claims.


ROKC's actions speak louder than their words. Right in synch with this final debunking they have pulled back and are no longer discussing Prayer Man. They are trying to parlay Gordon's dishonest censoring into a personal dismissal of myself as well as further discussion of evidence they know they can't answer. Gordon stopped posting as soon as he banned me. I guess after having his favored posters debunked so badly, and therefore making him look bad because he didn't detect their bogusness, Gordon is hoping this cowardly move will carry him with a majority he knows share the same interest in not admitting they've had their favorite theory demolished by somebody they patronized. It is in ROKC's interest to shut the topic down because they know they've seen the death of their theory in my postings. If you can't win on facts then shut the playing field down. This is what the coward and nincompoop Bart Kamp calls a victory.


Prayer Man is obviously Sarah Stanton. With the aid of a dirty moderator (Gordon) ROKC and Kamp are going to use every trick in the book to avoid admitting their raison d'etre theory has finally been debunked and that they and their organization have no credibility...



Kamp is exactly like Fetzer. He is telling people to read his essay even after the need to read it has been dismissed. Him and his mob are in serious need of deprogramming.

[Albert Doyle]

Stancak fails to realize that in his explaining how Frazier was forced to lie about the curtain rods that he then gives the reason why Frazier demurred on seeing Baker. Frazier was simply not giving any witnessing against the cops because of the intimidation he received.



If Frazier did hear Oswald say curtain rods and honestly did not see Baker enter, then it has nothing to do with the Prayer Man evidence that shows Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton.

[Mark Russo]

Stancak fails to realize that in his explaining how Frazier was forced to lie about the curtain rods that he then gives the reason why Frazier demurred on seeing Baker. Frazier was simply not giving any witnessing against the cops because of the intimidation he received.



If Frazier did hear Oswald say curtain rods and honestly did not see Baker enter, then it has nothing to do with the Prayer Man evidence that shows Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton.

In an apparent attempt at retaliation for Mr Doyle's comments here about ROKC, this week's Rob Clark podcast was guest hosted by Bart and Mr LeDoux, and they made a disparaging comment about Mr Doyle in the 106th minute.

[LR Trotter]

[size=12]Why couldn't the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter have happened?LeeHarveyOswald said it happened.RoySansomTruly said it happened.DPD Officer MarrionLewisBaker said it happened.Has anyone who was in or within view of the 2nd floor lunchroom at about 12:32pm,CST, 11/22/'63 testified/stated that it did not happen?[/SIZE]

I continue to wonder, as I forever wander, and listen to the sounds...of silence.

[Albert Doyle]

In an apparent attempt at retaliation for Mr Doyle's comments here about ROKC, this week's Rob Clark podcast was guest hosted by Bart and Mr LeDoux, and they made a disparaging comment about Mr Doyle in the 106th minute.

I'm not the issue. The evidence is. If you look at Ed LeDoux's offerings he is basically like an internet comments section dummy and doesn't have any analytical research analysis skill. Out on the serious academic world researchers who favored Murphy are ignoring our credible evidence and giving favor to those two and their garbage research. Jim DiEugenio is the biggest violator and he doesn't answer for it.


We know those two idiots are goons. What is inexcusable is we have offered good evidence that the rest of the community stays quiet about while those two attack us at a moronic level without ever intelligently addressing our evidence. The community is so set on Murphy that it has allowed credulous researchers to destroy its integrity all for the pathetic purpose of hanging on to Murphy despite the facts.


Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton. They know this is true. Even Stancak gives hints like his recent comment on the Education Forum saying "Prayer Man may not be Oswald". The pro-Murphy people are not honest because they know what made Stancak say that (despite hypocritical censorship of the better evidence). I could quickly finish off ROKC and Kamp on a level playing field but they have influenced UK moderator Gordon in their favor. He plays dirty and I am unable to answer those idiots.

[Albert Doyle]

I continue to wonder, as I forever wander, and listen to the sounds...of silence.

The answer, Larry, is because the research community fell for Murphy and his bullshit and don't want to admit they were wrong or that people who they patronized disproved them (egos).



When he banned me the fraudulent moderator James Gordon said he was very sensitive to postings because of a potential merge between Lancer and the Education Forum. So in other words he is openly protecting Lancer "Excellence In Research" award winner Bart Kamp from any information that shows his bogusness. And the rest of the community says nothing.


When Andrej Stancak posted his Jerry-built bullshit on the Education Forum Prayer Man thread, when I tried to answer the moderator Gordon would not let my post go through. What Gordon was trying to do was say "Take the hint. Stancak is a credible poster and you're not." The problem here is Gordon is a fool who doesn't understand the first thing about intelligent abstract analysis. He probably ended up in a position of power because no one wanted to take the duty of running the site after Simkin turned it over. Gordon is the type who gravitates to such a position in order to compensate for his intellectual failings. When I was unable to answer Stancak due to Gordon's censorship Jim DiEugenio mocked me saying we would be waiting a long time for my response. It took me a long time via PM's to convince Gordon to follow his own rules and let my response go through. Stancak was literally unable to respond to my post and lied. He said he was too busy and needed time to work on a finer graphics software program to produce his answer. The truth is most of what I wrote did not require any improved graphics to answer. It is obvious to any honest person that Stancak knew he was beaten and was taking advantage of what he knew was a dirty playing field to avoid answering. So in a situation where it is actually Stancak who we'll be waiting a long time for the answer from, DiEugenio is once again ignoring it and is over on the Education Forum thread giving approval to Stancak.


Stancak and the others are allowed to go off topic on the Prayer Man issue and switch the subject to Frazier and the curtain rods. Gordon rode my back in a draconian manner making up forced site rules violations every time I posted. Since he banned me there has been no such restriction of content what so ever and anyone can post basically anything with no fear of moderation from Gordon. So DiEugenio is over on the Education Forum praising Stancak for his diversion to off-topic while ignoring the fact we have been waiting 3 months for an answer from Stancak on my Prayer Man evidence. Gordon doesn't have the wit to realize Stancak isn't credible and is offering seriously flawed material. I think he's moderating for site donations and trying to keep the majority happy by honoring their bogus content and banning those who can disprove it. DiEugenio favors Stancak because he offers enough pseudo-analysis bullshit that people accept it instead of trying to figure it all out. The Education Forum will not be credible until Gordon is justly booted and fair conversation can resume. And hypocrites like DiEugenio need to be publicly shamed.


By the way, we're still waiting for Jim DiEugenio to answer Davidson's metadata and the rest of the community seems happy letting him not. Jim doesn't do well when he can't shut a thread down, so he ignores it. Jim ignores the answer that he mocks you can't give.


What Stancak and the Murphy theorists are trying to do here is attack Frazier's credibility on the curtain rods in order to transpose that lack of credibility to the Prayer Man issue. Without ever directly confronting the evidence, they are trying to say you can't take Frazier at his word because he lied about the curtain rods. Therefore you can ignore his saying he was talking to Sarah Stanton when Calvery ran up. This is entirely dishonest because we have film evidence backing his talking to a person next to him when Calvery ran up. The entire curtain rod off-topic is designed to get around that without ever honestly confronting it, which is a good example of how this Murphy fantasy is perpetuated.




.

[Albert Doyle]

I apologise to everyone for dragging the discussion to curtain rod story but the question asked repeatedly and understandably by fellow researchers is why would Mr. Frazier not say whether Prayer Man was or was not Lee Oswald, and the answer would be that he may not volunteer any information about who stood next to him (if it were Oswald) since he was compromised from the very beginning.

This is why Jim DiEugenio and the Education Forum are not credible. Whether Frazier was intimidated into not talking or not he still directly commented that he was standing next to "Sarah" when Clavery ran up shouting the president had been shot.


Stancak ignores that his statement here would also cover why Frazier may not have mentioned anything about Baker going in. In fact this would be more likely since the cops are the ones who intimidated Frazier and would therefore be the first people Frazier would not mention. Totally ignoring this, ROKC and Stancak still stand by their point that Frazier failed to see Baker and it was firm evidence that Baker didn't go in right away. One rule for the BS Prayer Man theory and another for that which disproves it.


This is a perfect example of the credulousness of Stancak's input. Jim is a very sharp man who specializes in cutting through this kind of faulty research but for some reason instead of applying his usual wit he ignores its obvious failings and gives praise to it and Stancak.


Stancak is a risible hack and incompetent. He uses that English as a second language apologetic Euro researcher approach to sucker people in to those phony appeals. As shown by this example, this offering is dishonestly designed to avoid responding to Frazier's statement that he was standing next to "Sarah" when Calvery ran up. It's all right there in the Dunkel Film. As evidenced by its conspicuous omission, it is also designed to avoid dealing with how this intimidation also accounted for his not mentioning Baker. If Frazier was forced to lie about the curtain rods then he almost certainly omitted seeing Baker for the same reason. He just wasn't doing anything to get himself in trouble with the cops.


Don't let Stancak divert you to the curtain rods. His protector moderator Gordon is deliberately keeping me from making these points on the Education Forum where they belong because he is aware of their devastating value. Make Stancak and DiEugenio answer for Frazier's comment about speaking to "Sarah" when Calvery ran up vis a vis the Dunkel Film. And make him answer how Frazier's muzzling also accounts for his not mentioning Baker.


Of all the flagrant dishonesty...


By the way, I think Stancak got that Frazier compromise argument from me. Stancak is stealing my material and using it against my conclusions.



.

[Albert Doyle]

Here is the Rob Clark show where he was dumb enough to allow two clowns to take over his program and have full say. I only listened to the 1:04 mark onward in order to hear the comment Mark Russo warned me about. From what I can hear these two obvious yahoos are trying to discredit the bus and taxi story. Let it be known that James DiEugenio probably signs on to yet another example of main evidence hacking by ROKC. Jim also questions the bus/taxi story, so he probably approves of these two knuckleheads and their boorish presentation. Kamp, whose vocal inflection obviously telegraphs his neanderthalism and lack of credibility, scoffs that the McWatters/Whaley story is probably something I would endorse due to my obvious lack of credibility.


The McWatters/Whaley story is important because it shows evidence for Armstrong's two Oswalds. Remember, ROKC denies Armstrong's theory and attacks it like it does other highly credible assassination evidence. I didn't listen to the rest of the show but I presume Kamp and LeDoux didn't mention Staurt Reed or his obvious nebulous association with taking photos of places where Oswald either was, or should have been, arrested. Especially the bus that was later seen being boarded by the police after Oswald got off. Kamp thuggishly scoff's about Albert Doyle automatically approving of the bus encounter, but he never intelligently confronts the evidence that reinforces it. Nor do these knuckleheads ever mention Frazier, who clearly said Oswald crossed Houston from the Depository and was last seen going up that way.


The bus/taxi encounter shows evidence that the Oswald Frazier saw walking down Houston from the back entrance was indeed one of two Oswalds in the Depository that day. DiEugenio endorses ROKC's denial of Armstrong but then ignores you when you ask him to account for it. Yeah, Albert Doyle very much does endorse the McWatters/Whaley claim, and he does so because it is part of the very important real evidence the ROKC thug pack doesn't fathom because of its incompetency and low brow research. It shows that the Oswald Roger Craig witnessed coming out the front and down the Knoll was indeed a second Oswald whose witnessing cost Craig his life. DiEugenio? - Mute on this very important technical evidence while unaccountably endorsing one of the worst groups to ever be given acceptance in the research community. I believe Hargrove relayed a very intelligent response on the bus/taxi encounter from Armstrong. Meanwhile the community is dumb enough to give serious attention to what are basically two Australian bar room knuckleheads.


Why is ROKC attacking the bus/taxi encounter? Because it shows evidence that some of the Murphy evidence used to deny the lunchroom encounter and make Oswald Prayer Man can possibly be explained by this second Oswald. But we don't need Armstrong to disprove Prayer Man. We've already done that by other analysis. Prayer Man is clearly Sarah Stanton, as all the evidence shows. That some main credible assassination researchers have subjected the community to these jokers is something they'll have to account for.


If you want a good lesson in linguistic forensics listen to Bart Kamp after 1:04 when he interjects several "umm"'s. Overt umming is a sign of knowing what one is saying is dubious. These are the people the community has allowed to hijack the JFK assassination research world. The Albert Doyle scoff is around 1:06 -





https://www.spreaker.com/user/thelonegun...on-getaway




.

[Mark Russo]

Here is the Rob Clark show where he was dumb enough to allow two clowns to take over his program and have full say. I only listened to the 1:04 mark onward in order to hear the comment Mark Russo warned me about.
..
..
If you want a good lesson in linguistic forensics listen to Bart Kamp after 1:04 when he interjects several "umm"'s. Overt umming is a sign of knowing what one is saying is dubious. These are the people the community has allowed to hijack the JFK assassination research world. The Albert Doyle scoff is around 1:06 -




https://www.spreaker.com/user/thelonegun...on-getaway

Just so folks don't get lost looking for the "ummms" and scoffs, they're at 104 and 106 minutes, not 1h4m and 1h6m. Spreaker just gives absolute minutes, not hour:minute format.

edit: And if you listen to the whole thing, you hear a lot of what John Armstrong talks about in his "Leaving the TSBD" article on his website, in the "naysayers" section... relentless bashing of testimony of Whaley, McWatters, Bledsoe, et al