Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Jim DiEugenio Betrays Deep Politics Forum Over Prayer Man
#1
Jim DiEugenio has cited this website on the Education Forum...However I see Jim is not man enough to actually come over here and argue the proof that this website was designed for in order to bypass the uncredible moderation on the Education Forum...Jim is in direct violation of the formational purpose of this site to counter unfair Education Forum moderation and is choosing the Education Forum and its bogus moderation over this website and its fair academic site rules...Jim DiEugenio hides behind James Gordon's corrupted moderation and in doing so directly violates the written rules and purpose of this site...

Mr DiEugenio has made an absolute declaration that Prayer Man is not Sarah Stanton on the Education Forum but when asked how he knows he cites a Non-Disclosure Agreement...Meanwhile Jim forgets that when I discovered Sarah Stanton's family photo showing her obesity Jim commented "To be honmest with you when I first saw the Prayer Man image I thought the person being called Prayer Man was too stocky to be Oswald"...Jim was admitting that Prayer Man was Stanton in that statement...I responded that Jim should go post that on the Education Forum where it would do some good and Jim reacted by putting me on Facebook block...Jim then told Gordon that "banning Doyle was the right thing to do" and never mentioned that admission again...However that doesn't stop Jim from posting over on the Education Forum (where he has a moderator as his personal censor of all those who disprove him) that Prayer Man isn't Stanton using evidence he conveniently says he can't discuss...The moderators have been protecting this rotten dirty double standard for too long...

Show the research community what you are worth Mr DiEugenio and come debate me on Prayer Man...Jim is always sanctimoniously boasting about how people refuse to debate him, however he then turns around and does the same thing himself with people who have disproven him...Jim is a coward and hypocrite who has a large group of suck-ups to make sure he gets away with it...He stays away from this uncensored website because he knows I would tear him a new one over Prayer Man...Jim's sycophants say nothing while he gives approval to some of the biggest nuts and trolls in the community over good researchers like myself...

Ask Mr DiEugenio to honestly account for just one piece of evidence to keep it simple (even though I have discovered layers and layers of evidence that all prove Sarah Stanton is Prayer Man)...Ask Jim to account for Chris Davidson's recent enhancement of the Darnell Film that shows a woman's "scoop" dress neckline on Prayer Man...Davidson used his photo analysis expertise to bring out a clearly-seen woman's dress neckline on Prayer Man that can not be denied...I see the cowards on the Education Forum, who ban all those who out-argue them on Prayer Man, are not allowing that image on the forum or doing any Peer Review discussion of it...That one image alone blows Prayer Man out of the water and proves beyond a doubt that Prayer Man is Stanton...Proof that this image is conclusive evidence can be had by obtaining the original Darnell Film and applying Davidson's enhancement process to it...That process will produce the exact same image therefore proving the scoop neckline is a real and existing thing on the original Darnell Film...The Education Forum is avoiding credible photo science and Davidson is refusing to defend his own damning discovery...You have to watch DiEugenio because he's a dishonest bastard...He manipulates the research community by means of aggressive sound bites like "He hasn't read the book yet", or "we need better images"...Jim knows exactly what he's doing and he's hijacking the conversation with those dishonest sound bites whose whole purpose it is to dishonestly divert from evidence like Davidson's - or his own admission to me that Prayer Man was Stanton...Jim is exploiting exactly what this website was formed in opposition to and the moderators are letting him while attacking those who are doing the job they should be doing...

Answer Davidson's enhancement of the woman's scoop neckline you coward...Come debate me where you aren't protected by dirty moderation...

Please go to my "Prayer Woman" Facebook page to see Davidson's image of Sarah Stanton's dress neckline...(The image function is impossibly difficult on this website)...
Reply
#2
To add my 2 cents:

Jim DiEugenio, unfortunately, is past his prime. He reached his peak with the Bugliosi critiques and re-issue of Destiny Betrayed. Since that time he has run off the rails and become megamaniacal in his assertions. In several instances he has relied too heavily on innuendo, taking it as proof of his suspicions, and I have personally called him on it.

He tried to make hay out of the fun fact that Baker's testimony went off the record 5 times, but I showed on pp. 35-36 of Death of the Lunchroom Hoax  that not one iota is taken away from our knowledge that Baker, Truly & Oswald had an encounter in the 2nd-floor lunchroom.

In a Deep Politics discussion about the lunchroom encounter, several years ago, Mr. DiEugenio insinuated that Harold Weisberg had sketched out the inklings of a lunchroom hoax in his rare 1965-66 books Whitewash and Whitewash II. But he didn't realize that I had copies of those books, and called him out on his underhandedness. All Weisberg critiqued was the timing questions of Baker and Oswald.

There are other examples, which is why I do not put my trust in Jim's analytical skills; they have become more political than hard-nosed.

That being said, it appears to me that Mr. DiEugenio is making a political move at the moment, claiming that he has a Non-Disclosure Agreement about PrayerMan information he is privy to-  that this blurry figure is NOT SARAH STANTON.

With this tack, he avoids saying that this blurry figure is NOT LEE HARVEY OSWALD. And he grants his faithful minions-  the ROKC substance abuse brigade-  the dogtreats they crave so that they can pretend their "research" hasn't been completely buffoonish, and clownworld Bolshevik, the past dozen years.

My guess is that Jim's NDA is another nothing-burger of his-  he's pretending he's got something substantive to protect, when all it is is his usual baloney-  hackneyed favoritism with Oliver Stone, who can thereby source Jim DiEugenio as his very own trusted source. And it's got nothing to do with the question of whether PrayerMan is Oswald-  which was settled a decade ago by Brian Doyle, and poor Jim can't bring himself to admit that.

***

Next question-  why did Chris Davidson keep his "scoop" enhancement of Ms. PrayerMan a secret for three years? Is that MI6 agent, James Gordon, slipping him a few shilliings in a back alley somewhere? Asking for a friend.
Reply
#3
Richard:   

There's two culprits here...The first is JFK internet moderators who stay noticeably quiet when this damning evidence appears...The second is the JFK research community and JFK internet website members who show a distinct bias towards Prayer Man...That second group also shows a tendency to defend their internet cliques and permanent seats on those forums right or wrong...They are hypocrites who will sell their souls for power and posting space...Jim DiEugenio is their figure head and leader...

I think Karl Kinaski is reading these posts because he posted some of the evidence against Prayer Man on the Education Forum and ROKC...Kinaski is a little better than useless because he posts a content-free version of my proof that gives no explanation of why it is proof...However Kinaski posted Davidson's Scoop Neckline image on ROKC...Predictably, the degenerate scum on ROKC attacked and trolled Kinaski, posting memes of pigs etc...Those ROKC degenerates were, however, unable to respond to Davidson's discovery...Only the creative trolling writer Alex Wilson responded and made the predictable excuse that Davidson was photo-shopped...Davidson can be proven to not be photo-shopped by obtaining the original Darnell Film and bringing out the exact same Scoop Neckline...But let's be real here...Alex Wilson knows Davidson's Scoop Neckline isn't photo-shopped...He's just exploiting the out JFK internet moderators have given him to evade admission...Those same liars know Davidson is not a source that produces photo-shopped images (as replication in the original will prove)...

It is an epic case of organized dishonesty to see the research community, under that jackass Jim DiEugenio and his compliant moderators, still support Bart Kamp, even in the face of this damning new discovery, and allow him to defy any normal objective academic standard of proof, all so they can conduct their self-serving corruption over good research...All so they can defend their research gang...You can see that whole gang marching naked while bragging about what fine research Kamp has produced, the whole time never doing any basic Peer Review of Davidson over on the Education Forum...The whole time never even bothering to have any basic discussion about the Scoop Neckline evidence while self-referencing themselves as credible...You see with Jim DiEugenio and his gang, once you reach his level you become illuminated so denying obvious evidence is OK and viciously punishing innocent skilled researchers for producing it is also OK...You can stay silent and you don't have to answer for anything because the mods gotcha covered and David Josephs got your back...And, for some bizarre reason I don't understand, Chris Davidson himself self-censors and aids this corruption by failing to defend his own evidence that people are saying is photo-shopped...

I guess the only recourse in this situation is an Alex Jones-type lawsuit where the chief culprits get exposed...Right now, because of the corruption of the moderators and memberships, this final damning proof is being ignored and denied...This is the equivalent of Alex Jones winning and running the community...Or Ralph Cinque...Or Barabbas over The Christ...Jim DiEugenio deserves to have his behavior in all this exposed in the media where his crony mods can't censor it...
Reply
#4
DiEugenio wrote:


[ Pat Speer:

2. The images were still quite blurry--nearly identical to what is in the public domain.

If one wants to get access to the original film, and have it studied, then fire away. Get on it. But I'm not aware of anyone who'd attended that screening believing further study will prove anything.



"The above is not true." ]



I believe Jim D is trying to say that the images he saw from this secret copy of Darnell were much clearer than the available images...It has to be said that as good as Jim D is in pedantic book-type written research he has the weird condition of being below average in technical analysis...Jim is also not to be trusted because his ignoring of the correct Prayer Man evidence on JFK sites shows he isn't to be trusted as a reliable opinion on technical evidence...Especially Prayer Man where he is obviously doing outright shameful demagogery...

As the top voice on the Prayer Man subject, and person who single-handedly refuted the theory, you would think the people in possession of that secret copy would get me involved...This is really foolishly embarrassing because Jim is ignoring that we have already proven Prayer Man is Stanton so Jim's attempt to bully the wrong conclusion through is just more evidence of the serious problem in the research community...This is just yet another good example of how the research community has now devolved in to a clique that researches by friendships and membership rather than sound investigation...
Reply
#5
Jim DiEugenio has said outright that Sarah Stanton is not Prayer Man and he has entered his viewing of the so-called secret film as justificatrion...

I can say with absolute certainty that any fair viewing of that film will show evidence that Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton and, if given my earned chance to view that secret film, I will be able to point it out...

The research community is playing the dirty game of letting the non-entity James Gordon be the dictatorial censor of who can be heard and who can not and he has done a pretty good job of censoring those who can prove Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...

The internet moderation of JFK websites, and that includes this one, are exerting false authority and are participating in denying the evidence that Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...Mr DiEugenio is too much of a cheat and coward to voluntarily come here and defend his betrayal...I guarantee that the film evidence DiEugenio is saying proves Stanton is not Prayer Man does the opposite and I can show so...It is time to expose the fraud DiEugenio as well as the moderators who enable him against the best and brightest...
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Jim DiEugenio: Not to be Trusted Richard Gilbride 13 653 1 hour ago
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  Speer Says Deep Politics Forum Has "Withered To Nothing" Brian Doyle 0 203 24-01-2024, 09:56 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  Jim Hargrove Chooses Politics Over Good Research Brian Doyle 0 170 12-01-2024, 10:17 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  DiEugenio On "The Loser's Club" Brian Doyle 0 216 30-12-2023, 07:06 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  Bart Kamp's Dallas Conference Prayer Man Presentation Brian Doyle 0 241 28-11-2023, 03:41 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  Current Education Forum Prayer Man Thread Brian Doyle 1 365 31-10-2023, 03:24 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  Stancak Posts False Prayer Man Evidence On Education Forum Brian Doyle 0 299 07-10-2023, 05:01 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  DiEugenio Reviews Kamp's Book But Doesn't Mention Prayer Man Brian Doyle 0 339 06-10-2023, 02:54 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  Chris Davidson Ends Prayer Man Issue On MacRae's Forum Brian Doyle 1 372 02-10-2023, 04:38 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  Bart Kamp's 'Prayer Man More Than A Fuzzy Picture' Book Brian Doyle 1 318 27-09-2023, 03:30 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)