Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

What ROKC Troll And Coward Alex Wilson Could Not Answer

1,490 views

Skip to first unread message

Scrum Drum

unread,

Oct 22, 2021, 5:28:14 PM10/22/21

In my debunking of Prayer Man my intense reading of the evidence caused me to realize Holmes revealed very important evidence...Holmes was outside of the gag order loop because he was a Postal Inspector and not part of the in-house Dallas Police Station silencing of witnesses...Because of this Holmes revealed parts of the witnessing that Fritz had covered-up...Holmes said the stop of Oswald by the cop definitely happened on the first floor in the Lobby...Of course, the Prayer Man nuts seized upon this in order to make it look like Oswald was on the front steps as Prayer Man and that is where the real stopping of Oswald by Baker occurred...These idiot researchers like Sean Murphy, Bart Kamp, and Greg Parker were so intent on making everything work for Prayer Man that they failed to see the real serious significance of what Holmes witnessed...Holmes witnessed Oswald describing a second stopping of Oswald in the Lobby after he came downstairs from the Lunch Room Encounter with Baker & Truly...We know this is true because if Truly had identified Oswald to a cop in the Lobby he would have said so...The reason the man who identified Oswald was called "superintendent" is because it was Shelley and not Truly who was still upstairs...

The reason for the stop is even more bizarre...The white T-shirt Lee who was seen by Mrs Reid had come down the front stairs and was entering the Lobby where Harvey was at the other end probably waiting for clearance to leave from Shelley...Harvey saw Lee enter the Lobby on the opposite end and knew he had to get out of there lest the whole game plan be exposed so he tried to get out the front entrance...Lee also saw the same situation and headed to the utility closet under the stairs where Campbell would later tell the Commission he saw him...The cop at the front door picked-up on this nervous fleeing and stopped Oswald...Shelley was observing all of this and knew he had to intervene so he stepped-in and cleared Harvey as an employee with the cop - giving him the OK...The cop then told Harvey to step aside and not leave, asking him to clear the egress to the front door (therefore proving this happened in the Lobby)...

Shelley knew a fellow CIA operative was in trouble and the game plan was being threatened so he dutifully led Harvey out the back exit by the loading dock where Frazier would see him exit and stroll down Houston St...Lee went the other direction in order to stay clear and went around the west side of the Depository where Helen Forrest would see him exit and then go across the Knoll to the Station Wagon...

The Commission never approached Truly on this stop and did its best to conflate it with the Lunch Room Encounter in order to make it disappear...They knew they were in trouble with this event because Shelley showed his true nature by bailing Harvey out of capture...The Commission also avoided identifying and interviewing the cop at the front door for the same reason...

It is not surprising the Parker booby cult has to do its best to ignore this and can't answer it short of self-embarrassing name-calling...

The present JFK community is so dumb and so corrupted that it doesn't even recognize a skilled analyst who cracks the case and proves Armstrong...They are probably govt ops pretending to be CT-er's...Their job is to eliminate any researcher like myself who shows up and cracks it...

Scrum Drum

unread,

Oct 23, 2021, 2:20:00 PM10/23/21

On Friday, October 22, 2021 at 5:28:14 PM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:

Wilson wrote one of his typical prosaic creative trolling responses to this post over on the ROKC troll farm...

In other words, he couldn't muster any response...

The JFK research community feels safe doing outright brute censorship against a fellow researcher and ignoring his discovery even though it pretty much cracks the case...

They put ego contest before skilled research...

John Corbett

unread,

Oct 23, 2021, 4:52:20 PM10/23/21

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Greg Parker

unread,

Oct 26, 2021, 9:32:56 PM10/26/21

On Saturday, October 23, 2021 at 8:28:14 AM UTC+11, Scrum Drum wrote:
> In my debunking of Prayer Man

The only debunking you've ever done is getting out of bed, Brian. And you trip up even then.

my intense reading of the evidence

Sounds like you were feverish? That would at least would be an explanation.

caused me to realize Holmes revealed very important evidence...Holmes was outside of the gag order loop because he was a Postal Inspector and not part of the in-house Dallas Police Station silencing of witnesses...Because of this Holmes revealed parts of the witnessing that Fritz had covered-up...Holmes said the stop of Oswald by the cop definitely happened on the first floor in the Lobby...

This is what I have been saying all along - without the need for :intense" reading - or hyperbolics.

Of course, the Prayer Man nuts seized upon this in order to make it look like Oswald was on the front steps as Prayer Man and that is where the real stopping of Oswald by Baker occurred...T

And there's the famous Brian pratfall.

There was NO encounter with Baker. Nil . Zip. Did Oswald tell Holmes I was stapped by Officer Baker? Of course not, He said he was stopped by an officer. It was the officer who was stationed at the door collecting personal details as people left and he was identified at the bottom of this repot as Det Erich Kaminski - ably assisted by Roy Truly. The information collected by Kaminski was typed up for his boss Det. Revill. Oswald is at the top of the list with an old address. He only had one ID with an address - his library card - and it te same address as on the list,
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=43

This procedure with Truly and Kaminski was confirmed in testimony by Buell Frazier.

Mr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.

> these idiot researchers like Sean Murphy, Bart Kamp, and Greg Parker were so intent on making everything work for Prayer Man

> that they failed to see the real serious significance of what Holmes witnessed...Holmes witnessed Oswald describing a second
> stopping of Oswald in the Lobby after he came downstairs from the Lunch Room Encounter with Baker & Truly...We know this is
> true because if Truly had identified Oswald to a cop in the Lobby he would have said so...The reason the man who identified
> Oswald was called "superintendent" is because it was Shelley and not Truly who was still upstairs...

LOL. He would have said so, Oh Brian, you are so funny sometimes. It is a documented fact that Truly was helping Kamiski near the front entrance. Kaminksi neeeded someone to confirm that each person leaving had legitimate business being in the building. You know. So an assassin couldn't just stroll out pretending to be an employee. The trouble is that Truly was the "inside" man in this plot. He let Oswald go and then reported him as missing. And then covered up wat he had done. by claiming he heriocally led Baker up the stairs -never once fearing for his life should he encounter a deranged sniper intent on escaping.

> The reason for the stop is even more bizarre...

No. It is just your "reasoning" that is bizarre.

"The white T-shirt Lee who was seen by Mrs Reid had come down the front stairs and was entering the Lobby where Harvey was at the other end probably waiting for clearance to leave from Shelley...Harvey saw Lee enter the Lobby on the opposite end and knew he had to get out of there lest the whole game plan be exposed so he tried to get out the front entrance...Lee also saw the same situation and headed to the utility closet under the stairs where Campbell would later tell the Commission he saw him...The cop at the front door picked-up on this nervous fleeing and stopped Oswald...Shelley was observing all of this and knew he had to intervene so he stepped-in and cleared Harvey as an employee with the cop - giving him the OK...The cop then told Harvey to step aside and not leave, asking him to clear the egress to the front door (therefore proving this happened in the Lobby)... "

Not even good fiction.

> Shelley knew a fellow CIA operative was in trouble and the game plan was being threatened so he dutifully led Harvey out the back exit by the loading dock where Frazier would see him exit and stroll down Houston St...Lee went the other direction in order to stay clear and went around the west side of the Depository where Helen Forrest would see him exit and then go across the Knoll to the Station Wagon...

Yikes!

> The Commission never approached Truly on this stop and did its best to conflate it with the Lunch Room Encounter in order to make it disappear...They knew they were in trouble with this event because Shelley showed his true nature by bailing Harvey out of capture...The Commission also avoided identifying and interviewing the cop at the front door for the same reason...

No Brian. The cops, Truly and FBI invented the lunchroom encounter to cover up the real encounter between Oswald, Truly and Kaminski on the first floor.

> It is not surprising the Parker booby cult has to do its best to ignore this and can't answer it short of self-embarrassing name-calling...

He says, at the same time as calling names.... boo hoo. You've been told and corrected - and this is no exaggeration - at least a gazzilion times. It just never sinks in. Nothing can penetrate that that razor sharp bowling ball you call a head. You're just lucky I kinda like you, Brian, otherwise it could get ugly.

> The present JFK community is so dumb and so corrupted that it doesn't even recognize a skilled analyst who cracks the case and proves Armstrong...They are probably govt ops pretending to be CT-er's...Their job is to eliminate any researcher like myself who shows up and cracks it...

Underneath it all, you just want some attention. Nothing wrong with that, unless it goes overboard - and you're drowning in your own froth. If you truly want attention, give this up and try goose-stepping around town in your gas mask and Mickey Mouse ears. That's gotta grab some attention, even in Florida...

Some parting advice. Be good to your mom. She has to be a saint.

Bud

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 7:49:35 AM10/27/21

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 11:25:03 AM10/27/21

I very much enjoy when they form their circular firing squads.

Steven Galbraith

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 12:21:14 PM10/27/21

This is why I disagree about Ruby's shooting of Oswald. Had he lived all of his lies and dissembling would have been exposed and most of this conspiracy nonsense wouldn't take place. I think eventually he would have, if not explicitly but implicitly, admitted to the act. He wanted to be famous, to make history and it would have been too tempting to deny the act that did so.
Granted, people think Sirhan was innocent. Or was brainwashed or controlled. Something. But those are real fringe people that we ignore. Or should.
As to Oswald and Holmes: Holmes testified that Oswald told him that he, Oswald, left the building shortly after the shooting. And that someone - probably Pierce Allman - rushed in as he (Oswald) was leaving and asked about a phone. This was all less than 5 minutes after the shooting and well before the police had secured the building. It's simply illogical to argue that Oswald simply gave his name to a police officer at the door and was let go. And it this officer - not Baker - that confronted him.
There were no officers taking names at that early point. They still thought a shooter was in the building. And it's silly to think an officer would simply take a person's name and let them go. Mr. Parker's scenario simply doesn't withstand the evidence.

Chuck Schuyler

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 12:23:52 PM10/27/21

Except chess is more popular than ever. Everyone plays online at Lichess or chess.com. The growth has been especially phenomenal since CV-19, and my local chess club has seen its membership double in 18 months. I've been playing since I was a kid and played on my high school team, and I've never seen anything like it. I got interested when Bobby Fischer was the world champ, and there was a frenzy of interest for a few years in the 70s that faded, but the recent growth is ridiculous.

https://superjumpmagazine.com/the-2020-chess-boom-992427704a28

https://sites.lsa.umich.edu/mje/2021/04/05/the-queens-gambit-the-chess-boom-and-the-future-of-chess/

Are you claiming the JFK conspiracy hobby is growing? Chess certainly is, and there are numbers to prove it.

Another poor analogy by you.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 12:37:05 PM10/27/21

On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 09:23:49 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler

<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 9:51:03 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 07:26:45 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
>> <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I thought this board would die out a long time ago...
>>
>> This is like me saying Chess is dying, as I push my pawn...
>
>Except chess is more popular than ever.

And here you are, daily... responding to the evidence for conspiracy
in a murder that occurred more than 50 years ago.

This was my point, and you evaded it.

You lose!

healyd...@gmail.com

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 1:25:36 PM10/27/21

oooooow, tough guy, obsessed with kid's. Go get'em you old rump-ranger you...

Scrum Drum

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 1:42:33 PM10/27/21

On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:

I guess Steve isn't a good researcher because if he was he would have noticed that Holmes mixed bits of the 2nd floor Lunch Room stop with Baker in with accounts of the Lobby stop by that un-named cop...Holmes mentioned the Vestibule as the location of one of the stops and when he did that he confirmed that he overheard Oswald talking about being stopped in the 2nd floor Lunch Room...Because of that ignorant asshole James Gordon and mafia war lord Jim DiEugenio, who gets idiot mods to ban those who disprove him, I am being unfairly denied the right to post amongst my peers...I am left to tedious repeating of my discoveries on marginalized troll boards like casting pearls before swine...This is better than nothing however so I will educate Mr Galbraith...Because Holmes was outside of the DPD loop he was not subjected to the cover-up orders those at the Police Station were...Holmes overheard the accounts of both stops of Oswald as told by Oswald at the Police Station...Holmes made clear that Oswald said he had come downstairs to see what the commotion was all about and that the cop stopped him in the Lobby on the first floor...When Oswald said that he confirmed he had come down from the 2nd floor to the Lobby...Homes also mentioned that Oswald was stopped by a cop in the Vestibule...The "Vestibule" was the enclosure built around the 2nd floor Lunch Room entrance to dampen sound from the noisy stairway...It was listed on the blueprints for its construction as "Vestibule" and whenever it is mentioned in any Warren document that is what they are referring to because Truly and others referenced it that way after being familiar with its construction...If you do linguistic analysis of Holmes' recounting of Oswald's statements Holmes heard Oswald describe both the stop by Baker in the 2nd floor Lunch Room and stop by an un-named cop in the Lobby...It is very simple to figure this out because Truly never cleared Oswald in the Lobby...If he did he would have said so in his statements...Shelley cleared Oswald in the Lobby and was described as Oswald's "superintendent" in order to cover-up CIA's Shelley assisting Oswald out of a jam...Jim D is a brilliant book-source researcher but he is a bit of a dummy when it comes to abstract evidence analysis...Because dumb moderators use Jim D as a barometer for their site control we are restricted in areas of brilliant evidence analysis like the type I offer here...Dumb moderators like Lauren Johnson and James Gordon use Jim D as their guide and therefore enforce Jim D's stupidity in evidence analysis by censoring cutting edge analyses like I offer...This pedantry kills progress in the community but they don't care as long as they are the only ones allowed to post...Holmes did not realize he was describing two separate stops so the Commission allowed him to conflate the two stops in to one and never pointed-out what I am pointing-out here...They desperately needed to cover-up the Lobby stop and assistance by Shelley of getting Oswald out the rear exit because it exposed Shelley's conscious role in aiding a fellow CIA operative whose mission he was quite aware of in the Depository...Proof of this is the intentional avoidance of identifying and interviewing the cop who stopped Oswald at the front door...I made all this clear enough in my first post...Steve has failed to live up to what I typed...That cop was avoided because he would have witnessed Shelley's intervention and getting Oswald around the police cordon...As for the 2nd floor Lunch Room stop - I am the researcher who figured out that Oswald was in the Vestibule window looking out at the staircase landing to see who was using the stairs...Oswald was standing stationary looking out that window when he saw Baker emerge on the 2nd floor staircase landing...Shocked at seeing an unexpected cop, Oswald flinched back from the window and retreated in to the lunch room...Baker's cop instincts homed right in on this guilty flinching and pursued Oswald in to the Lunch Room...The reason Baker gives such a fuzzy description in his Commission testimony of how he detected Oswald is because he could not admit he saw Oswald stationary and looking back at him in the Vestibule window...To tell that particular truth would be admitting Oswald had not just run down from the Sniper's Nest...Both Baker & Truly saw Oswald's lunch on the table in the 2nd floor Lunch Room...They knew he had been in there the whole time during the shooting...Buell Frazier came out with the truth in his recent book where he admitted an un-named person told him a partly-eaten cheese sandwich and apple were seen after the assassination on the table where Oswald was seen by Carolyn Arnold...This is not only proof of the 2nd floor Lunch Room Encounter but also proof of Oswald's innocence...

Steve is a liar if he ignores the fact that Buell Frazier waited until 2002 to tell Gary Mack that he saw Oswald exit the rear loading dock and walk down Houston St...Oswald crossed Houston to Elm St and then headed up to the Bus-Taxi encounter...Mack was aware of the significance of this so he asked no follow-through questions about this astounding revelation and changed the subject...When I asked Frazier about this he gave me the weak excuse that dangerous memories sometimes bury themselves and that happened with his witnessing of Oswald leaving the loading dock...It is obvious to me that Frazier hid that memory due to its danger and proof of conspiracy...Steve insults our intelligence by suggesting Mrs Reid's Oswald did not continue on down to the Lobby and therefore there had to be witnesses to that (There was - Campbell)...Baker's long-sleeved Oswald also ended up in the Lobby after coming downstairs either by the NW staircase or front steps...Geneva Hine probably saw both Oswald's and that is why she lied and failed to mention Mrs Reid's Oswald (that she couldn't have NOT seen)...I contacted Carol Reed 2 years ago and she told me she went up to the 2nd floor with a cop and he told her to stay there and not move...She told me the passenger elevator was not working and that she hid under a desk for a long time after the cop told her that...

Bud

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 1:55:23 PM10/27/21

Many young people take up chess every day, not so the JFK conspiracy hobby. In twenty years it is likely that there will be 1% taking part in the conspiracy hobby as there are today.

Bud

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 1:57:49 PM10/27/21

It isn`t the evidence that gets responded to most often, it is the poor thinking or misrepresentation applied to that evidence.

John Corbett

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 2:47:09 PM10/27/21

On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 1:42:33 PM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 7:49:35 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > Oswald wasn't stopped by Baker. He was stopped as he left with others by an officer taking names? And Truly and "the FBI" were in on it? Because Oswald didn't tell Holmes about the Baker/Truly incident?
> > All of Oswald's co-workers said they never saw him after the shooting. Not a one. But he left the building with others as an officer took their names? That didn't happen until *after* 1:00 p.m; Frazier said it, i.e,. leaving work, was between 1:00 and 2:00 after the police asked them for their names and identification. Oswald arrived at his rooming house at 1:00.
> > But never mind.
> I guess Steve isn't a good researcher

You know nothing about good research. A snipe hunt is not good research. Looking at the wrong things in the wrong way is not good research.

> because if he was he would have noticed that Holmes mixed bits of the 2nd floor Lunch Room stop with Baker in with accounts of the Lobby stop by that un-named cop...Holmes mentioned the Vestibule as the location of one of the stops and when he did that he confirmed that he overheard Oswald talking about being stopped in the 2nd floor Lunch Room...

Holmes was not a witness to anything. If he got anything wrong, it is because he was fed incorrect information.

> Because of that ignorant asshole James Gordon and mafia war lord Jim DiEugenio, who gets idiot mods to ban those who disprove him, I am being unfairly denied the right to post amongst my peers...

Where does it say you have a right to post in any discussion group you choose. Discussion groups are privately run and the people running them have the right to decide who gets to participate and the rules under which they participate. There are some discussion groups such as this one that allow unfettered access but most of the ones I have seen are moderated to some degree. Just because you have a right to free speech doesn't mean someone else is required to give you a soapbox.

> I am left to tedious repeating of my discoveries on marginalized troll boards like casting pearls before swine...

Pearls? Are you serious?

> This is better than nothing however so I will educate Mr Galbraith...Because Holmes was outside of the DPD loop he was not subjected to the cover-up orders those at the Police Station were...

Orders which you imagine were given because you have no evidence of them. You simply assume.

> Holmes overheard the accounts of both stops of Oswald as told by Oswald at the Police Station...Holmes made clear that Oswald said he had come downstairs to see what the commotion was all about and that the cop stopped him in the Lobby on the first floor...

Why would you assume anything Oswald said was factual?

> When Oswald said that he confirmed he had come down from the 2nd floor to the Lobby...Homes also mentioned that Oswald was stopped by a cop in the Vestibule...The "Vestibule" was the enclosure built around the 2nd floor Lunch Room entrance to dampen sound from the noisy stairway...

Once again anything Holmes related was hearsay. He had no first hand knowledge of anything. What he heard may or may not have been correct.

(ridiculous fantasies deleted for lack of interest)

>
> Steve is a liar if he ignores the fact that Buell Frazier waited until 2002 to tell Gary Mack that he saw Oswald exit the rear loading dock and walk down Houston St...

I wouldn't put a lot of faith in what somebody said 49 years later if they had never mentioned it before.

> Oswald crossed Houston to Elm St and then headed up to the Bus-Taxi encounter...Mack was aware of the significance of this so he asked no follow-through questions about this astounding revelation and changed the subject...When I asked Frazier about this he gave me the weak excuse that dangerous memories sometimes bury themselves and that happened with his witnessing of Oswald leaving the loading dock...It is obvious to me that Frazier hid that memory due to its danger and proof of conspiracy...

There are lots of things that are obvious to you that just ain't so.

> Steve insults our intelligence

I see no evidence of your intelligence. Leave the rest of us out of this.

> by suggesting Mrs Reid's Oswald did not continue on down to the Lobby and therefore there had to be witnesses to that (There was - Campbell)...Baker's long-sleeved Oswald also ended up in the Lobby after coming downstairs either by the NW staircase or front steps...Geneva Hine probably saw both Oswald's and that is why she lied and failed to mention Mrs Reid's Oswald (that she couldn't have NOT seen)...I contacted Carol Reed 2 years ago and she told me she went up to the 2nd floor with a cop and he told her to stay there and not move...She told me the passenger elevator was not working and that she hid under a desk for a long time after the cop told her that...

I think we have just entered the Twilight Zone.

(cue the eerie music)

John Corbett

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 4:19:11 PM10/27/21

On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 12:14:37 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler

<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 11:37:05 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 09:23:49 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
>> <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 9:51:03 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 07:26:45 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
>>>> <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I thought this board would die out a long time ago...
>>>>
>>>> This is like me saying Chess is dying, as I push my pawn...
>>>
>>>Except chess is more popular than ever.
>
>> And here you are, daily... responding to the evidence for conspiracy
>> in a murder that occurred more than 50 years ago.
>
>So is the JFK assassination "case" becoming more popular as the years go by?

Are you really stupid enough to think that no-one sees that as *YOUR*
suggestion?

I said no such thing, nor even implied it. It was merely a logical
fallacy on your part.

>> This was my point, and you evaded it.
>

>Silly...

As was your "point."

>> You lose!
>
>Ben ...

Won. Yes. You lost. Yes.

Bud

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 5:37:31 PM10/27/21

On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 10:26:46 AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:

<snicker> Good riddance. Never has so much energy and thought gone into such a bankrupt idea.

> The old incels are dropping like flies from prostate cancers and heart attacks and general loneliness. The largely family-less seventy-year old plus weed smoking boomers who derive their meaning in life from the belief that thousands killed JFK and covered it up, have nothing left to do but attack the increasingly unhinged hobby points of fellow cultists, thus a Civil War of sorts is breaking out among Team Oswald.

That is why I asked Scummy which side was the People`s Front of Judea, it has all the makings of a religious schism...

https://youtu.be/a0BpfwazhUA

Replace "Romans" with "Warren Commission". The factions start to hate each other more than their common enemy.

>Team Oswald has never rallied behind a theory, and apparently has given up on actually trying to get to a solution for 11/22/63 that would usurp the historical null hypothesis, so among the CT rank and file, their madness swirls like a huge pile of flotsam rotating in the South China Sea.
>
> This is how an unhinged nutjob like Greg Parker can come across as relatively sane in his Scummy Dummy critiques. Parker is almost as wacky as Scummy, but in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

For the most part I try to avoid such distinctions, they are all crackpots trying to pin Oswald`s crimes on innocent people.

Oswald takes his rifle to his work and shoots some people and crackpots scrutinize the actions of everybody else.

> I thought this board would die out a long time ago, and just a few years ago, the monthly posting numbers were really low,

Yeah, I remember checking in once in a while and it was dead. Not sure what was responsible for it`s very slight revival.

>but I'm going to modify my thinking and I now believe the dusty little corner of the internet known as alt.conspiracy.jfk Google Groups will die last. There will come a point when the other forums fade to nothing, and the few diehards left will be forced over here. No moderation or upkeep needed, and it can't kick out cyberbullies like Ben or the unhinged Scummys or Healys.

I might be here shitting on their ideas to the very end. Or not.

John Corbett

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 6:28:42 PM10/27/21

On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 3:14:38 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 11:37:05 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 09:23:49 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
> > <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 9:51:03 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 07:26:45 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
> > >> <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >I thought this board would die out a long time ago...
> > >>
> > >> This is like me saying Chess is dying, as I push my pawn...
> > >
> > >Except chess is more popular than ever.
>
> > And here you are, daily... responding to the evidence for conspiracy
> > in a murder that occurred more than 50 years ago.
> So is the JFK assassination "case" becoming more popular as the years go by?
> >
> > This was my point, and you evaded it.
> Silly. Just because I participate here doesn't mean the JFK assassination hobby isn't slowly fading away. It's natural, given that the demographic interested in the subject--old, mostly white men--is aging out of the hobby. Stamp collecting and building model trains is also a hobby for a certain demographic. Not too many kids are pestering their parents for a ride to the local hobby shop to buy X-Acto blades and Testors modeling paint to assemble their new Lionel Pennsylvania Flyer HO gauge train. The hobby exists, but it's an older demographic.

I'm one of those old white guys who also is into model railroading. My other old white guy hobby is golf. You'd think since I'm retired I'd have time for both but it doesn't work out that way. It's either golf season or train season. When it's too cold for golf, it's train season. It stayed warm here in Ohio until this week. My golf course will probably be closing in a few weeks and then it will be trains full time. Maybe I'd have time for both if I didn't waste so much time talking about a 58 year old murder that was solved within 12 hours but for some reason I can't walk away. I tried to once but couldn't stay away. As Michael Corleone famously said:

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=michael+corleone+they+pull+me+back+in&docid=608051611314107945&mid=04CB28EF2BBBFEA71ECB04CB28EF2BBBFEA71ECB&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

John Corbett

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 6:34:01 PM10/27/21

On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 5:37:31 PM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 10:26:46 AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:

> > The old incels are dropping like flies from prostate cancers and heart attacks and general loneliness. The largely family-less seventy-year old plus weed smoking boomers who derive their meaning in life from the belief that thousands killed JFK and covered it up, have nothing left to do but attack the increasingly unhinged hobby points of fellow cultists, thus a Civil War of sorts is breaking out among Team Oswald.
> That is why I asked Scummy which side was the People`s Front of Judea, it has all the makings of a religious schism...
>
> https://youtu.be/a0BpfwazhUA
>
> Replace "Romans" with "Warren Commission". The factions start to hate each other more than their common enemy.

Kind of like the Democrats hating Manchin and Sinema more than they do Trump. I'm sure it's only temporary.

Greg Parker

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 6:48:49 PM10/27/21

On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 10:49:35 PM UTC+11, Bud wrote:

Interesting, ScumDummy was able to lure one of the crackpots from the Education Forum into this cesspool.

Interesting that my arrive has drawn out half a dozen troll nutters who inhabit this troll's cesspit and that you have the gall to call a moderated forum a cesspit. Projection? I think so!

And as usual, you don't have a friggin' clue what you are talking about. I haven't posted at the Ed Forum for several years. Not that knowing what you are talking about is of any importance to you. We both know it's not.

They are fighting over who`s fingerpainting is better, who has the bestest sandcastle. They are fighting over how many Oswalds there were (but why stop at two, I wonder).

I take on disinformation on both sides of the picket fence. As everyone who gives a shit should.

There are a lot of rifts in the crackpot community, z-film faked or legitimate, Oswald on the front steps or elsewhere, lots of creations on display. But one thing is certain, when someone says something like this...

Those aren't "rifts". I am not part of your imagined community. It exists only in your head. Z-film fakery is bullshit. The WC is bullshit. Multiple Oswald's is bullshit. I hate bullshit no matter who is tossing it around.

"The cops, Truly and FBI invented the lunchroom encounter to cover up the real encounter between Oswald, Truly and Kaminski on the first floor."

...you are dealing with someone who has made a hobby out of the deaths of these men.

Is Bugliosi a "hobbyist" too? Your pejoritive language comes out when you are threatened.

It is okay for you tio say no one said they saw Oswald after the shooting and that is evidence to you, when it is really just absence of evidence resulting from fear of Dallas police. Well, guess what? No one saw Baker and Truly going in together either. So that absence of evidence has equal weight here.

And what sort of cop uses an unarmed civilian as a shield when searching for an assassin?

Curry knew the truth. This is fom his book:

"At approximately this point in the investigation Deputy Chief Lumpkin had arrived at the School Book Depository Building from Parkland Hospital. The building was then completely sealed off, so that no one could leave or enter.The employees were checked at the door by Lieutenant Kaminski and Superintendent of the Depository, Mr. Truly. Employees names, addresses, and phone numbers were taken for future use, and Mr. Truly verified their right to be in the building."

What was it Truly is alleged to have said, upon encountering Oswald? "He's okay, he works here,"

Indeed. It was said. It was said to Kaminski near the front entrance, not to Baker on the second floor. Because that was Truly's job - as Curry said, to verify the right of those leaving to be in the building.

So fuck yeah. Truly never gave a statement to the cops like everyone else. His first statement was to the FBI that night. It was aconcocted statement to cover up the fact that Truly and Kaminski had given Oswald permission to leave and then Truly had reported Oswald as missing, setting the hounds after him

Or maybe you believe in the Two Truly Theory? One charging heroically up the stairs.... one helping to vet people as they left. Hmmm. Talk about crackpot...

Greg Parker

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 7:07:48 PM10/27/21

% clearance rate on murder because theOn Thursday, October 28, 2021 at 3:21:14 AM UTC+11, Steven Galbraith wrote:

> This is why I disagree about Ruby's shooting of Oswald. Had he lived all of his lies and dissembling would have been exposed and most of this conspiracy nonsense wouldn't take place.

Hmmm. Couldn't be the cops and FBI deissembling noww could it? You know. The same cops who knowingly sent innocemt people to the electric chair? The same cops who had a 98% clearance rate on murder by extracting confessions by any means possible so they did not have to worry about trifles like evidence? Those cops? You were a cop. What is the average clearance rate for murderr again? What does a 98% clearance rate suggest to you? That Fritz was better than Sherlock Holmes? LOL And just why were all those interogation reports only typed up after the one man who could refute them was murdered while in police custody?

I think eventually he would have, if not explicitly but implicitly, admitted to the act. He wanted to be famous, to make history and it would have been too tempting to deny the act that did so.

???? He wanted to be famous.... so it was too tempting to DENY the act?

> Granted, people think Sirhan was innocent. Or was brainwashed or controlled. Something. But those are real fringe people that we ignore. Or should.

That is a far more complex case. Neither side is entirely wrong. But it is also irrelevant here.

> As to Oswald and Holmes: Holmes testified that Oswald told him that he, Oswald, left the building shortly after the shooting. And that someone - probably Pierce Allman - rushed in as he (Oswald) was leaving and asked about a phone. This was all less than 5 minutes after the shooting and well before the police had secured the building. It's simply illogical to argue that Oswald simply gave his name to a police officer at the door and was let go. And it this officer - not Baker - that confronted him.

No witnesses to Truly and baker going in together.

Documentation that proves what Oswald decribed to Holmes actually was in place. Was Oswald psychic?

Oswald saw two fellow workers re-enter from the back of the building at around 12:25. He could see this through the domino room windows. He could NOT have seen this from the 6th floor.

We only have the cops word for it as to when the building ws sealed. If you want to believe they only sealed it what 10 or 15 minutes after identifying that building, good luck! The Dallas DPD got lucky just when you need them to get luck and they were downright incompetent just when you need them to be incompetent. How convnient is that for your "case" against Oswald?

> There were no officers taking names at that early point. They still thought a shooter was in the building. And it's silly to think an officer would simply take a person's name and let them go. Mr. Parker's scenario simply doesn't withstand the evidence.

So they thought a shooter was still in the building and that i WHY they didn't seal it straight away? Amazing!

It is amzing that you do not believe the police documentation, Chief Curry's memoirs or Buell Frazier's testimony - all apparently so you can continue calling Oswalda liar!

What does not withstatnd the evidence is your house of cards.

Bud

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 7:32:30 PM10/27/21

On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 6:48:49 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 10:49:35 PM UTC+11, Bud wrote:
>
> Interesting, ScumDummy was able to lure one of the crackpots from the Education Forum into this cesspool.
> Interesting that my arrive has drawn out half a dozen troll nutters who inhabit this troll's cesspit

You didn`t draw anyone out, we are always here.

>and that you have the gall to call a moderated forum a cesspit.

I didn`t call the Education Forum a cesspit. I`d call it a haven for crackpots.

>Projection? I think so!
>
> And as usual, you don't have a friggin' clue what you are talking about. I haven't posted at the Ed Forum for several years. Not that knowing what you are talking about is of any importance to you. We both know it's not.

I don`t follow kookfights that closely. I think Scummy mentioned being booted from the EF and fights with Gil and you, so I assumed they took place there. Really doesn`t matter to me.

> They are fighting over who`s fingerpainting is better, who has the bestest sandcastle. They are fighting over how many Oswalds there were (but why stop at two, I wonder).
> I take on disinformation on both sides of the picket fence. As everyone who gives a shit should.

So you have deluded yourself you are fighting a noble fight, eh Don Quixote? My take on it is a bit different.

> There are a lot of rifts in the crackpot community, z-film faked or legitimate, Oswald on the front steps or elsewhere, lots of creations on display. But one thing is certain, when someone says something like this...
> Those aren't "rifts". I am not part of your imagined community. It exists only in your head. Z-film fakery is bullshit.

Ah, see, you have a rift there with Ben Holmes here. Engage him on this, show me this just exists in my head.

> The WC is bullshit. Multiple Oswald's is bullshit. I hate bullshit no matter who is tossing it around.
> "The cops, Truly and FBI invented the lunchroom encounter to cover up the real encounter between Oswald, Truly and Kaminski on the first floor."
>
> ...you are dealing with someone who has made a hobby out of the deaths of these men.
> Is Bugliosi a "hobbyist" too?

No, the opposite, an "anti-hobbyist". The only reason his book exists is because of crackpot hobbyists.

>Your pejoritive language comes out when you are threatened.

<snicker> How could I possibly be threatened? You gonna hunt me down, Greg?

> It is okay for you tio say no one said they saw Oswald after the shooting and that is evidence to you, when it is really just absence of evidence resulting from fear of Dallas police. Well, guess what? No one saw Baker and Truly going in together either. So that absence of evidence has equal weight here.

No, it really isn`t equal. The things people said they did are not equal to your imagination. You start spinning out of control, where each "this must mean this" leads to a another, with each one becoming increasingly fantastic until you enter into a crackpot fantasyland. And almost every crackpot takes a different trip, a different path to his own personal crackpot fantasyland.

My beliefs are probably almost identical to any other LNer, is there even one conspiracy hobbyist who agrees with your take on things?

> And what sort of cop uses an unarmed civilian as a shield when searching for an assassin?

You don`t get to rewrite reality just because your expectations aren`t met.

Baker thought the shots came from the roof and Truly knew the building and was taking him there. Second guess it all you like or contrive something you like better to replace it with, free country and all that.

> Curry knew the truth. This is fom his book:
>
> "At approximately this point in the investigation Deputy Chief Lumpkin had arrived at the School Book Depository Building from Parkland Hospital. The building was then completely sealed off, so that no one could leave or enter.The employees were checked at the door by Lieutenant Kaminski and Superintendent of the Depository, Mr. Truly. Employees names, addresses, and phone numbers were taken for future use, and Mr. Truly verified their right to be in the building."
>
> What was it Truly is alleged to have said, upon encountering Oswald? "He's okay, he works here,"

At that point in time the assumption of both Baker and Truly probably was that an outsider was responsible. As evidence mounted the possibility of it being an inside job became more plausible.

> Indeed. It was said. It was said to Kaminski near the front entrance, not to Baker on the second floor. Because that was Truly's job - as Curry said, to verify the right of those leaving to be in the building.

Did Baker point his gun at Kaminski?

> So fuck yeah. Truly never gave a statement to the cops like everyone else.

He was busy assisting the cops. And nothing he could have told them could have helped their investigation much, he didn`t see anything that gave insight into the crime, this is merely grist for crackpot mills.

> His first statement was to the FBI that night. It was aconcocted statement to cover up the fact that Truly and Kaminski had given Oswald permission to leave and then Truly had reported Oswald as missing, setting the hounds after him

You`d think that would be something Oswald would have mentioned when they questioned him.

You don`t seem all that far down the rabbit hole, perhaps the LNers here could grab your feet and pull you out. Others have dropped these silly ideas and were better for it.

> Or maybe you believe in the Two Truly Theory? One charging heroically up the stairs.... one helping to vet people as they left. Hmmm. Talk about crackpot...

Truly did what he did. I`m not seeing the problem.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Oct 27, 2021, 7:41:16 PM10/27/21

unread,

Oct 28, 2021, 5:12:16 PM10/28/21

On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:

> > Interesting, ScumDummy was able to lure one of the crackpots from the Education Forum into this cesspool. They are fighting over who`s fingerpainting is better, who has the bestest sandcastle. They are fighting over how many Oswalds there were (but why stop at two, I wonder). There are a lot of rifts in the crackpot community, z-film faked or legitimate, Oswald on the front steps or elsewhere, lots of creations on display. But one thing is certain, when someone says something like this...

> > "The cops, Truly and FBI invented the lunchroom encounter to cover up the real encounter between Oswald, Truly and Kaminski on the first floor."
> > ...you are dealing with someone who has made a hobby out of the deaths of these men.

Greg Parker

unread,

Oct 28, 2021, 11:03:23 PM10/28/21

Hmm. Two "would have"s,

two "probably"s

One "possible.

One lie: Baker could have parked his bike ight a the steps of the TSBD and didn't. He also is NOT seen running "toeard the entrance". He is seen running parallel with the sidewalk in the direction of the Dal-Tex. Given the two men being on the 3rd floor being taken into custody, it makes sense that a cop would go up to that 3rd floor to check it out and see if there are any others up there without permission. Which of course is what he put in his report.... "on the 3rd or 4th floor"...

One fracturing of logic: You have Frazier NOT telling the WC or police what they want to hear because he was scared of the police. Please Brian.

Re Garner and Williams - Baker was not the only cop to search that building. - not even the only one with a helmut. Garner did not even see any cop and Williams never saw a face. In any case, Williams was scared shitless of the cops and had already changed his original story under duress. it would not take much to get him to say anything they wanted. Unlike Frazier, who YOU claim was too scared of them to testify in the way they wanted!

Re Yates: How can pointing out someone's record of psychiatric issues be slander? The cause of his psychiatric problems is up for reasonable inference which is not slander. It is evidence based. The Oswald at the Oak Cafe that morning was not Oswald, nor anyone eliberattely impersonating Oswald. It was Crafard who had obviously been at Ruby's apartment. He left the cafe and hitched, as he did everywhere. There was a reason he hitched. He made money hitching. Do you really wanna know how?

Oswald was reported as being at Ruby's gay parties. Exept again it was actually Crafard. One of Ruby's strippers, Pixie Lynn, described him as "trade" which is the person who takes the passive role in gay sex. Crafard was kicked out of the army for this very behavior.

So yes, Yates picked up Crafard and they went back to the Carousel. Yates had a breakdown because he could not bring himself to admit why he was in Oak Cliff. But that was far from his first breakdown. he had a number of the prior.

I have to admit Brian, you're playing a much improved game. There have been times when your "probably" count alone, if laid out end to end, could encircle the globe. Or even your ego!

Scrum Drum

unread,

Oct 29, 2021, 3:38:57 PM10/29/21

On Thursday, October 28, 2021 at 11:03:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
> On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 12:34:04 PM UTC+11, Scrum Drum wrote:

> One lie: Baker could have parked his bike ight a the steps of the TSBD and didn't. He also is NOT seen running "toeard the entrance". He is seen running parallel with the sidewalk in the direction of the Dal-Tex. Given the two men being on the 3rd floor being taken into custody, it makes sense that a cop would go up to that 3rd floor to check it out and see if there are any others up there without permission. Which of course is what he put in his report.... "on the 3rd or 4th floor"...

What you are saying is outright false Greg...Baker is running towards the Book Depository front entrance...Because you idiots and hacks at ROKC didn't have the skill to differentiate between Darnell's outer lens distortion and the direction Baker was running you seized on this Mickey Mouse retardery and claimed Baker was filmed diverting towards Dal Tex...Your Dal Tex 3rd floor claim is just another example of you contriving complete bullshit and inserting it as the truth...If find it incredible that otherwise intelligent researchers not only allow you to get away with it but they then back it up and help you damage the true scenario...Your answer doesn't answer for the simple fact if Baker intended to go to the Dal Tex he would have driven his motorcycle there...Baker parked in front to the Depository front entrance because that was where he intended to go...Since Pauline Sanders was standing in a perfect spot to see Baker enter that is why she saw him...Greg, you are obviously making up complete bullshit off the top of your head...Why people let you get away with that may be a measure of how many government plants there are on these boards pretending to be legitimate CT's...The reason there is not one witness to Baker making this radical departure from the official story is because he never did it...You know this is true as much as I do...

>
> One fracturing of logic: You have Frazier NOT telling the WC or police what they want to hear because he was scared of the police. Please Brian.

Another tortured equivocation offered in front of arguments you haven't adequately answered...Frazier stood his ground, but he had witnessed enough brutish threats and intimidation that he decided not to volunteer anything...If you profile Frazier he is still carrying that type of concealment out because he is still keeping the identity of the Depository employee who told him about the partly-eaten sandwich secret...This is what you do Greg...You offer complete made-up bullshit and then claim it to be the truth...While at the same time ignoring that Mrs Garner and Bonnie Ray's witnessings prove Baker ran in with Truly exactly as he described...You team up with similar assholes to yourself and then push it as truth in a mob-like manner, while ignoring what disproves it in public...Then that idiot Gordon allows your supporters to post your bullcrap unopposed on the EF...You have done real damage to credible research...

>
> Re Garner and Williams - Baker was not the only cop to search that building. - not even the only one with a helmut. Garner did not even see any cop and Williams never saw a face. In any case, Williams was scared shitless of the cops and had already changed his original story under duress. it would not take much to get him to say anything they wanted. Unlike Frazier, who YOU claim was too scared of them to testify in the way they wanted!

That is regressive, irrelevant bullshit Greg - like most of what you post...You are dishonest because whether there were other helmeted officers who entered the building I made a good case that Baker was the only helmeted cop at the time of the witnessings I cited...If you tried this feeble excuse-making bullshit in a court of law you would be quickly set straight by the judge and opposing lawyer...You are also a liar because the original June 2 1964 Stroud Document said in plain writing that Mrs Garner "Saw Mr Truly and the policeman come up"..."The" policeman is language that tells you Garner was referring to Baker as per the official claim...As for Bonnie Ray his witnessing was timed so that the white helmet he saw could only have been Baker's...Bonnie Ray's witnessing was timed to his going to the 4th floor windows after his witnessing...Mrs Garner witnessed the timing of when Bonnie Ray ran down to the 4th floor and it was right after Bonnie Ray witnessed the white helmet emerge above the boxes...You are incredibly contemptuous of our intelligence Greg if you try to get away with ignoring that Mrs Garner saw Truly & Baker continue up to the 5th floor right after her witnessing...So that, and the timing of Bonnie Ray's witnessing the helmet right before he ran down to the 4th floor, FORCES both those witnessings to be timed perfectly with the Lunch Room encounter...You are obviously making up bullshit excuses Greg - which is the material of which your nutty Prayer Man thesis consists...You are giving us a good example of the make-it-up-as-you-go-along nature of your Prayer Man claim...As you show us here it is based entirely on you making up flimsy excuses for the evidence that disproves Prayer Man and proves the Lunch Room Encounter is real...You are a fraud Greg...Just Garner's mention of Truly is proof enough because you don't have any reason why Truly would go from watching Baker enter the Depository - as Darnell shows him tracking Baker with his body language - to being seen by Garner arriving on the 4th floor landing right after Adams & Styles descended...Truly would have no reason to make that trip unless he was escorting Baker upstairs...The partly-eaten sandwich finally corroborates Carolyn Arnold and cinches the case for the Lunch Room Encounter being real...

You take a firm Von Pein-like Lone Nutter stance Greg and use their exact logic...It is a crime that certain members of the research community let you get away with this murder and actually endorse you...You ignored everything I wrote and answered with a question...You use the exact same method as the worst LN trolls on this board...You are a dirty, dishonest son of a bitch Greg...You contemptuously ignore that Scheim told me Crafard's front teeth were missing at the time...You are in stupid contempt of the evidence that disproves you and have failed to answer not only how Yates could have missed those missing teeth but also how Crafard with his missing teeth was going to waltz in to the Depository that Yates dropped him off at with a rifle?...You're an asshole Greg and a troll...You answer serious evidence you can't give any adequate response to with silly trolling evasion...Yates passed a lie detector test that the person he saw was Oswald...You have to be a crazy bastard to think you can get away with ignoring how many other people said they saw Oswald just like Yates or heard him say he was Oswald...I'm surprised you haven't tried that bullshit Crafard excuse with the two Oswalds seen at the Theater...The Oswald who got in to the station wagon at the Depository was not Crafard...Only a real scum would take the FBI's side against someone they murdered by means of false mental commitment...No one has the backbone to make Jim D account for this...Jim has James Gordon attending his nether regions as a personal servant...

> Oswald was reported as being at Ruby's gay parties. Exept again it was actually Crafard. One of Ruby's strippers, Pixie Lynn, described him as "trade" which is the person who takes the passive role in gay sex. Crafard was kicked out of the army for this very behavior.

You are just a contrarian evidence fantasist inserting Crafard for Oswald in the Conspiracy evidence...If you are not a gov't agent then you're a nut...Just the sheer volume of other evidence you deny/ignore that refutes your crap says all you need to know...

>
> So yes, Yates picked up Crafard and they went back to the Carousel. Yates had a breakdown because he could not bring himself to admit why he was in Oak Cliff. But that was far from his first breakdown. he had a number of the prior.
>
> I have to admit Brian, you're playing a much improved game. There have been times when your "probably" count alone, if laid out end to end, could encircle the globe. Or even your ego!

Yates passed a lie detector test on dropping Oswald off at the Book Depository...Greg, when you are forced to post outside your cowardly, censorship-controlled nut farm you stumble and fall on everything you post...

The real crime that is happening here is I interviewed Sarah Stanton's grand daughter Wanda Daniels in 2018...Wanda told me in one of my preliminary, non-recorded calls that she was pretty sure Sarah told her Oswald said "I am not going out to watch the motorcade...I am going back in to the Break Room"...That "Break Room" was the 2nd floor Lunch Room that Carolyn Arnold would see Oswald sitting alone in at his regular booth seat minutes after Stanton's witnessing...It is the same Break Room that the person who told Frazier there was a partly-eaten sandwich at the place Oswald sat was talking about...Because you assholes operate like a dirty team this highly important witnessing has been removed from mention on JFK assassination research sites...The same sites where your bullshit is entered freely with no resistance from that asshole James Gordon...Seeing how no serious researchers would ignore witnessing like that, or ignore the fact you are an obvious bullshit artist, I have to assume the main JFK boards have been infiltrated and are being run by government operatives posing as CT's...Either that or some really dumb/dishonest researchers...

Message has been deleted

Greg Parker

unread,

Oct 29, 2021, 10:48:51 PM10/29/21

On Saturday, October 30, 2021 at 6:38:57 AM UTC+11, Scrum Drum wrote:

On Saturday, October 30, 2021 at 6:38:57 AM UTC+11, Scrum Drum wrote:

> What you are saying is outright false Greg...Baker is running towards the Book Depository front entrance...Because you idiots and hacks at ROKC didn't have the skill to differentiate between Darnell's outer lens distortion and the direction Baker was running you seized on this Mickey Mouse retardery and claimed Baker was filmed diverting towards Dal Tex...Your Dal Tex 3rd floor claim is just another example of you contriving complete bullshit and inserting it as the truth...If find it incredible that otherwise intelligent researchers not only allow you to get away with it but they then back it up and help you damage the true scenario...Your answer doesn't answer for the simple fact if Baker intended to go to the Dal Tex he would have driven his motorcycle there...Baker parked in front to the Depository front entrance because that was where he intended to go...Since Pauline Sanders was standing in a perfect spot to see Baker enter that is why she saw him...Greg, you are obviously making up complete bullshit off the top of your head...Why people let you get away with that may be a measure of how many government plants there are on these boards pretending to be legitimate CT's...The reason there is not one witness to Baker making this radical departure from the official story is because he never did it...You know this is true as much as I do...

Oh dear, Brian. Calm down old mate. Anyone can view the brief footage for themselves and make up their own mind if it looks like he was about to head up the steps or continue along the side walk. What they will notice is that at no point do we see him turn toward the steps. Your impotent rage can't change that fact.

> Another tortured equivocation offered in front of arguments you haven't adequately answered...Frazier stood his ground, but he had witnessed enough brutish threats and intimidation that he decided not to volunteer anything...If you profile Frazier he is still carrying that type of concealment out because he is still keeping the identity of the Depository employee who told him about the partly-eaten sandwich secret...This is what you do Greg...You offer complete made-up bullshit and then claim it to be the truth...While at the same time ignoring that Mrs Garner and Bonnie Ray's witnessings prove Baker ran in with Truly exactly as he described...You team up with similar assholes to yourself and then push it as truth in a mob-like manner, while ignoring what disproves it in public...Then that idiot Gordon allows your supporters to post your bullcrap unopposed on the EF...You have done real damage to credible research...

Again Brian, what you say makes no sense at all. But it really is all you have. The fact is he was NOT volunteering anything. He was asked specifically if he saw a cop go in and he answered honestly that he never. If he did not want to be hassled by the WC or the cops, the easiest way out was to tell them what they wanted to hear. He did not do that. On the other hand, you have him LYING to the WC when he had no reason to. What the fuck did it matter to Frazier if a cop went in? It didn't. You make shit up and then project your MO onto me.

> That is regressive, irrelevant bullshit Greg - like most of what you post...You are dishonest because whether there were other helmeted officers who entered the building I made a good case that Baker was the only helmeted cop at the time of the witnessings I cited...

And Wiliams never mentioned seeing this helmuted head until his testimony. He wasa scared Black man who, unlike Frazier, did testify the way they wanted. After no one seeing Baker going in, they desparatly needed a witness putting him in there. Williams was their man. He had already changed his story about going direct to 5th floor with Norman and Jarman to cover up the fact that th cops shifted lunch leftovers to the 6th floor. One more lie for them made no difference.

> If you tried this feeble excuse-making bullshit

The only excuse-making is coming from you. Because you don't like the evidence. Which is why you are hoping I leave. You cant stand the heat.

in a court of law you would be quickly set straight by the judge and opposing lawyer...You are also a liar because the original June 2 1964 Stroud Document said in plain writing that Mrs Garner "Saw Mr Truly and the policeman come up"..."The" policeman is language that tells you Garner was referring to Baker as per the official claim...

"A policement" equals Baker???? LOL. You know as well as I do, or you should, that Adams' own timeline means she should have ran into the two heroes coming up. Garner seeing Truly and an unidenfied cop AFTER Adams and Styles gpy out of the bulding does not work for the official ti,eline - or whatever timeline you make up for your answer.

But I happen to believe Garner. She did see Truly and a cop going up the stairs after Adams and Styles left the building. It was Lumkin taking Truly up to talk to Fritz and reprt Oswald as missing afetr allowing him to leave.

Mr. BELIN. All right. And then what happened?
Mr. TRULY. So Chief Lumpkin had several officers there that he was talking to, and I assumed that he gave him some instructions of some nature I didn't hear it. And then he turned to me and says, "Now we will go upstairs".
So we got on one of the elevators, I don't know which, and rode up to the sixth floor. I didn't know Captain Fritz was on the sixth floor. And he was over in the northwest corner of the building.
Mr. BELIN. By the stairs there?
Mr. TRULY. Yes; by the stairs.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Mr. TRULY. And there were other officers with him. Chief Lumpkin stepped over and told Captain Fritz that I had something that I wanted to tell him.

> > Re Yates: How can pointing out someone's record of psychiatric issues be slander? The cause of his psychiatric problems is up for reasonable inference which is not slander. It is evidence based. The Oswald at the Oak Cafe that morning was not Oswald, nor anyone eliberattely impersonating Oswald. It was Crafard who had obviously been at Ruby's apartment. He left the cafe and hitched, as he did everywhere. There was a reason he hitched. He made money hitching. Do you really wanna know how?
> >
> You take a firm Von Pein-like Lone Nutter stance Greg and use their exact logic...It is a crime that certain members of the research community let you get away with this murder and actually endorse you...You ignored everything I wrote and answered with a question...You use the exact same method as the worst LN trolls on this board...You are a dirty, dishonest son of a bitch Greg...

Now now, Vrian. Be nice. I spoke well of YOUR mother...

> You contemptuously ignore that Scheim told me Crafard's front teeth were missing at the time...

Not ignored Brian. I addressed this over 4 years ago. Try and keep up! He was indeed missing front teeth. He told the FBI that they were knocked out in a fight. Which was total bullshit.
"https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1403-crafard-s-missing-teeth

> You are in stupid contempt of the evidence that disproves you and have failed to answer not only how Yates could have missed those missing teeth but also how Crafard with his missing teeth was going to waltz in to the Depository that Yates dropped him off

Yates never dropped anyone at the depository. He and Crafard went to the Carousel.

> at with a rifle?...You're an asshole Greg and a troll...You answer serious evidence you can't give any adequate response to with silly trolling evasion...Yates passed a lie detector test that the person he saw was Oswald...

Yates never passed the a lie detector test.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=57753#relPageId=3

His mental state was flat and nothing could be determined from the results. But even if the God Botherer whose book you are relying on, is right and Yates' wife was telling him the truth, the so-called ie-detector only proves that he BELIEVED he gave Oswald a lift - not that he actually did. Do you know the difference between belief and reality? The author pf the book you are relying on believes there is a magician living on the sky. The reality is that there is no magician living on the sky. You should stop confusing belief with reality - or relying upon those who put belief about empirical reality.

> You have to be a crazy bastard to think you can get away with ignoring how many other people said they saw Oswald just like Yates or heard him say he was Oswald...

Big cases attract masses of incorrect sightings. A known fact. You have to be batshit crazy to ignore that fact in order to hang on to the stupidest theory out there.

> I'm surprised you haven't tried that bullshit Crafard excuse with the two Oswalds seen at the Theater...

I have no need to invent sht since I have no theory to protest and posetylize.

> The Oswald who got in to the station wagon at the Depository was not Crafard...

The person mistaken as Oswald you mean, ala the common phenomonen that happens with every big case? Oswald was a generitc young white male. Hundreds of similar looking types roaming around Dallas at the time.

> The real crime that is happening here is I interviewed Sarah Stanton's grand daughter Wanda Daniels in 2018...Wanda told me in one of my preliminary, non-recorded calls that she was pretty sure Sarah told her Oswald said "I am not going out to watch the motorcade...I am going back in to the Break Room"...That "Break Room" was the 2nd floor Lunch Room that Carolyn Arnold would see Oswald sitting alone in at his regular booth seat minutes after Stanton's witnessing...It is the same Break Room that the person who told Frazier there was a partly-eaten sandwich at the place Oswald sat was talking about...Because you assholes operate like a dirty team this highly important witnessing has been removed from mention on JFK assassination research sites...The same sites where your bullshit is entered freely with no resistance from that asshole James Gordon...Seeing how no serious researchers would ignore witnessing like that, or ignore the fact you are an obvious bullshit artist, I have to assume the main JFK boards have been infiltrated and are being run by government operatives posing as CT's...Either that or some really dumb/dishonest researchers...

Brian, this is just tragic and sad. When you were just a young Hendrix fanboy, you looked like a kid who had some potential to do something with himself. What the fuck happened?

Scrum Drum

unread,

Oct 30, 2021, 5:19:54 PM10/30/21

On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 10:48:51 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
> On Saturday, October 30, 2021 at 6:38:57 AM UTC+11, Scrum Drum wrote:
> On Saturday, October 30, 2021 at 6:38:57 AM UTC+11, Scrum Drum wrote:
>

> > What you are saying is outright false Greg...Baker is running towards the Book Depository front entrance...Because you idiots and hacks at ROKC didn't have the skill to differentiate between Darnell's outer lens distortion and the direction Baker was running you seized on this Mickey Mouse retardery and claimed Baker was filmed diverting towards Dal Tex...Your Dal Tex 3rd floor claim is just another example of you contriving complete bullshit and inserting it as the truth...If find it incredible that otherwise intelligent researchers not only allow you to get away with it but they then back it up and help you damage the true scenario...Your answer doesn't answer for the simple fact if Baker intended to go to the Dal Tex he would have driven his motorcycle there...Baker parked in front to the Depository front entrance because that was where he intended to go...Since Pauline Sanders was standing in a perfect spot to see Baker enter that is why she saw him...Greg, you are obviously making up complete bullshit off the top of your head...Why people let you get away with that may be a measure of how many government plants there are on these boards pretending to be legitimate CT's...The reason there is not one witness to Baker making this radical departure from the official story is because he never did it...You know this is true as much as I do...

> Oh dear, Brian. Calm down old mate. Anyone can view the brief footage for themselves and make up their own mind if it looks like he was about to head up the steps or continue along the side walk. What they will notice is that at no point do we see him turn toward the steps. Your impotent rage can't change that fact.

You are a liar and a troll Greg because your typical bloviating trolling response doesn't answer the fact that the so-called diverting seen at the very end of Darnell is simply Darnell's camera lens distorting Baker's movement and making it look like he dodges towards the Dal Tex Building when in fact all it is is Darnell's lens making the illusion of rightward movement...Greg ignores that Baker is running directly towards the front entrance before that...Typical of your trolling, that the other trolls on ROKC let you get away with, you haven't answered for the fact there are many witnesses to Truly & Baker running inside...There are no witnesses to your radical change in the official story and your answer makes no effort to explain why...You are inventing fantasy argument techniques that ignore, right in their face, other examples of evidence that prove why you are wrong...We have Pauline Sanders saying in no uncertain terms she saw Baker go in through the front door that she was standing right next to...We have Piper and West saying they saw Truly and a cop running through the first floor...We have Oswald himself admitting he "Claimed 2nd floor Lunch Room When Officer Came In"...We have Mrs Reid seeing one Oswald leave from the Lunch Room area in synch with the Lunch Room Encounter...We have Mrs Garner seeing Truly and "THE" cop (Baker) emerging on the 2nd floor...We have Bonnie Ray then seeing Baker's helmet emerge above the boxes on the 5th floor right before he ran down to the 4th floor windows...You use openly dishonest argument methods in public that would never pass muster in any credibly moderated forum or court room...You can't just ignore evidence and be allowed to get away with it...Your Baker diversion claim is idiotic, ignores the vastly greater more credible evidence that refutes it, and doesn't answer for its obvious fatal flaws...You are obviously using it to avoid answering other evidence you know you can't answer...

> > Another tortured equivocation offered in front of arguments you haven't adequately answered...Frazier stood his ground, but he had witnessed enough brutish threats and intimidation that he decided not to volunteer anything...If you profile Frazier he is still carrying that type of concealment out because he is still keeping the identity of the Depository employee who told him about the partly-eaten sandwich secret...This is what you do Greg...You offer complete made-up bullshit and then claim it to be the truth...While at the same time ignoring that Mrs Garner and Bonnie Ray's witnessings prove Baker ran in with Truly exactly as he described...You team up with similar assholes to yourself and then push it as truth in a mob-like manner, while ignoring what disproves it in public...Then that idiot Gordon allows your supporters to post your bullcrap unopposed on the EF...You have done real damage to credible research...

> Again Brian, what you say makes no sense at all. But it really is all you have. The fact is he was NOT volunteering anything. He was asked specifically if he saw a cop go in and he answered honestly that he never. If he did not want to be hassled by the WC or the cops, the easiest way out was to tell them what they wanted to hear. He did not do that. On the other hand, you have him LYING to the WC when he had no reason to. What the fuck did it matter to Frazier if a cop went in? It didn't. You make shit up and then project your MO onto me.

Bullshit Greg...If we look at Frazier's statements and interviews he said that after Stanton told him what Calvery shouted he and Sarah "Stood staring at each other in shock for the longest time"...Since Prayer Man is Stanton, and we can see Frazier staring at Prayer Man in Darnell, it is not unreasonable to assume that perhaps Frazier was locked-on to Stanton and Baker slipped behind his back...You never do any scenario analysis Greg because you know it disproves you...Frazier has his back to Baker and is looking at Stanton...Pauline Sanders is just to the east of the door and right next to it so she sees Baker go in right in front of her...You offer a silly boy's approach of calling everyone who refutes you "mistaken" or a liar...But you avoid in public honestly answering for the overwhelming preponderance of evidence that refutes you...

> > That is regressive, irrelevant bullshit Greg - like most of what you post...You are dishonest because whether there were other helmeted officers who entered the building I made a good case that Baker was the only helmeted cop at the time of the witnessings I cited...

> And Wiliams never mentioned seeing this helmuted head until his testimony. He wasa scared Black man who, unlike Frazier, did testify the way they wanted. After no one seeing Baker going in, they desparatly needed a witness putting him in there. Williams was their man. He had already changed his story about going direct to 5th floor with Norman and Jarman to cover up the fact that th cops shifted lunch leftovers to the 6th floor. One more lie for them made no difference.

This is a typical example of the flawed bullshit that the Lunch Room Hoax is built on...First of all if Williams was coerced to lie he would have just said he saw Baker...The detail of Baker's head popping above the boxes is something you would only see if the story were true...But this is what you do Greg...You do a Rube Goldberg BS excuse for obvious evidence while ignoring that you still haven't explained Mrs Garner's witnessing, who said she saw Truly and "THE" policeman (Baker) emerge right after Adams & Styles descended...You ignored my argument right in its face that Bonnie Ray saw Baker emerge right before he ran down to the 4th floor and looked out the windows...There's a timing bracket there that forces all this to be exactly at the same time as the synchronization for the Lunch Room Encounter...It is clear to all those reading, Greg, that you ignore this because you know it is correct, know it refutes you, and know you can't answer it...You are a liar Greg and you can't answer for the fact Bonnie Ray saw Baker right after Mrs Garner saw Baker & Truly emerge right after Adams & Styles descended...And right after Garner then saw Baker & Truly head up to the 5th floor...And right before Bonnie Ray ran down to the 4th floor windows...

> > If you tried this feeble excuse-making bullshit in a court of law you would be quickly set straight by the judge and opposing lawyer...You are also a liar because the original June 2 1964 Stroud Document said in plain writing that Mrs Garner "Saw Mr Truly and the policeman come up"..."The" policeman is language that tells you Garner was referring to Baker as per the official claim...

> "A policement" equals Baker???? LOL. You know as well as I do, or you should, that Adams' own timeline means she should have ran into the two heroes coming up. Garner seeing Truly and an unidenfied cop AFTER Adams and Styles gpy out of the bulding does not work for the official ti,eline - or whatever timeline you make up for your answer.

You are answering evidence you can't answer with a question Greg...A person who repeats the question back to the asker is a person who is showing psychological signs of realizing the point is valid and he can't answer it...It is obvious by basic linguistic forensics that Garner said "THE" policeman instead of "a" policeman because she was referring to Baker in the official story...So not only does that confirm Truly & Baker's account, as well as the Lunch Room Encounter, but it also destroys your idiotic attempt to dishonestly push Mrs Garner's witnessing back to Lumpkin's arrival...You're not a very clever liar Greg...Garner was clear that the first thing she saw after Adams & Styles descended was Truly & Baker emerge...

You are deliberately vague Greg because you know that we have narrowed it down to Adams & Styles either scooting by the Lunch Room while Truly & Baker were inside it confronting Oswald or Adams & Styles getting out of the first floor just ahead of Truly & Baker running in...Your answers show the clearly visible pattern of someone who can't discuss the evidence he is denying because he knows it disproves him...

>
> But I happen to believe Garner. She did see Truly and a cop going up the stairs after Adams and Styles left the building. It was Lumkin taking Truly up to talk to Fritz and reprt Oswald as missing afetr allowing him to leave.

You're definitely a crazy son of a bitch Greg...You straight-facedly offer Lumpkin as the cop Mrs Garner saw emerge with Truly but fail to inform the readers that Lumpkin went to Parkland immediately after the shooting and then drove back to the Depository after going to Parkland...This means Lumpkin was not back to the Depository for like at least 15 minutes after the last shot...You have to be out of your fucking mind to think you could get away with that outrageous whopper and still be taken seriously...This is yet more evidence of the assholery that originates from the EF that they not only don't call you out on this but then actually endorse your obvious crazy bullshit under the buffoonish moderator James Gordon...

> > > Re Yates: How can pointing out someone's record of psychiatric issues be slander? The cause of his psychiatric problems is up for reasonable inference which is not slander. It is evidence based. The Oswald at the Oak Cafe that morning was not Oswald, nor anyone eliberattely impersonating Oswald. It was Crafard who had obviously been at Ruby's apartment. He left the cafe and hitched, as he did everywhere. There was a reason he hitched. He made money hitching. Do you really wanna know how?
> > >

> > You take a firm Von Pein-like Lone Nutter stance Greg and use their exact logic...It is a crime that certain members of the research community let you get away with this murder and actually endorse you...You ignored everything I wrote and answered with a question...You use the exact same method as the worst LN trolls on this board...You are a dirty, dishonest son of a bitch Greg...

> Now now, Brian. Be nice. I spoke well of YOUR mother...

FBI murdered Yates by mental commitment for witnessing a second Oswald...Your trolling contempt doesn't do anything to disprove that...Only a sick research-marring bastard would take the side of the murdering FBI against the victim in this case...

> > You contemptuously ignore that Scheim told me Crafard's front teeth were missing at the time...

> Not ignored Brian. I addressed this over 4 years ago. Try and keep up! He was indeed missing front teeth. He told the FBI that they were knocked out in a fight. Which was total bullshit.
> "https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1403-crafard-s-missing-teeth

More made-up bullshit from the evidence fantasist Parker...I believe there was someone who researched Crafard and found he was out of town at the time you are lying and saying he hitch-hiked with Yates...All we are seeing here is a nutty troll trying to force Crafard in as Lee who was obviously setting-up Harvey...

Yates passed a lie detector test that the person he saw was Oswald...
> Yates never passed the a lie detector test.
> https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=57753#relPageId=3

>
> His mental state was flat and nothing could be determined from the results. But even if the God Botherer whose book you are relying on, is right and Yates' wife was telling him the truth, the so-called ie-detector only proves that he BELIEVED he gave Oswald a lift - not that he actually did. Do you know the difference between belief and reality? The author pf the book you are relying on believes there is a magician living on the sky. The reality is that there is no magician living on the sky. You should stop confusing belief with reality - or relying upon those who put belief about empirical reality.

You are a liar Greg...If you analyze the true context of that Mary Ferrell entry FBI is using weaseling wording to avoid admitting that Yates passed his lie detector test with flying colors...FBI says Yates showed no emotional response...That's just their dishonest way of saying the test showed no signs of lying...You are a real piece of work Greg because in a case where FBI is trying to get around admitting Yates passed his lie detector test with flying colors you honor the lies of FBI and use them against one of their worst victims...It was against the interest of FBI to admit Yates passed the test that showed he witnessed Lee trying to set Harvey up...So they fudged the wording in order to get around admitting Yates passed his test...The reason you are a proven scummy liar Greg is because FBI told Yates that the fact he passed his lie detector test showed he actually believed he saw Oswald and since Oswald was at work at that time it proved Yates was crazy because he believed something that couldn't be true...You forgot to mention the part where FBI itself told Yates he passed his lie detector test and that was why they were committing him...Thank you for providing yet another example of how dishonestly you portray evidence...

> > You have to be a crazy bastard to think you can get away with ignoring how many other people said they saw Oswald just like Yates or heard him say he was Oswald...

> Big cases attract masses of incorrect sightings. A known fact. You have to be batshit crazy to ignore that fact in order to hang on to the stupidest theory out there.

Another trolling hand-wave against a full history of evidence you ignore and insult our intelligence by trying to get away with those feeble excuses...Funny how this witnessing goes way beyond the average of "incorrect" witnessings...

> > I'm surprised you haven't tried that bullshit Crafard excuse with the two Oswalds seen at the Theater...

> I have no need to invent sht since I have no theory to protest and posetylize.

Again, contempt and failure to answer seriously confirmed evidence of two Oswald's at the Texas Theater (Armstrong)...

> > The Oswald who got in to the station wagon at the Depository was not Crafard...

> The person mistaken as Oswald you mean, ala the common phenomonen that happens with every big case? Oswald was a generitc young white male. Hundreds of similar looking types roaming around Dallas at the time.

You're just a cheap excuse-making liar Greg...Conversely, we have a full case of evidence of a white T-shirt Oswald (Lee) being seen in the Depository just prior to Craig's witnessing...Craig's witnessing was backed-up by Helen Forrest whose "If it wasn't Oswald it was his identical twin" you ignored...

> > The real crime that is happening here is I interviewed Sarah Stanton's grand daughter Wanda Daniels in 2018...Wanda told me in one of my preliminary, non-recorded calls that she was pretty sure Sarah told her Oswald said "I am not going out to watch the motorcade...I am going back in to the Break Room"...That "Break Room" was the 2nd floor Lunch Room that Carolyn Arnold would see Oswald sitting alone in at his regular booth seat minutes after Stanton's witnessing...It is the same Break Room that the person who told Frazier there was a partly-eaten sandwich at the place Oswald sat was talking about...Because you assholes operate like a dirty team this highly important witnessing has been removed from mention on JFK assassination research sites...The same sites where your bullshit is entered freely with no resistance from that asshole James Gordon...Seeing how no serious researchers would ignore witnessing like that, or ignore the fact you are an obvious bullshit artist, I have to assume the main JFK boards have been infiltrated and are being run by government operatives posing as CT's...Either that or some really dumb/dishonest researchers...

> Brian, this is just tragic and sad. When you were just a young Hendrix fanboy, you looked like a kid who had some potential to do something with himself. What the fuck happened?

You are a contemptible troll Greg - as your answers here show...You get away with murder on your censorship-enforced ROKC Troll site...Not only does my serious new discovery get ignored in the research world but the Education Forum has a large majority who enforce its ignoring as well...The people doing that ignoring are also the same people who repeat your bullshit on the Lunch Room Hoax and Prayer Man...The majority opinion on the Lunch Room Encounter on the Education Forum repeat your crazy bullshit as if it were real and proven...The biggest criminal is James DiEugenio who just recently recommended you and your work...So Gordon does not enforce the no proxying for banned members rule on your Lunch Room bullshit...He does no intelligent moderation what so ever on the credibility of that material and has allowed it to influence the research world and damage JFK research...Most members there now post with confidence that the Lunch Room Encounter has been disproven...That asshole James Gordon is doing his best to destroy and remove the one researcher with the skill to disprove your nutty Lunch Room Hoax claim...Because he is dumb he attacks and bans skilled debate against bullshit like yours calling it disruption instead of admitting he is too dumb to moderate it...

Greg doesn't deny what I am saying here...

Greg Parker

unread,

Nov 1, 2021, 1:44:47 AM11/1/21

On Sunday, October 31, 2021 at 8:19:54 AM UTC+11, Scrum Drum wrote:

> You are a liar and a troll Greg because your typical bloviating trolling response doesn't answer the fact that the so-called diverting seen at the very end of Darnell is simply Darnell's camera lens distorting Baker's movement and making it look like he dodges towards the Dal Tex Building

Brian, do you understand what bloviating and trolling even are?

Here is what the cambridge dictionary says for "bloviate"

"Meaning of bloviate in English ... to speak a lot in an annoying way as if you are very important"

That is what YOU do. In psychology, accusing another of doing what you are actually guilty of is called "projection". The only person I can think of who bloviates as much as you is Lifton.

Here is what Cambridge says about "trolling". "the act of leaving an insulting message on the internet in order to annoy someone" Again, you are projecting. I have been citing evidence while you have been citing whatever bug is up your ass at any given time, while hurling abuse at me.

> when in fact all it is is Darnell's lens making the illusion of rightward movement...Greg ignores that Baker is running directly towards the front entrance before that...

More made up expertize on your part. But at least you now admit he appears to be heading toward the Dal-Tex. He appears to be, because he is - not because of any made-up lrns distortion.

> Typical of your trolling, that the other trolls on ROKC let you get away with, you haven't answered for the fact there are many witnesses to Truly & Baker running inside...

Many? There are zero. Which I already proved.

> There are no witnesses to your radical change in the official story and your answer makes no effort to explain why...

I have made no changes, radical or otherwise, to the INITIAL story. The OFFICIAL story - whichyou support - made all the radical changes to the INITIAL story in order to implicate Oswald. If you want to support a ridicuous theory by supporting the OFFICIAL story, you're doing a good job. Armstrong's theory is just the Warren Comission (OFFICIAL) version with the addition of a Tinfoil Hat. After all, the DPD, FBI, the Warren Commission AND Armstrong, all believe Oswald shot Kennedy ad Tippit

You are inventing fantasy argument techniques that ignore, right in their face, other examples of evidence that prove why you are wrong...We have Pauline Sanders saying in no uncertain terms she saw Baker go in through the front door that she was standing right next to...

Citation for saying she saw a cop entering the building with Truly, let alone identifying Baker as that cop.

> We have Piper and West saying they saw Truly and a cop running through the first floor...

Nope. Piper originally said it was FBI agent and West said it was with a whle bunch of cops AND agents. Also note that neither Baker nor Truly claim to have seen Piper or West - and nor did nayone on upper floors hear Truly calling for any elevator.

You never provide citations because you can't cite your own imagination.

We have Oswald himself admitting he "Claimed 2nd floor Lunch Room When Officer Came In"

Nope. You are misreading the notes by joining the end of one thought and the beginnng of a new one. Any fool can read a buncj of chicken scratch and get it say what ever they want. Read ALL of the interrogaton reports. He claimed he got a coke on the second floor was on the first floor abut to leave when he was stopped by a cop.

>...We have Mrs Reid seeing one Oswald leave from the Lunch Room area in synch with the Lunch Room Encounter...

Mrs Reid was Truly's secetrary. She was supporing her bosses bullsht. Fact is, she was outside with Truy and Campbell and she was seen neturning to the second floor with a bunch of other woman.... none of whom saw Oswald on the second floor - let alone Mrs Reid talking to Oswald. But you just keep supporting the OFFICIAL lies tat Armstrong also supports, bub.

> We have Mrs Garner seeing Truly and "THE" cop (Baker) emerging on the 2nd floor...

Mrs garner should have seen Truly come up twice with a cop accordng to the official story. First time with Baker and second time with Lummy Lumpkin. Since she only talked about seeing him going up once and never specified who the cop was or how long after the shootiing it was, I say it was Lumkin because the one with Baker never happened. We know the one with Lummy happened without a shadow of a doubt.

We have Bonnie Ray then seeing Baker's helmet emerge above the boxes on the 5th floor right before he ran down to the 4th floor windows...You use openly dishonest argument methods in public that would never pass muster in any credibly moderated forum or court room...You can't just ignore evidence and be allowed to get away with it...Your Baker diversion claim is idiotic, ignores the vastly greater more credible evidence that refutes it, and doesn't answer for its obvious fatal flaws...You are obviously using it to avoid answering other evidence you know you can't answer...

Again, Williams never mentioned such a sighting until his WC testimony where he also changed his original story about which floor he went to from the first floor. Williams was helping out those framing Oswald Just like you are. But for the sake of argument, even if he did see a helmut - seeing a helmut is not proof it was Baker. The place was crawling with cops and agents pretty quickly according to your star witness Mr West. In fact, according to West, Truly came in with a whole bunch of 'em.

> Bullshit Greg...If we look at Frazier's statements and interviews he said that after Stanton told him what Calvery shouted he and Sarah "Stood staring at each other in shock for the longest time"...Since Prayer Man is Stanton, and we can see Frazier staring at Prayer Man in Darnell, it is not unreasonable to assume that perhaps Frazier was locked-on to Stanton and Baker slipped behind his back...You never do any scenario analysis Greg because you know it disproves you...

Scenario analysis. I see. That appears to be you making up any shit in order try and win a debate against actual evidence.

> Frazier has his back to Baker and is looking at Stanton...Pauline Sanders is just to the east of the door and right next to it so she sees Baker go in right in front of her...You offer a silly boy's approach of calling everyone who refutes you "mistaken" or a liar...But you avoid in public honestly answering for the overwhelming preponderance of evidence that refutes you...

You ae the one who has been accusing Frazier of lying or being mistaken about no cop going in with Truly. Now you are claiming you can get around it with "scenario analysis" which is just code for making shit up.

> This is a typical example of the flawed bullshit that the Lunch Room Hoax is built on...First of all if Williams was coerced to lie he would have just said he saw Baker...The detail of Baker's head popping above the boxes is something you would only see if the story were true...

You are clueless. The vaguer the lies, the better for all concerned. I'll let someone with more patience explain why.

But this is what you do Greg...You do a Rube Goldberg BS excuse for obvious evidence while ignoring that you still haven't explained Mrs Garner's witnessing, who said she saw Truly and "THE" policeman (Baker)

Nope. "the policeman" refers to the only policeman she saw with Truly. That was Lummy Lumpkin.

emerge right after Adams & Styles descended..

Nope. She never said "right after" at all. you are making that up,

.You ignored my argument right in its face that Bonnie Ray saw Baker emerge right before he ran down to the 4th floor and looked out the windows...There's a timing bracket there that forces all this to be exactly at the same time as the synchronization for the Lunch Room Encounter...It is clear to all those reading, Greg, that you ignore this because you know it is correct, know it refutes you, and know you can't answer it...You are a liar Greg and you can't answer for the fact Bonnie Ray saw Baker right after Mrs Garner saw Baker & Truly emerge right after Adams & Styles descended...And right after Garner then saw Baker & Truly head up to the 5th floor...And right before Bonnie Ray ran down to the 4th floor windows...

The timeline is made up to incriminate Oswald Which is why you support it. You are a LN Oswald accuser except with a timfol hat.

> You are answering evidence you can't answer with a question Greg...A person who repeats the question back to the asker is a person who is showing psychological signs of realizing the point is valid and he can't answer it...It is obvious by basic linguistic forensics that Garner said "THE" policeman instead of "a" policeman because she was referring to Baker in the official story...So not only does that confirm Truly & Baker's account, as well as the Lunch Room Encounter, but it also destroys your idiotic attempt to dishonestly push Mrs Garner's witnessing back to Lumpkin's arrival...You're not a very clever liar Greg...Garner was clear that the first thing she saw after Adams & Styles descended was Truly & Baker emerge...

My question was rhetorical because your insistance that someone referencing a "policeman" = Baker is just hilarious.

Bu I do agree - Garner was clear. She saw a policeman and Truly come nup after Adams and Styles had gone down The only officer that could be is Lumpkin. There is nothing in her statment that identifies the cop as Baker and no one else and there is nothing in it that specifies it happened "STRAIGHT" after the two girls left.

.
> You're definitely a crazy son of a bitch Greg...You straight-facedly offer Lumpkin as the cop Mrs Garner saw emerge with Truly but fail to inform the readers that Lumpkin went to Parkland immediately after the shooting and then drove back to the Depository after going to Parkland...This means Lumpkin was not back to the Depository for like at least 15 minutes after the last shot...

I think they stretched that timeline out a bit, but it was certainly we ll after the last shot.

> You have to be out of your fucking mind to think you could get away with that outrageous whopper and still be taken seriously...This is yet more evidence of the assholery that originates from the EF that they not only don't call you out on this but then actually endorse your obvious crazy bullshit under the buffoonish moderator James Gordon...

You have Oswald getting on the Rambler 10 to 15 minutes after the shots. But if he was there for a couple of munites beyong what the WC claimed, I'm crazy?

ps that's another rhetorical question.

> FBI murdered Yates by mental commitment for witnessing a second Oswald...Your trolling contempt doesn't do anything to disprove that...Only a sick research-marring bastard would take the side of the murdering FBI against the victim in this case...

And you take their side against Oswald's alibi every time you support Williams, Claim Garner saw Baker, falsely claim multiple people saw Baker and Truly rum in ygether, support Reid, support the phony 2nd floor story, support the bus/taxi getaway and support Oswald killing Tippit.

The FBI did murder people via proxies.... but that was under COINTELPRO. The FBI never murdered yates, nor falsely labelled him in need of psychaitric care. Yates wouldn't have even had a breakdown at all if he had lived in these mre enlightened times and could just be his good gay self without guilt.

> You are a liar Greg...If you analyze the true context of that Mary Ferrell entry FBI is using weaseling wording to avoid admitting that Yates passed his lie detector test with flying colors...FBI says Yates showed no emotional response...That's just their dishonest way of saying the test showed no signs of lying...You are a real piece of work Greg because in a case where FBI is trying to get around admitting Yates passed his lie detector test with flying colors you honor the lies of FBI and use them against one of their worst victims...It was against the interest of FBI to admit Yates passed the test that showed he witnessed Lee trying to set Harvey up...So they fudged the wording in order to get around admitting Yates passed his test...The reason you are a proven scummy liar Greg is because FBI told Yates that the fact he passed his lie detector test showed he actually believed he saw Oswald and since Oswald was at work at that time it proved Yates was crazy because he believed something that couldn't be true...You forgot to mention the part where FBI itself told Yates he passed his lie detector test and that was why they were committing him...Thank you for providing yet another example of how dishonestly you portray evidence...

I love the way you keep invoking the word "analyse" whenever you are about to make up the biggest bullshit, That's all part of the Brian charm offensive!

In fact... that would make excellent band name... THE BRIAN CHARM OFFENSIVE.. I would only stipulate thogh that the lead guitarist would have to have actiual ability and not be an pver-rated hack like Hendrix/

> You are a contemptible troll Greg - as your answers here show...You get away with murder on your censorship-enforced ROKC Troll site...Not only does my serious new discovery get ignored in the research world but the Education Forum has a large majority who enforce its ignoring as well...The people doing that ignoring are also the same people who repeat your bullshit on the Lunch Room Hoax and Prayer Man...The majority opinion on the Lunch Room Encounter on the Education Forum repeat your crazy bullshit as if it were real and proven...The biggest criminal is James DiEugenio who just recently recommended you and your work...So Gordon does not enforce the no proxying for banned members rule on your Lunch Room bullshit...He does no intelligent moderation what so ever on the credibility of that material and has allowed it to influence the research world and damage JFK research...Most members there now post with confidence that the Lunch Room Encounter has been disproven...That asshole James Gordon is doing his best to destroy and remove the one researcher with the skill to disprove your nutty Lunch Room Hoax claim...Because he is dumb he attacks and bans skilled debate against bullshit like yours calling it disruption instead of admitting he is too dumb to moderate it...
>
> Greg doesn't deny what I am saying here...

You are right, I don't deny at all that you said what you said. You would have made a good stand-in fr John Clewse in Fawlty Tpwers. And I mean that in the nicest possible way.

Sky Throne 19efppp

unread,

Nov 1, 2021, 1:56:31 AM11/1/21

The running motorcycle officer in the Darnell film does not appear to be running up the TSBD steps, but to be running past them. The camera pans away at the critical moment when he presumably passed the steps, but that's the way it looks to me. Where he might actually be running to is a matter of speculation. The Dal-Tex Building is not the only possibility.

Greg Parker

unread,

> Here are the two building. Photo: tinyurl.com/bvfzpxru
>
> As to Oswald: The evidence for me is overwhelming that he left the TSBD well before the police arrived and secured the building.

Sorry Stee, but the reality is that the evidence is the opposite. It is UNDERwhelmng. What is OVERwhelming is the hyperbole and false certainlty with which the government asserts that this is what happened. But it is based on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence and not much of that. Mostly it is jusy wishful thinking and guesswork.

No witnesses to his leaving on the government side.

On my side, I at least have hearsay from Jarman during his HSCA deposition that Lovelady told him that Oswald was briefly stopped by a cop at the front door by a cop before being allowed to leave.

You will also need to exlain how the old Elsbeth address is on the list created by Erich Kaminski by checking ID before people left. Myscenario explains it quite well. We know from the police memo that Truly and Kaminski were checking ID and veriying their business in in the building beore letting them leave and we know this was verified by Bul Frazier in testimony. Oswald only had ONE pive of ID with an address on it - his old library card. The address on that card was the old Elsbeth one. Where do YOU think they got that Elsbeth address?

I would also like to know how Oswald KNEW that this process at the process at the front door was in place if he was already long gone? Was he psychic, Steve?

This would be before 12:35 or so. The police did not secure the building until around 12: 37 (if not later). And they went into the building thinking that the sniper was still there. As Buell Frazier testified, the workers/employees weren't allowed to leave the building until after 1:00.

Yes. So? ince no one claimed to see Oswald prior to then, how does Buell know that Oswald was not given prmission to leave before him? He doesn't. He is only testifiying to what HE was told as to wen he could leave. He has zro idea of what Oswald was told. But since after allowing him to leave, Truly reported Oswald a missing, one has to conv=clude that Truly was the inside man on this plot and that he allowed Oswald to leave before everyone else specifically so he could report him as the only man missing.

It defies logic that Oswald would give his name to an officer who would then just let him go.

And yet you believe that is what Baker did one floor up and refuse to believe the police document that has Truly and Kaminski taking names and contact details before letting people leave? LOL As if that was some weird practice that makes no sense? It is exactly what any police unit in the world would have done.

> Oswald told Harry Holmes that he (Oswald) left the building shortly after the shooting to see what all of the "commotion" was about.

No he did not. He never said that he left the building to check anything. He simply said he went down to see what the commotion was. He didn't say down where he was when he did that and Holmes never asked him.

From Holmes' testimony here he is paraphrasing Oswald:

"I started to go out and see what it was all about, a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later. Then I just went on out in the crowd to see what it was all about."

The sequence of events is - sitting in Domino room for lunch. Going up to the 2nd floor to grab a coke, going out just in time to catch the parade, going straight back in and going to the storeroom, then going back out on hearing all the noise. It is apparent that from his position in the back corner of the steps, he saw little, if anything, and probably assumed like others did that the shots were motorbike backfires or firecrackers. It was the hysterics he could hear AFTER HE WENT BACK IN - along with seeing people rushing back in, that drew him to go back out. That was when h was stopped by Truly and Kaminski. And that was when he was seen by Campbell.

This is what Jarman told the HSCA and it matches perfectly with what Oswald told Homes:

"Well, there was a Billy Lovelady standing out there, he was on the steps, see... And, Oswald was coming out the door and he Lovelady, said the police had stopped Oswald and sent him back in the building, Billy Lovelady said that Mr. Truly told the policeman that Oswald was alright, that he worked there, so Oswald walked on down the stairs."

At this point, you have to ask yourself, Steve if you are more interested in letting the facts fall whereever they may, or are you more interested in protecting the official lies at the expense of your own integrity?

> As he was leaving someone rushed in (if the police had secured the building this wouldn't have been allowed) and asked for a phone. That was very like Pierce Allman who said he went into the building less than five minutes after the shooting. This "Truly and Baker" staged the meeting makes no sense on any level.

It makes sense as a cover up to what really happened. The only facts in their story is that Truly did tell a cop that "he's okay. He works here." That was said to Kaminski on the first floor ntrance and as Curry said in his ook - that was Truly's job - to confirm for Kaminski that the person had a right to be in the building.

In any case - what he told Kelley was that the person he assumed was Secret Service, rushed in as he was standing IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING and ready to leave. https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0327a.htm

Again - the interogators are paraphrasing, We don;t know how well they did that. If taken literally, Oswald was already outside the building when this happened OR it happened as Oswald told Holmes and Jarman tod the HSCA. It happened AFTER "the officer told me to stand aside" per Holmes and after "the officer sent him back in the building" per Jarman. Those two statement amount to the same thing.

You have no proof it was Allman or the other reporter who also claims to have been the one. There was indeed a Secret Service agent who went in after that to use the phone. Powell - AFTER THE PLACE WAS SEALED and HE GOT IN by flashing his cedentials. Allman and co were simply covering up that Oswald was still around after the place was sealed.

> And by the way, Holmes testified that Oswald told him that he (Oswald) went DOWN the stairs after hearing the commotion. He wasn't in the lunch room at the time of the shooting.

Again, he was in the Domino room, went up one floor to get a coke, came back down, had his sandwich and made it to the steps just in time for the parade. Went straight back in where he was seen by Campbell - and then some time AFTER that, he tried to get out to see what was happening - was sent back in by a cop and told to wait. When Kaminski and Truly were ready to start their checks, Oswald showed his old library card, was given the okay by Truly and allowed to leave.

Scrum Drum

unread,

Nov 2, 2021, 3:50:01 PM11/2/21

On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 at 12:58:51 AM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 at 5:55:51 AM UTC+11, Steven Galbraith wrote:
> > Why would Baker leave his motorcycle directly *in front* of the TSBD if he was headed to the Dal-Tex building? And he ran towards the TSBD not towards the Dal-Tex building. So, he drove *past* the Dal-Tex building first? Then stopped in front of the TSBD and circled back? That makes no sense at all.
> And yet when I say "that makes no sense", I'm told it happened whether it makes sense or not.
>
> All I know i that Baker testified that he did not know which of the two buildings that the shots came from.
>

Greg is just a crazy bullshit artist who finds a weak crack in the evidence and exploits it as much as possible in order to hatch a brand new theory out of it...He provides us an example of how Baker being unsure whether the shots came from the Depository or the Dal Tex now becomes a solid claim that Baker went to the Dal Tex Building and the Lunch Room Encounter is now a proven hoax...So showing us in public that Greg has created the bed rock of a radical new scenario based on flimsy suggestions from Baker's testimony he then draws you in to his self pronouncement of that new scenario that is used to distract you from the fact he is flagrantly ignoring all the evidence that was already posted that refuted it...Greg is an asshole and if you follow his posting he lures in to his bullshit presentation in order to distract you from the fact he is ignoring all of your evidence...Despite Greg's insistence that the evidence forces him to acknowledge Baker went to the Dal Tex Building, he still hasn't answered for the multitudes of witnesses who said he went in to the Book Depository...And this flagrant children's wishing of evidence in to being is given approval by Jim D who also avoids answering for its mountain of fatal flaws...Greg just outright ignores that there are ZERO witnesses to Baker making a major deviation from the official story...The Baker diversion claim is based not on credible analysis of evidence but is instead based on JFK community insider hustlers exploiting their corrupted advantage to the max and avoiding discussing the serious evidence that refutes it...Welcome to the DiEugenio/ROKC-corrupted internet...Parker avoids answering my posts to him because they are devastating and he literally cannot answer them without looking like contemptuous troll that he is...When these nuts are denied the unfair advantage of banning and censorship and I am in the room they quickly fold like the Greg has done in every thread he has engaged me in...

>
> In short, he had no reason to park nearer to the TSBD than the Dal-Tex. He just did. He had no reason to pick to run into the TSBD over the Dal-Tex. And there is grave doubt that he did so choose.
> > Here are the two building. Photo: tinyurl.com/bvfzpxru

Greg is a kook...The obvious reason Baker parked in front of the Depository is because it was facing him and he saw the pigeons fly off its roof...Here is Greg stirring his troll cauldron and asking you to go under his spell of evidence-cooking...In the mean time he trollishly ignores the fact that every one involved and ALL the witnesses said Baker ran in to the Depository...Every time I mention that Pauline Sanders was standing just to the east of the glass front door and therefore was in the best position to see Baker run in Greg ignores it...What Greg is showing us there is he needs to ignore certain evidence to make his wack theory work...Others were focused on the limousine or not getting involved...The only person who doubts Baker ran in to the Depository (as Darnell shows him doing) is evidence fantasist Greg Parker who is doing it so he can clear the Lunch Room Encounter out of the way of his nutty Prayer Man theory...A few years ago even Jim D admitted that when he first saw the image of Prayer Man he thought the person in question was too stocky to be Oswald...The evidence hustlers are avoiding admitting that Jim said that in public on Facebook...They are taking full advantage of my banning to hustle evidence they know is not true and have no respect for the research world or the public...Greg is mis-quoting Baker's Commission testimony so he can avoid answering why there were ZERO witnesses to Baker making a huge deviation away from the official story and to the Dal Tex...If you listen to this crackpot Parker, it means that you believe Truly & Baker are excellent actors passing off a hoax story in all their accounts of the Lunch Room Encounter - not to mention all the other witnesses who verified it...

> Sorry Stee, but the reality is that the evidence is the opposite. It is UNDERwhelmng. What is OVERwhelming is the hyperbole and false certainlty with which the government asserts that this is what happened. But it is based on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence and not much of that. Mostly it is jusy wishful thinking and guesswork.

Greg is projecting here...The main brackets to Oswald's departure are Frazier and Craig who both said 5 to 10 minutes, with Craig saying 10...There's a photo of Robinson's Cadillac on Elm confirming this time...Greg knows all this but the dishonest piece of shit doesn't inform the reader...The times involved in the Bus/Taxi Encounter bracket Frazier's Oswald (Harvey)...

Greg once again uses bullshit con-man hustling to lure you away from the fact his fantasy scenario is the one that has ZERO co-witnessing behind it...This is a perfect example of blowhard Greg convincing us his bullshit fantasy is the right version based mostly on his hot-winded insistence... Meanwhile, back in credible reality, ALL the evidence points towards the Lunch Room Encounter being real...

>
> No witnesses to his leaving on the government side.
>
> On my side, I at least have hearsay from Jarman during his HSCA deposition that Lovelady told him that Oswald was briefly stopped by a cop at the front door by a cop before being allowed to leave.

What Greg is not telling you here is Lovelady told that false tale of seeing Oswald leave by the front door because he was trying to cover for his partner Shelley...Lovelady was lying so he chose the most vulnerable witness to tell his fake account to knowing that Jarman being black could be used to destroy his credibility if needed...Greg never asks himself why Lovelady 1) Never mentioned this before in any of his interviews?...2) Why no one else in the crowded Lobby witnessed this or spoke about it?...3) Why the HSCA showed no interest in this critical witnessing or interviewed the cop who let Oswald walk out after ordering him to "step aside"...Greg is lying here and he knows this story isn't true...Lovelady's telling Jarman this false tale and trying to cover for his partner Shelley is actually very important evidence for my side because it shows, as DiEugenio says, "a consciousness of guilt" that made Lovelady try to cover for what he knew Shelley did...Greg is an asshole and there is no way the Commission would avoid investigating something as important as Oswald's departure from the Depository...The reason Lovelady lied to a person he knew could be easily made uncredible, and the HSCA avoided any look in to this front door departure, is because all those involved knew Shelley cleared Oswald with the cop at the front door and then led him out the back...Greg likes to portray himself as a slick researcher but he asks us to accept that he doesn't ask why Truly never admitted this so-called clearing of Oswald at the front door at a time when Truly was upstairs...Or why Lovelady never told of his witnessing Oswald leaving through the front door to anyone else or to the FBI in the original signed statements?...Or why HSCA never probed Lovelady to ask him why he held this back and only told Jarman...Greg insults your intelligence and asks you to be an idiot for his sake in order to let him get away with his bullshit...This is yet again another example of Greg taking the slightest wisp of false context and turning it in to bed rock for bullshit...

Here is Greg once again lying and trying to stretch events that happened 15 minutes after the time periods in question in to plausible excuses...The rest of the community has some pretty intelligent people, yet they sit back and allow Greg to get away with these goofy stretches unchallenged...

>
> I would also like to know how Oswald KNEW that this process at the process at the front door was in place if he was already long gone? Was he psychic, Steve?
> This would be before 12:35 or so. The police did not secure the building until around 12: 37 (if not later). And they went into the building thinking that the sniper was still there. As Buell Frazier testified, the workers/employees weren't allowed to leave the building until after 1:00.

Here is Greg using the hustler's magic trick of inserting Oswald's knowledge of the Kaminski ID check as real when he has presented ZERO fucking evidence for it except his lying suggestion...Holmes overheard Oswald telling of being stopped by a cop at the front door when he tried to leave...There was nothing in Oswald's statement that mentioned this being at the time of Kaminski's alleged ID check (that Greg pulled out of his ass) - which was 20 minutes after the shots not 5...What Greg is really showing us here is his Lunch Room Hoax is built on firm, confidently-suggested bullshit and nothing else...

> Yes. So? ince no one claimed to see Oswald prior to then, how does Buell know that Oswald was not given prmission to leave before him? He doesn't. He is only testifiying to what HE was told as to wen he could leave. He has zro idea of what Oswald was told. But since after allowing him to leave, Truly reported Oswald a missing, one has to conv=clude that Truly was the inside man on this plot and that he allowed Oswald to leave before everyone else specifically so he could report him as the only man missing.

Speculative bullshit that is used to avoid the fact Truly could not have OK-ed Oswald at the front door since he was still upstairs at the time...The reason they said "superintendent" instead of "building manager" is because it was Shelley, not Truly, and they were trying to hide his assisting Oswald out of the building...Frazier was outside on the corner at this time and would soon see Harvey exit the loading dock after Shelley ushered him safely around the police cordon...Greg insults your intelligence and asks you to ignore that Truly could never have gotten away with not admitting clearing Oswald at the front door if the evidence ever came out for it...

> > Oswald told Harry Holmes that he (Oswald) left the building shortly after the shooting to see what all of the "commotion" was about.

> No he did not. He never said that he left the building to check anything. He simply said he went down to see what the commotion was. He didn't say down where he was when he did that and Holmes never asked him.

Greg is dishonestly avoiding admitting that "Came downstairs to see what the commotion was all about" is PROOF that Oswald came down from the 2nd floor Lunch Room where Baker had just confronted him...These trolls know this which is why I saw one of them try to get around it by saying Oswald was referring to going down the Depository front steps when he said "came downstairs"...They are such pathetic liars - but this is not worthy of contest to the rest of the community who stay quiet...It is not possible by the timing of Truly going upstairs from the Lunch Room Encounter, and Oswald going downstairs, for Truly to be the "superintendent" who cleared Oswald at the front door...It had to be Shelley, as all the covering-up that followed evidences...

>
> From Holmes' testimony here he is paraphrasing Oswald:
> "I started to go out and see what it was all about, a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later. Then I just went on out in the crowd to see what it was all about."

Greg is once again inventing fantasy scenarios and inserting them as real...He insults your intelligence by asking you to believe a cop following a presidential assassination ordered someone to step aside and not leave and then let him leave anyway right under his nose...Greg is conscious of his bullshit because he can't bring himself to mention the lies of Truly checking Oswald's library card, which wouldn't be necessary if Truly OK-ed him as an employee...Greg is telling us here he knows this was 5 minutes after the shots and not 20...

> The sequence of events is - sitting in Domino room for lunch. Going up to the 2nd floor to grab a coke, going out just in time to catch the parade, going straight back in and going to the storeroom, then going back out on hearing all the noise. It is apparent that from his position in the back corner of the steps, he saw little, if anything, and probably assumed like others did that the shots were motorbike backfires or firecrackers. It was the hysterics he could hear AFTER HE WENT BACK IN - along with seeing people rushing back in, that drew him to go back out. That was when h was stopped by Truly and Kaminski. And that was when he was seen by Campbell.

Jack Dougherty said in no uncertain terms that he was alone in the Domino Room while Oswald ate his lunch upstairs in the 2nd floor Lunch Room...As usual, lying Greg just outright ignores evidence that refutes him...Greg also contemptuously ignores that Sarah Stanton witnessed Oswald saying he intended to go back in to that 2nd floor Break Room...Stanton said Oswald had a soda in his hand when she confronted him on the 2nd floor staircase landing...Greg also contemptuously ignores that Carolyn Arnold confirmed Oswald's return to that Lunch Room shortly after he told that to Stanton...And finally Buell Frazier confirmed that a partly-eaten sandwich was seen on the Lunch Room table where Arnold saw Oswald eating lunch...This not only proves the Lunch Room Encounter was real, but it also proves Oswald was in the 2nd floor Lunch Room in the 6 minutes in between Arnold's sighting and Baker's...Greg is a liar because ALL the ensuing witnessings, interviews, and statements ALL say Oswald was up in the 2nd floor Lunch Room with a Coke "When officer came in"...That is a firm indicator that the references Greg gives could only be 90 seconds after the shots and therefore PRECLUDE Oswald being on the first floor and being conned in to the Prayer Man spot, like Greg so uncredibly attempts...Greg is a dirty scumbag so he must avoid answering me like he does or otherwise it will become clear he has no answer for his lies that I've exposed...He is assisted by his supporters who use dirty banning (censorship) to avoid my evidence...These people are never going to admit someone they ridiculed turned around and handed them their asses and cracked the case...

Greg has Oswald going in and out a lot in his make it up as he goes along fantasy scenario above...He contradicts himself because he has Oswald in the Lobby utility closet before he "Went downstairs to see what all the commotion was about"...Greg once again insults our intelligence by asking us to believe the dozens of people seen going back in to the Depository in Darnell did not see Oswald right in front of them...It has been long proven that Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton in Darnell and that she is in the process of "staring at each other in shock for the longest time" as Frazier described...The reason none of the employees going back in in Darnell said they saw Oswald in the west corner of the portal is because it was Stanton...

>
> This is what Jarman told the HSCA and it matches perfectly with what Oswald told Homes:
>
> "Well, there was a Billy Lovelady standing out there, he was on the steps, see... And, Oswald was coming out the door and he Lovelady, said the police had stopped Oswald and sent him back in the building, Billy Lovelady said that Mr. Truly told the policeman that Oswald was alright, that he worked there, so Oswald walked on down the stairs."

As explained above in detail, Lovelady is lying in order to cover for his CIA partner Shelley who bailed Oswald out at the front door and snuck him out the back...

>
> At this point, you have to ask yourself, Steve if you are more interested in letting the facts fall whereever they may, or are you more interested in protecting the official lies at the expense of your own integrity?
> > As he was leaving someone rushed in (if the police had secured the building this wouldn't have been allowed) and asked for a phone. That was very like Pierce Allman who said he went into the building less than five minutes after the shooting. This "Truly and Baker" staged the meeting makes no sense on any level.

> It makes sense as a cover up to what really happened. The only facts in their story is that Truly did tell a cop that "he's okay. He works here." That was said to Kaminski on the first floor ntrance and as Curry said in his ook - that was Truly's job - to confirm for Kaminski that the person had a right to be in the building.

Greg waves a hand and the full extensive body of Depository evidence and witnessing now becomes a highly organized grand conspiracy with men in black and a highly coordinated orchestration of hoax stories all to be gotten straight even though the true record shows there was no possible way to get to all those people to do it...Greg again takes you for a moron and tries to insert something that happened 15 minutes later as a feeble excuse...

>
> In any case - what he told Kelley was that the person he assumed was Secret Service, rushed in as he was standing IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING and ready to leave. https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0327a.htm

LIAR!...Allman made clear this all happened just inside the building...

>
> Again - the interogators are paraphrasing, We don;t know how well they did that. If taken literally, Oswald was already outside the building when this happened OR it happened as Oswald told Holmes and Jarman tod the HSCA. It happened AFTER "the officer told me to stand aside" per Holmes and after "the officer sent him back in the building" per Jarman. Those two statement amount to the same thing.

The Prayer Man liars can't get their story straight...First they have Oswald hanging with Shelley outside during the shots and then they have Oswald standing stationary on the top landing after he was stopped by a cop, but he can't do that and still be inside when Campbell returns from the Knoll...Greg is obviously just making it up as he goes along...

>
> You have no proof it was Allman or the other reporter who also claims to have been the one. There was indeed a Secret Service agent who went in after that to use the phone. Powell - AFTER THE PLACE WAS SEALED and HE GOT IN by flashing his cedentials. Allman and co were simply covering up that Oswald was still around after the place was sealed.

LIAR!...Both phone users said they got in before the building was sealed...What they were covering-up is the fact they didn't see Oswald leave through the front...

> > And by the way, Holmes testified that Oswald told him that he (Oswald) went DOWN the stairs after hearing the commotion. He wasn't in the lunch room at the time of the shooting.
> Again, he was in the Domino room, went up one floor to get a coke, came back down, had his sandwich and made it to the steps just in time for the parade. Went straight back in where he was seen by Campbell - and then some time AFTER that, he tried to get out to see what was happening - was sent back in by a cop and told to wait. When Kaminski and Truly were ready to start their checks, Oswald showed his old library card, was given the okay by Truly and allowed to leave.

The liar Greg fails to inform the reader that Campbell went to the Knoll before he came back and saw Oswald in the utility closet...Greg offers no evidence to prove Oswald wasn't in the 2nd floor Lunch Room - he just pronounces it...Greg hopes you are stupid enough to not notice that the "commotion" was the assassination and ensuing chaos and noise...Therefore if Oswald "Came downstairs" upon hearing the assassination he had to be upstairs in the 2nd floor Lunch Room prior to that...Greg contemptuously ignores the important part of Holmes' witnessing where he heard Oswald describe being stopped in the "Vestibule"...Oswald was a Depository employee, so being privy to the nomenclature used by the management in the Depository he knew that "Vestibule" was only used to describe the enclosure that was constructed over the 2nd floor Lunch Room entrance to cut down noise from the stairs...Parker is a creepy liar because he knows Holmes said the stop occurred on the first floor...Greg is a liar and deliberate distorter of context because here is the true context of what Holmes overheard:

" He didn't say up where, and he didn't mention what floor he was on. Nobody seemed to ask him.

You see, I assumed that obvious questions like that had been asked in previous interrogation. So I didn't interrupt too much, but he said, "Send the elevator back up to me."

Then he said when all this commotion started, "I just went on downstairs." And he didn't say whether he took the elevator or not. He said, "I went down, and as I started to go out and see what it was all about, a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later. Then I just went on out in the crowd to see what it was all about. "

Nobody asked Oswald what floor he was on before he came downstairs because the Commission knew it was the 2nd floor and they were not about to expose Oswald's alibi and true location...Greg is lying when he tries to weasel around the true context of going downstairs...As Holmes shows, Oswald could not have gone down the front steps, as Greg lies, and take an elevator to do it as Holmes indicates...By floating the elevator as a possible means for Oswald coming downstairs Holmes is showing the true context was coming downstairs from the 2nd floor Lunch Room where Holmes overheard Oswald describe being stopped in the "Vestibule"...There is no doubt the context is coming downstairs from the 2nd floor since Oswald said he was stopped by the cop AFTER he came downstairs...Only a ballsy liar and evidence hoaxer would dare try to switch this to the front steps in order to force his lies to work:

"Mr. BELIN. By the way, where did this policeman stop him when he was coming down the stairs at the Book Depository on the day of the shooting?

Mr. HOLMES. He said it was in the vestibule.

Mr. BELIN. He said he was in the vestibule?

Mr. HOLMES. Or approaching the door to the vestibule. He was just coming, apparently, and I have never been in there myself. Apparently there is two sets of doors, and he had come out to this front part.

Mr. BELIN. Did he state it was on what floor?

Mr. HOLMES. First floor. The front entrance to the first floor.

Mr. BELIN. Did he say anything about a Coca Cola or anything like that, if you remember?

Mr. HOLMES. Seems like he said he was drinking a Coca Cola, standing there by the Coca Cola machine drinking a Coca Cola."

What assholes and liars the JFK research community are...Anyone who is competent enough to participate in evidence discussion should know that Holmes proved what I am saying in his wording here...He described the "Vestibule" (that had to be the enclosure to the 2nd floor Lunch Room) and confirmed it by saying Oswald was standing by the Coke machine when he was stopped...This description cannot be anything other than the 2nd floor Lunch Room as Holmes correctly related it...Yet Holmes goes on to assure us the event happened on the first floor by the front entrance to the building...There is no doubt what so ever that this is proof that Holmes overheard the description of two separate stops...One happening in the 2nd floor Lunch Room, as Baker described, and the other happening in the Lobby and then being covered-up by the Warren Commission...Holmes was a Postal Inspector and was outside the loop on the gag orders...He also never actually visited the Depository so he didn't realize the serious mistake he was making in exposing the incriminating conspiracy evidence...

This bozo ignoramus James Gordon makes it his duty to destroy and remove the guy who brilliantly cracked the case and protect silly hacks and their idiotic hack-work...

Greg Parker

unread,

Nov 2, 2021, 10:18:02 PM11/2/21

On Wednesday, November 3, 2021 at 6:50:01 AM UTC+11, Scrum Drum wrote:

> Greg is just a crazy bullshit artist who finds a weak crack in the evidence and exploits it as much as possible in order to hatch a brand new theory out of it...

Nope. Earliest evidence is usually the most reliable. When such evidence has multiple, disparate sources, all of which is deep-sixed and where witesses suddenly start changig their stories and are never questioned about their original statements, you can be sure that the earliest evidence is pretty close to what really happened and that there is a substantial cover-up in progress. The fact that you are siding with the Nutters here is very telling. You may end up being asked to hand in your Tinfoil Hat if you're not very careful.

> He provides us an example of how Baker being unsure whether the shots came from the Depository or the Dal Tex now becomes a solid claim that Baker went to the Dal Tex Building

No. It is what is Brian. His uncertainty is just one thing. The film showing him NOT heading up the steps of the TSBD but seeming to be heading toward the Dal-Tex where there was a bit of commotion about unaurthorised people being on the 3rd floor is another which in itself is further supported by his own statment about questionin someone a 3rd floor.

> and the Lunch Room Encounter is now a proven hoax...

Yay. You finally get it!

So showing us in public that Greg has created the bed rock of a radical new scenario based on flimsy suggestions from Baker's testimony he then draws you in to his self pronouncement of that new scenario that is used to distract you from the fact he is flagrantly ignoring all the evidence that was already posted that refuted it...Greg is an asshole and if you follow his posting he lures in to his bullshit presentation in order to distract you from the fact he is ignoring all of your evidence...

In typical Nutter fashion, you are labelling the official story as rock solid while labelling all the evidence that was covered up as "flimsy". You have it all ass-end up, Brian. When exactly did you become a Nutter?

Despite Greg's insistence that the evidence forces him to acknowledge Baker went to the Dal Tex Building, he still hasn't answered for the multitudes of witnesses who said he went in to the Book Depository...

Multitudes? Too funny! I keep asking you for the evidence of this. Why can't you cite it?

And this flagrant children's wishing of evidence in to being is given approval by Jim D who also avoids answering for its mountain of fatal flaws...Greg just outright ignores that there are ZERO witnesses to Baker making a major deviation from the official story...The Baker diversion claim is based not on credible analysis of evidence but is instead based on JFK community insider hustlers exploiting their corrupted advantage to the max and avoiding discussing the serious evidence that refutes it...

"Mountain of fatal flaws". Pure unsupportable hyperbole, Brian. Hot air. Bloviation. It is all you have.

No witnesses to Baker going in to the TSBD with Truly. You only have two witesses. One saw Truly with Lumkin, not Baker, and the other was a scared Black Man who chanhged his story to help the piss poor case the authories had. Amd even then, all he caimed to see was a helmut - not Baker. That was good enough for Witchfilder Generals of Warren Commission, but it would not have stood up in court.

My flabber is totally gasted by your willingness to side with the Nutters on every aspect of this case. I thought I knew you, Brian, but now I feel like I have been taken in by a true chameleon. I saw you as a future star of the troofer movement, being interviewed on all the biggest tinfoil hatter shows. Now? Now, I don't even know who you are any more. You have completely shattered my trust in humanity,

> Welcome to the DiEugenio/ROKC-corrupted internet...Parker avoids answering my posts to him because they are devastating and he literally cannot answer them without looking like contemptuous troll that he is...When these nuts are denied the unfair advantage of banning and censorship and I am in the room they quickly fold like the Greg has done in every thread he has engaged me in...

My fortune cookie told me "you can't argue with stupid." I have tried, Lawdy I have tried. I have posted more actual evidece in this one thread than this place sees ina year. You have posted zero evidence.

> Greg is a kook...The obvious reason Baker parked in front of the Depository is because it was facing him and he saw the pigeons fly off its roof...

Jesus H Christ. The man himself said he did not know whic of te two the pigeons flew from. And on that subject, try and find anyone else who saw any pigeons flying off startled by the shots. Good luck with that.

Here is Greg stirring his troll cauldron and asking you to go under his spell of evidence-cooking...In the mean time he trollishly ignores the fact that every one involved and ALL the witnesses said Baker ran in to the Depository...Every time I mention that Pauline Sanders was standing just to the east of the glass front door and therefore was in the best position to see Baker run in Greg ignores it...

No. That's not true. Every time you post it, I ask you to provide the evidence for it and you fail to do so each time. She seems to be your idea of "multitudes".

So once again, I'll do your work for you.

From Sanders' statment of Nov 24:
"She said within a matter of ten seconds a uniform police officer in a white helmet ran into the building but she did not observe him any further and could not state where he went in the building."

and

"Mrs. SANDERS advised that Mr. Campbell, Office Manager, arrived shortly after the police officer entered the building."

So Mr Campbell ARRIVED shortly after the police office went in (as oppsed to the police officer and Truly). Since Campbell had been outside the whole time until AFTER the shots... he could only ARRIVE if he had left the scene and returned. This has to be well after Fatman and Ribbon allegedly heriocally entered. In fact, Campbell did tell the Dallas Morning News that he rushed up the Grassy Knoll before returning and reentering the building
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/PMAGIrMz6xozA6ETmuVHcwP3_1bZQpxijUoI-cf-iFNK-DNCEgNcqP-IXSHKE_zPnK5eEHzoMXgIsr3lTJq8iMDntrgDNyYxI1QK_CD__FBewWtcc8es-by_KaUlvSRB0P1XIzUbxmJdESyRQmP5tSYk7OaQ7lXlrhbFZYY_L_7OIWVR09w

Yet his statement of Novemeber 24 says he rushed straight into the builing.
"He then observed the car bearing President KENNEDY to slow down, a near stop, and a motorcycle policeman rushed up. Immediately following this, he observed the car rush away from the scene. He then immediately rushed into his building without having seen anything unusual from any window of his building. Inside he was told shortly thereafter by the warehouse superintendent, Mr. TRULY, that all the employees of the company had been rounded up and one employee, LEE HARVEY OSWALD, was missing."

Of course, he also said he saw Oswald on the first floor after racing back in when interviewed by the New York Heald Tribune. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/wpwVHfYV2zt8rUuFSUK-qb_iiV5FmiX3dVBlXMsuil5SMwr6wEvM8Dpi34cZxSfUocSdy8GonpQtyMpJtCSoPNJ6K3xRZho6OiiwT2fqGnMj9opxbW5Y05KleMHeCSizRA

if Stanton saw an officer enter the building shortly before Campbell arrived.... it is way too late to be Baker if Campbell did indeed first go up the grassy knoll... but if Campbell lied - or the newspaper just misquoted about any grassy knoll run, and Campbell did run straight back in - then Oswald is right there on the first floor. Sanders uses the crowd as the excuse for not seeing him on that first floor. Again quting from her statemnt. "She said she did not observe OSWALD in the lobby but the lobby was crowded with people at this time." Why are they even asking if she saw him in the lobby? Because they know damn well that Oswald placed himself there and Campbell confirmed it to the media before changing his story.

Sanders cop tale was about a flatfoot name Schidt. Officer Jack Schidt. He raced up the building with a Mr Really. Nort Really.

> What Greg is showing us there is he needs to ignore certain evidence to make his wack theory work...Others were focused on the limousine or not getting involved...The only person who doubts Baker ran in to the Depository (as Darnell shows him doing) is evidence fantasist Greg Parker who is doing it so he can clear the Lunch Room Encounter out of the way of his nutty Prayer Man theory...A few years ago even Jim D admitted that when he first saw the image of Prayer Man he thought the person in question was too stocky to be Oswald...

As did I. But tat is put to bed by the window behind him casting a reflection wich is partially seen in the frame and adds what appears to be a few extra inches of girth. His hands are not in the prawyer as originally thought in theWeigman frame What appears to be a fist or a hand is really his elbow His arms are folded and he s leaning agaist the wall. Once you eiminate the refection, his build is exactly that of Oswald.

You try and get around this by somehow claiming that glass does not cast any reflection.

The evidence hustlers are avoiding admitting that Jim said that in public on Facebook...They are taking full advantage of my banning

We are taking full advantage of your banning to revel in relatiive sanity. I love ya, old mate. You provide some of the unintentionally funniest commentary online, but you are also batshit crazy and prone to cause trouble, so like everyone else, I can only take you in small doses.

>to hustle evidence they know is not true and have no respect for the research world or the public...Greg is mis-quoting Baker's Commission testimony so he can avoid answering why there were ZERO witnesses to Baker making a huge deviation away from the official story and to the Dal Tex...

That was simply never investigated. And ven if t had been, it would have been covered up.

If you listen to this crackpot Parker, it means that you believe Truly & Baker are excellent actors passing off a hoax story in all their accounts of the Lunch Room Encounter - not to mention all the other witnesses who verified it...

Why was Baker kept on ice after his 3rd or 4th floor-laden statement until his Warren Commission deviation? Truly was a long-time friend of the FBI, as was Cason and possibly Shelley.= (who was NOT - repeat NOT a CIA agent)

> Greg once again uses bullshit con-man hustling to lure you away from the fact his fantasy scenario is the one that has ZERO co-witnessing behind it...This is a perfect example of blowhard Greg convincing us his bullshit fantasy is the right version based mostly on his hot-winded insistence... Meanwhile, back in credible reality, ALL the evidence points towards the Lunch Room Encounter being real...

"Credible reality"??? LOL. See what I mean, Brian. That there is comedy gold.

> What Greg is not telling you here is Lovelady told that false tale of seeing Oswald leave by the front door because he was trying to cover for his partner Shelley...Lovelady was lying so he chose the most vulnerable witness to tell his fake account to knowing that Jarman being black could be used to destroy his credibility if needed

Oh to have your imagination! I personally, would move to Hollywood.

>...Greg never asks himself why Lovelady 1) Never mentioned this before in any of his interviews?...

He was cut off when about to say who was standing behind him on the steps. No way would he have actually said it was Oswald even though he knew it was - but the commission was not about to take any chances. They all knew the fix was in and that the worst thing they could do for a peaceful life was to volunteer any unwabted truths.

> 2) Why no one else in the crowded Lobby witnessed this or spoke about it?...3)

Most did not notice because of the general chaos, and because they worked for the book companies and took no notice at the best of times to any of the laborers. Some at least, obviously spoke about it in the days following the assassination with work colleagues.

> Why the HSCA showed no interest in this critical witnessing or interviewed the cop who let Oswald walk out after ordering him to "step aside"...

The HSCA was more honest in its pursuit of the facts than was the WC. But the HSCA investigators who questioned TSBD employees were clueless. It is obvious from the questioning that they had done no homework on these people, let aone on their past statments. This meant important leads were missed and not followed up.

Greg is lying here and he knows this story isn't true...Lovelady's telling Jarman this false tale and trying to cover for his partner Shelley is actually very important evidence for my side because it shows, as DiEugenio says, "a consciousness of guilt" that made Lovelady try to cover for what he knew Shelley did...

There's that vivid imagination again.

> Greg is an asshole and there is no way the Commission would avoid investigating something as important as Oswald's departure from the Depository...

Brian is a Nutter sychophant. The WC had no power to investigate anything. The commish took the word of the FBI and DPD. As do you.

And that is ARSEhole, not asshole. Speak the Queen's lingo as she is meant to be spoke, cobber. Fair dinkum.

> > You will also need to exlain how the old Elsbeth address is on the list created by Erich Kaminski by checking ID before people left. Myscenario explains it quite well. We know from the police memo that Truly and Kaminski were checking ID and veriying their business in in the building beore letting them leave and we know this was verified by Bul Frazier in testimony. Oswald only had ONE pive of ID with an address on it - his old library card. The address on that card was the old Elsbeth one. Where do YOU think they got that Elsbeth address?
> Here is Greg once again lying and trying to stretch events that happened 15 minutes after the time periods in question in to plausible excuses...The rest of the community has some pretty intelligent people, yet they sit back and allow Greg to get away with these goofy stretches unchallenged...

Nice dodge.

> > I would also like to know how Oswald KNEW that this process at the process at the front door was in place if he was already long gone? Was he psychic, Steve?
> > This would be before 12:35 or so. The police did not secure the building until around 12: 37 (if not later). And they went into the building thinking that the sniper was still there. As Buell Frazier testified, the workers/employees weren't allowed to leave the building until after 1:00.
> Here is Greg using the hustler's magic trick of inserting Oswald's knowledge of the Kaminski ID check as real when he has presented ZERO fucking evidence for it except his lying suggestion...Holmes overheard Oswald telling of being stopped by a cop at the front door when he tried to leave...There was nothing in Oswald's statement that mentioned this being at the time of Kaminski's alleged ID check (that Greg pulled out of his ass) - which was 20 minutes after the shots not 5...What Greg is really showing us here is his Lunch Room Hoax is built on firm, confidently-suggested bullshit and nothing else...

Okay. You admit Oswald said he was stopped by a cop at the front door. Oswald was the unluckiest sonuva bitch in history Stopped by a cop on the second floor. Stopped again by a cop at the front door, stopped again by a cop in Oak Cliff and then beaten up and arrested by 6 cops while watching a movie.

Hint: two of those things never happened.

> Speculative bullshit that is used to avoid the fact Truly could not have OK-ed Oswald at the front door since he was still upstairs at the time...The reason they said "superintendent" instead of "building manager" is because it was Shelley, not Truly, and they were trying to hide his assisting Oswald out of the building...

What was that again about speculative bullshit, Mr Projectioner? We have a police report on duties carried out that day confirming that Truly was stationed at the door with Kaminski. End of story.

Frazier was outside on the corner at this time and would soon see Harvey exit the loading dock after Shelley ushered him safely around the police cordon...Greg insults your intelligence and asks you to ignore that Truly could never have gotten away with not admitting clearing Oswald at the front door if the evidence ever came out for it...

Well, I'd hate to insult anyone's intelligence by claiming the WC, FBI and DPD got everything right, including nailing Lee Oswald as the killer that day - but then add that LEE framed his CIA spermbank experiment brother for it all before then disappearing with the spermbank experiment's fake mom. I think they went to Miami to shoot some MILF porn.

> Greg is dishonestly avoiding admitting that "Came downstairs to see what the commotion was all about" is PROOF that Oswald came down from the 2nd floor Lunch Room where Baker had just confronted him...

Nope. Never happened. He tried to go down the steps from the first floor to the sidewalk. But you stick with the WC, little buddy. You and the Warrenistas make a beautiful bromance.

These trolls know this which is why I saw one of them try to get around it by saying Oswald was referring to going down the Depository front steps when he said "came downstairs"...They are such pathetic liars - but this is not worthy of contest to the rest of the community who stay quiet...It is not possible by the timing of Truly going upstairs from the Lunch Room Encounter, and Oswald going downstairs, for Truly to be the "superintendent" who cleared Oswald at the front door...It had to be Shelley, as all the covering-up that followed evidences...

Right! It is not possible. The lunchroom encounter was a fraud.

> Greg is once again inventing fantasy scenarios and inserting them as real...He insults your intelligence by asking you to believe a cop following a presidential assassination ordered someone to step aside and not leave and then let him leave anyway

Hahahaha! Not leave --- until they were ready to take his contact details. Sheesh.

> Greg is conscious of his bullshit because he can't bring himself to mention the lies of Truly checking Oswald's library card, which wouldn't be necessary if Truly OK-ed him as an employee...Greg is telling us here he knows this was 5 minutes after the shots and not 20...

The card was for Kaminski's records so they had a contact address they could reach him at -- same as evry other employee. Are you suggesting that the cps didn't want to speak to any of the employees again???? Seriously? And btw, five minutes is even too long for the WC bullshit timeline....

> Jack Dougherty said in no uncertain terms that he was alone in the Domino Room

Everything that came out of Dougherty's mouth was in uncertain terms.

> while Oswald ate his lunch upstairs in the 2nd floor Lunch Room...

Holy crap! ho many times do you gotta be told that we have it from a former employee that the laborers were not allowed to eat in the 2nd floor lunchroom? The book companies had sublet that entire floor. IT WAS THEIR LUNCHROOM AND COULD NOT BE USED BY DIRTY LABORERES EXCEPT TO USE THE MACHINES.

All the Stanton claptrap deleted for the sake of EVERYONE's sanity.

> Greg has Oswald going in and out a lot in his make it up as he goes along fantasy scenario above...He contradicts himself because he has Oswald in the Lobby utility closet before he "Went downstairs to see what all the commotion was about"...Greg once again insults our intelligence by asking us to believe the dozens of people seen going back in to the Depository in Darnell did not see Oswald right in front of them...I

Ochus Campbell did. He said so.

t has been long proven that Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton in Darnell and that she is in the process of "staring at each other in shock for the longest time" as Frazier described...The reason none of the employees going back in in Darnell said they saw Oswald in the west corner of the portal is because it was Stanton...

You have long proven you are obsessed with trying to discredit ROKC because we destroyed your favorite witness, Ralph Yates. Up until then, you agreed that PM wasa male. Go figure,

Scrum Drum

unread,

Nov 3, 2021, 3:51:48 PM11/3/21

On Tuesday, November 2, 2021 at 10:18:02 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 3, 2021 at 6:50:01 AM UTC+11, Scrum Drum wrote:
>

> Multitudes? Too funny! I keep asking you for the evidence of this. Why can't you cite it?

I have repeated the list of witnesses several times yet Greg trolls and pretends he's never seen it...We have Truly, Sanders, Piper, West, Oswald, Mrs Garner, and Bonnie Ray Williams and Darnell who all witnessed Baker running in to the Depository...Now let's ask projecting Greg how many witnesses he has for Baker doing a major deviation from the official story and diverting over to the Dal Tex Building in front of hundreds of witnesses?...NONE...ZERO...Yet in Greg's trolling mind this then becomes me failing to show evidence in response to his demands that I have failed to live up to...This Fetzer/Cinque-type approach by Greg is usually judged to be trolling and the person committing it is usually removed from the community, but in Greg's case he gets promoted by mainly fringe internet Lone Nutters and the person who refuted him gets the banning Greg deserves...

>
> No witnesses to Baker going in to the TSBD with Truly. You only have two witesses. One saw Truly with Lumkin, not Baker, and the other was a scared Black Man who chanhged his story to help the piss poor case the authories had. Amd even then, all he caimed to see was a helmut - not Baker. That was good enough for Witchfilder Generals of Warren Commission, but it would not have stood up in court.

Again, if the JFK internet were credibly moderated you would be prevented from posting what you post here...What is really happening here is you have failed to answer the point that Pauline Sanders saw Baker enter because she was standing next to the door and was in a position to see it...Typical of your ROKC boy's club research you take an illusion caused by Darnell's camera lens where Baker looks like he jumps to the right at the last second and make that the end all that you use to ignore all the other evidence...You hand wave and say there was some activity on the 3rd floor of Dal Tex but that is just you adding vague bullshit to get around honestly answering that you still have ZERO witnesses to Baker's major diversion from the official scenario...

You are lying when you say Mrs Garner saw Truly with Lumpkin...I previously cited the June 1964 Stroud letter where Mrs Garner said she saw "THE" cop with Truly..."THE" cop means she was specifically referring to Baker and you uncredibly ignored that...The reason you ignored that Greg is because you are an uncredible nut who ignores evidence he knows refutes him...You also ignored my citation of Lumpkin going to Parkland before coming back to the Depository...Lumpkin could not have returned to the Depository for at least 20 minutes and Mrs Garner made clear "THE" cop and Truly came up right after Adams & Styles descended...Because the JFK internet is an unmoderated free for all you are allowed to get away with these easily refuted lies without consequence...You also failed to honestly answer the fact Williams saw the helmet emerge immediately after Mrs Garner saw Truly & Baker go up to the 5th floor...On a credibly moderated JFK internet, Greg, you and your obnoxious trolling would be banned and removed...

> > You have posted zero evidence.

You are a liar and anyone can read this thread to see the evidence you are flagrantly dodging with lies, trolling, ignoring, and false claims...

.
> Jesus H Christ. The man himself said he did not know whic of te two the pigeons flew from. And on that subject, try and find anyone else who saw any pigeons flying off startled by the shots. Good luck with that.

As usual, you fail to answer the point that from Baker's perspective the roof of the Depository was completely view-able and the roof of the Dal Tex was less visible because of the oblique angle...Typical of ROKC bullshit, we waste time answering your idiotic excuses while ignoring that Baker drove to the Depository because that is where he saw the birds fly from the roof...

> No. That's not true. Every time you post it, I ask you to provide the evidence for it and you fail to do so each time. She seems to be your idea of "multitudes".

What we have here is a troll who, not having any witnesses to Baker going to Dal Tex, goes on the offensive and demands witnesses to my witnesses...Greg fails to answer the basic point that Sanders witnessed Baker going in because she was right there at the door...Greg has no witnesses to Baker running over to Dal Tex because he never did...Funny how, having not gone in to the Depository, Baker was able to recall the small locked swinging door Truly ran in to...Asking for evidence in front of evidence you are ignoring is generally known as "trolling" on the internet...

> Immediately following this, he observed the car rush away from the scene.

Greg is taking Campbell's trip to the Knoll being condensed in to "he observed the car rush away from the scene" and turning it in to his grand Prayer Man Lunch Room Hoax conspiracy...

>
> Of course, he also said he saw Oswald on the first floor after racing back in when interviewed by the New York Heald Tribune. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/wpwVHfYV2zt8rUuFSUK-qb_iiV5FmiX3dVBlXMsuil5SMwr6wEvM8Dpi34cZxSfUocSdy8GonpQtyMpJtCSoPNJ6K3xRZho6OiiwT2fqGnMj9opxbW5Y05KleMHeCSizRA

Liar...We both know this was after Campbell had gone to the Knoll and back...They also avoided asking him how Oswald was dressed because he was wearing a white T-shirt...My version has to be true because the Oswald Campbell saw was Lee and he was wearing a white T-shirt...Campbell could not have rushed right back in and saw him because Mrs Reid's witnessing had not happened yet...

>
> if Sanders saw an officer enter the building shortly before Campbell arrived.... it is way too late to be Baker if Campbell did indeed first go up the grassy knoll... but if Campbell lied - or the newspaper just misquoted about any grassy knoll run, and Campbell did run straight back in - then Oswald is right there on the first floor. Sanders uses the crowd as the excuse for not seeing him on that first floor. Again quting from her statemnt. "She said she did not observe OSWALD in the lobby but the lobby was crowded with people at this time." Why are they even asking if she saw him in the lobby? Because they know damn well that Oswald placed himself there and Campbell confirmed it to the media before changing his story.

Liar...You are using your typical trolling to avoid admitting Sanders specified the officer in the white helmet entered 10 seconds after the shots...(It was more like 30 or 35)...

That crowd on the first floor had no excuse for not seeing Oswald leave through the front door if he did...

You are trollishly avoiding the obvious...If Prayer Man was Oswald Sanders would have seen him right there since he would have been right behind Baker as he ran in...

>
> Sanders cop tale was about a flatfoot name Schidt. Officer Jack Schidt. He raced up the building with a Mr Really. Nort Really.

You are lying...Baker was the only possibility for Sanders' "ten seconds" as Darnell shows...

> As did I. But tat is put to bed by the window behind him casting a reflection wich is partially seen in the frame and adds what appears to be a few extra inches of girth. His hands are not in the prawyer as originally thought in theWeigman frame What appears to be a fist or a hand is really his elbow His arms are folded and he s leaning agaist the wall. Once you eiminate the refection, his build is exactly that of Oswald.

Typical Parker Rube Goldberg crap...For years I have been telling Parker that if there was a reflection in the glass the thing that would reflect the most would be Prayer Man's white cheek...But if we look at all the imagery we don't see any reflection of the cheek...Parker is lying because he knows he can't get around the fact Prayer Man's wide girth, as seen in the best images, excludes him from being Oswald...Stanton just so happened to have the obese features seen on Prayer Man...Greg also avoids answering for the fact Prayer Man's right arm could not be reflected and we can see straight obese features, including an obese hand...There's no glass reflection excuse for that fat right forearm and hand...Greg is a fool who long after I proved Prayer Man was Stanton still trolls that it is Oswald...Prayer Man is facing Frazier and is not leaning against the wall, as Parker falsely observes...That facing towards Frazier is exactly what Frazier described Stanton as doing at the time...

> That was simply never investigated. And ven if t had been, it would have been covered up.

You're a troll who can't answer for the fact that no witnesses spoke of this by means the usual non-investigation ways that showed up everywhere else in the assassination...If Baker took a radical departure from the claimed scenario someone would have spoken up...A voice stress analysis of Baker describing the Lunch Room Encounter to CBS would show he was telling the truth...

> Why was Baker kept on ice after his 3rd or 4th floor-laden statement until his Warren Commission deviation? Truly was a long-time friend of the FBI, as was Cason and possibly Shelley.= (who was NOT - repeat NOT a CIA agent)

Baker was isolated because he witnessed Oswald's obvious 2nd floor Lunch Room location during the shooting...And it is even possible Baker witnessed Lee in a white T-shirt right after on the 3rd floor landing...Both Baker & Truly saw Oswald's partly-eaten sandwich and apple on the table as well as Coke and knew he had been in there the whole time...When Baker emerged on the 2nd floor staircase landing he saw Oswald stationary and flat-footed staring back at him from the Vestibule window...Oswald was shocked to see a cop so he flinched back and withdrew in to the Lunch Room...Baker saw that guilty flinching and pursued him...This could not be told to the FBI or Commission because it exonerated Oswald and showed he hadn't just ran down from the 6th floor...

Shelley told Dean Glaze he was CIA...

> >...Greg never asks himself why Lovelady 1) Never mentioned this before in any of his interviews?...

> He was cut off when about to say who was standing behind him on the steps. No way would he have actually said it was Oswald even though he knew it was - but the commission was not about to take any chances. They all knew the fix was in and that the worst thing they could do for a peaceful life was to volunteer any unwabted truths.

Greg is a troll who switches the subject instead of answering what was asked...If Lovelady saw Oswald leave via the front door why didn't he tell this story on the first day?...Not only does Greg switch the subject but he lies and doesn't tell you Lovelady later clarified that he was about to say Frazier was directly behind him (which is what is seen in Darnell)...The reason Lovelady never mentioned Oswald leaving through the front door is because Oswald never did...Greg dishonestly ignores Frazier seeing Oswald exit via the loading dock...Lovelady was covering for Shelley (as is proven by HSCA not pursuing Lovelady about this)...

> > 2) Why no one else in the crowded Lobby witnessed this or spoke about it?...3)

> Most did not notice because of the general chaos, and because they worked for the book companies and took no notice at the best of times to any of the laborers. Some at least, obviously spoke about it in the days following the assassination with work colleagues.

You are a liar Greg and you haven't answered for why the Commission never interviewed the cop who stopped Oswald at the front door...Oswald's exit was one of the most important pieces of evidence...We both know the reason the Commission avoided interviewing that cop about Oswald's departure is because they were avoiding exposing dangerous evidence of Shelley's assisting Oswald out of the building after that cop told Oswald to stay...

> Greg is lying here and he knows this story isn't true...Lovelady's telling Jarman this false tale and trying to cover for his partner Shelley is actually very important evidence for my side because it shows, as DiEugenio says, "a consciousness of guilt" that made Lovelady try to cover for what he knew Shelley did...

> There's that vivid imagination again.

You're trolling instead of answering proven facts...When you do that you lose the debate and I win...

> > > You will also need to exlain how the old Elsbeth address is on the list created by Erich Kaminski by checking ID before people left. Myscenario explains it quite well. We know from the police memo that Truly and Kaminski were checking ID and veriying their business in in the building beore letting them leave and we know this was verified by Bul Frazier in testimony. Oswald only had ONE pive of ID with an address on it - his old library card. The address on that card was the old Elsbeth one. Where do YOU think they got that Elsbeth address?

You failed to answer the point that Frazier had not gone back in to the building before he witnessed Harvey emerge from the rear loading dock after Shelley led him out of the building...You also trollishly ignore that Truly was upstairs at this time because Mrs Garner saw him head up to the 5th floor right after Adams & Styles descended...Greg, you are a liar because we both know the ID-ing before letting the employees leave happened at least 30 minutes after the shots (1:00)...Roger Craig and Frazier both made clear their Oswald's left from 5 to 10 minutes after the shots...You are trollishly violating the basic rules of evidence and compensating for it with fantasy bullshit and desperate replacement of real doings with false references...

> Okay. You admit Oswald said he was stopped by a cop at the front door. Oswald was the unluckiest sonuva bitch in history Stopped by a cop on the second floor. Stopped again by a cop at the front door, stopped again by a cop in Oak Cliff and then beaten up and arrested by 6 cops while watching a movie.

You're trolling Greg and not answering the point...That would get you banned in a credible forum and a decision would be made against you in the debate...The point you are avoiding is, a correct reading of Holmes' witnessing would show he overheard Oswald describe a second stop by a cop in the Lobby that was covered-up because Shelley helped get Oswald out of the building...You know this is true because we can see the Commission avoid any serious investigation in to how Oswald left...

> What was that again about speculative bullshit, Mr Projectioner? We have a police report on duties carried out that day confirming that Truly was stationed at the door with Kaminski. End of story.

You are a liar and anyone can see you inserting something that happened a half hour later exactly because you can't answer my evidence...

> Frazier was outside on the corner at this time and would soon see Harvey exit the loading dock after Shelley ushered him safely around the police cordon...Greg insults your intelligence and asks you to ignore that Truly could never have gotten away with not admitting clearing Oswald at the front door if the evidence ever came out for it...

> Well, I'd hate to insult anyone's intelligence by claiming the WC, FBI and DPD got everything right, including nailing Lee Oswald as the killer that day - but then add that LEE framed his CIA spermbank experiment brother for it all before then disappearing with the spermbank experiment's fake mom. I think they went to Miami to shoot some MILF porn.

Your trollish response shows you are obviously shaken by proof you can't answer...You can't give a credible answer to the fact that Truly never said he cleared Oswald at the front door because he was aware that his testimony showed him to be upstairs at the time...You are publicly skirting evidence with lies Greg...They said "Superintendent" because that was a safe word that would also cover Shelley while not exposing it wasn't Truly...Just like yourself, the guilty Commission avoided this obvious dilemma and never sought to explain it because they knew it was damning...So you still haven't given a credible answer to it...

> > Greg is dishonestly avoiding admitting that "Came downstairs to see what the commotion was all about" is PROOF that Oswald came down from the 2nd floor Lunch Room where Baker had just confronted him...

> Nope. Never happened. He tried to go down the steps from the first floor to the sidewalk. But you stick with the WC, little buddy. You and the Warrenistas make a beautiful bromance.

You ignored, in public, my citation of Holmes' testimony where he said they hadn't decided if Oswald took the elevator to go downstairs to see what the commotion was about...Since it is not possible to take the elevator to go down the front entryway steps that proves you are a lying bullshit artist who deliberately enters false arguments to avoid evidence...The rest of what you writes proves that you are an unserious troll...Greg also avoided/ignored my entire evidence argument that proved there were provable references to both the second floor Lunch Room and Lobby in Holmes' statement...You've lost this one Greg...

> > Jack Dougherty said in no uncertain terms that he was alone in the Domino Room

> Everything that came out of Dougherty's mouth was in uncertain terms.

You are using a dishonest oversimplification to avoid answering for the fact that Dougherty not telling this to the Commission but telling it to Toff shows it was dangerous information and therefore real...It is also backed-up by all the other witnesses that Greg lies and says I've shown no evidence for..."Oswald was up eating his lunch in the 2nd floor Lunch Room while I ate my lunch in the Domino Room"...

> Holy crap! ho many times do you gotta be told that we have it from a former employee that the laborers were not allowed to eat in the 2nd floor lunchroom? The book companies had sublet that entire floor. IT WAS THEIR LUNCHROOM AND COULD NOT BE USED BY DIRTY LABORERES EXCEPT TO USE THE MACHINES.

The rest of the uncredible research community (clique) allow you to get away with ignoring/denying the many female secretaries who directly witnessed Oswald eating in that Lunch Room regularly...They were Sanders, Ruth Hendrix, Karen Westbrook, and another I can't recall...Even Buell Frazier said Oswald did not fit in with the common workers in the Domino Room (which was his way of saying he ate lunch in the 2nd floor Lunch Room where Harvey with his educated background did fit in)...It just shows what crazy balls you have that you think you could get away with ignoring those well-known witnesses...It is why Oswald was in the 2nd floor Lunch Room during the shooting...You know that which is why you deny it so trollishly....

unread,

Nov 7, 2021, 4:16:01 PM11/7/21

On Saturday, November 6, 2021 at 10:43:12 PM UTC-4, gparker...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, November 6, 2021 at 7:33:28 AM UTC+11, Scrum Drum wrote:

> Are you claiming she DIDN'T see them? Lumpkin, Truly and Fritz all confirm they both went up together. The only people claiming Baker and Truly went up togeher are... Baker and Truly... Since Garner only mentions seeing Truly going up ONCE with an offier, it has to be Truly and Lumkin because we know 100% that they did go up together. On the other hand, there is a big black cloud hanging ovr the Baker and Truly Charge of the Light Brigade. Baker getting the floor wrong... Baker not turning to run up the stairs.... people like Frazier and Molina not seeing them go in togerher.... West seeing Truly enter with a whole bunch of cops and FBI men.... the story of the Truly and Baker heroics is all over the place like a dog's breakfast.

You are publicly avoiding answering what was written Greg...I posted in plain language that Lumpkin went to Parkland and then came back to the Depository...When you made your conspicuously evasive answer above you were aware that the point in contest was that the cop Mrs Garner said she saw with Truly could not be Lumpkin because Mrs Garner was clearly talking about the very specific narrow time period that immediately followed Adams & Styles descending the steps...That time window could not be any more than 45 seconds and it could not have occurred any later than 2 minutes after the shots...Since the earliest Lumpkin could have gotten back to the Depository was 20 minutes after the shots this conclusively excludes Lumpkin as being the cop Mrs Garner saw Truly arriving on the 4th floor landing with...Furthermore Mrs Garner said "THE" cop...When she said that she was indicating Baker since Baker was "THE" cop Truly was said to be climbing the stairs with...You are in denial of a confirming witness Mr Parker and are using provably false claims to do it...

You have failed to answer this provable point...Therefore you default on giving a valid answer and a credibly moderated debate and moderator would score it against you and determine you have failed to answer good evidence...This is the problem with the JFK internet is there is no credible moderation out there and provable false claim makers are not held accountable for their bad claims and the evidence never progresses...

> Campbell's first story was that he rushed back in immediately and saw Oswald. That was to a New York paper. Someone tipped him off that this exonerates Oswald, so he had a second intervir=ew, this time with the Dallas Morning News and inserted the knoll run and left out seeing Oswald at all. That's how cover-ups work, Brian and you are supporting that cover-up to protect your Tinfoil hatted version of the Warren Commission lies. Shame on you. As for Mrs Reid... since she was with Truly and Campbell, she could not have seen Oswald on the second flooor after the shots. She lied to hep her boss, Mister Truly.... and you keep ignoring that she wa seen arriving back on the second floor with a bunch of other women... none of whom confirmed her alleged Oswald encounter. Never happened, bud

Campbell wasn't asked how Oswald was dressed because the authorities knew it was the same Lee in the white T-shirt seen by Mrs Reid and they didn't want Campbell exposing it...Campbell saw Lee in the utility closet because after Lee walked through the 2nd floor offices and was seen by Mrs Reid he went down the front steps to the Lobby where he saw Harvey in long-sleeves at the opposite end...Since Mrs Reid didn't see Oswald until 2 or more minutes after the shots that means Campbell went to the Knoll and back before he came in and saw Oswald - just like he said...

In 2018 I got a photo of Mrs Reid from Wanda Daniel...It came from Sarah's photo album of Book Depository employees...I called Groden and sent him a copy, since it looked different than the Mrs Reid seen out on the sidewalk...Groden told me the woman in Sarah's photo was the woman he interviewed back in the early 70's...Groden's Mrs Reid seen in that photo was different from the one seen out on the sidewalk who came back in with Mrs Campbell...

I see you chose to ignore Depository employee Karen Westbrook who was there at the time and a direct witness...Westbrook told Fagin that when the cops detained all the secretaries on the 2nd floor Mrs Reid told her of Oswald exiting the Lunch Room door with a Coke in a white T-shirt...Mrs Reid told this to Westbrook just minutes after the event happened...This PROVES Campbell could not have gone right back in and seen Oswald...

I also see you chose to ignore the 4 secretaries who gave detailed descriptions of witnessing Oswald eat in the 2nd floor clerical Lunch Room regularly...In the same seat Carolyn Arnold saw him sitting...Your contemptuous denial of this direct witnessing speaks for the rest of what you post...Again, you would be instantly dismissed in any credibly moderated forum where you were not allowed to BS your way out of your lies...

>
> The commission never interviewed Kaminski for the same reason they never interviewed many others. They were trying to prosecute a case against Oswald in a kangaroo court. Interviewing Kaminski would have been suicide for the case if he told the truth. It's not rocket sciece, Brian. You are simply relying on the Nutter tactic of taunting and asking stupid questions that have obvious answers. And that alon is reason enough to stop replying.

You are publicly back-pedalling in to generalities Greg...You ignored that we bracketed the timing of Oswald being stopped in the Lobby in relation to Frazier and Craig saying their Oswald's exited 5 to 10 minutes after the last shot...The earliest times the two Oswald's could have arrived in the Lobby after the Baker and Mrs Reid witnessings would be roughly 2 or 3 minutes...You are running to generalities in order to hide and avoid answering the better detailed argument...

> > You failed to answer the point that Frazier had not gone back in to the building before he witnessed Harvey emerge from the rear loading dock
> Frazier has privately admitted that he is giving the suckers what they want to hear. It is all about book sales.

The hell he did...We could put a voice stress analysis on his telling of that to Gary Mack and he would pass...You guys are just in straight denial of Armstrong's "Nay-Sayers" article where he proved the Bus/Taxi Encounter...

You are in denial of the fact you have no witnesses to Oswald exiting through the front door...And on top of that we have Lovelady obviously lying to Jarman in order to cover his CIA partner Shelley...

> It seems like you are saying Truly never testified to sayng he cleared Oswald at the front door because that would conflict with his previous testimony about clearing him on the second floor? Godamnit! and here I was thinking you thought he never testified to it because it never happened! Trouble is it did. The second floor was the story that never happened. Put your deerstalker on for a minute. Why would someone hire Oswald, allow him to be the first to leave after an assassination, then report him as missing - and then cover all of that up by making up a different version of events? Think hard, Brian. Could it be because Truly was the plotter's inside man?

Greg - a person who knows they can't answer facts usually responds with a question like you do...You have ignored my analysis of Holmes' statement that proved he overheard the telling of two separate stops...One in the Lunch Room and one in the Lobby...You are forgetting that you have badly failed to account for Mrs Garner's witnessing of Truly & Baker...You busted badly when you tried to force Lumpkin in to that slot so you still haven't come up with an answer or managed to refute Mrs Garner...There is no doubt that Mrs Garner saw Truly and "THE" cop in the 2 minute time slot that they would have been in were the 2nd floor Lunch Room Encounter real...Not only that but she then saw the pair head up to the 5th floor in perfect timing with Bonnie Ray Williams seeing Baker's helmet emerge above the boxes...You haven't managed to weasel out of this with your lies so the evidence still stands...You have the balls to insult the intelligence of the research community by entering your pronouncement against the witnessings of Sanders, West, Piper, Oswald, Mrs Garner, Bonnie Ray Williams, Dougherty, Truly, and Baker...Not only did the 2nd floor Lunch Room Encounter happen but another stop of Oswald in the Lobby happened too after the Lunch Room Encounter...Holmes overheard "Vestibule"...You can go look at the blueprints of the construction of that Vestibule and you will see it is labelled "Vestibule" on those blueprints...ALL of those who refer to "Vestibule" in testimony are referring to the enclosure to the 2nd floor Lunch Room entry...This was confirmed by Holmes mentioning the Coke machine that was only located in the 2nd floor Lunch Room...I see you dishonestly ignored that...

In March Barry Ernest wrote an article discussing Adrian Lee and Lt Day who both told him of hearing of the 2nd floor Lunch Room Encounter at 7 and 3 on the 22nd...You have failed to answer that Day heard about it before Baker wrote his affidavit...

> No Brian. Superintendant was Truly's official title. Shelley was the supervisor of the Miscelaneous Department. That wsa his title.
>
> > You ignored, in public,
>
> LOL.

Irrelevant when you consider Holmes overheard the story of Superintendent Truly stopping Oswald in the Lunch Room and was conflating the Lunch Room stop with the one in the Lobby...Again, if this were a credibly moderated debate you would be scored for failing to answer that you busted badly on your lie about Lumpkin being "THE" cop Mrs Garner saw...Since I have proven it was Baker therefore you have failed to account for the fact Mrs Garner then saw Truly headed up to the roof so therefore he could not possibly have had time to get down to the Lobby to OK Oswald...You are failing to answer for the fact Oswald failed to say "Manager Truly"...The reason Truly was not specifically named was because it was Shelley and they could not admit his obvious complicity...The reason Holmes' statement was muddled in to a confusing conflating of the Lunch Room stop with the Lobby stop was because they were trying to avoid explaining all this...That is proof in itself that you have failed to acknowledge or answer...

> No dear boy , that is not what Holmes said. It is not up to Holmes or anyone else to "decide" whether anyone did anything. His job was to ask questions and note the answers. In regard to elevators, what Holmes actually said was that Oswald neer said if he got an elevator and he did not specifically ask Oswald because he assumed it had been covered in a previous interrogation.

Nice mish-mash of evasion Greg that lets you avoid answering the point...I made my argument very clear...If you read Holmes' statement he left no doubt that Oswald came downstairs BEFORE he was stopped by a cop...Holmes is then asked if Oswald took the elevator to come downstairs...The context is irrefutably asking if Oswald took the elevator to come downstairs to the Lobby...So therefore I have refuted your dishonest contention that Oswald meant he went down the Depository front steps when he said he went downstairs to see what the commotion was about...I have caught you lying there Greg because Oswald could not have taken the elevator to go from the Lobby to the street and he could not have been stopped at the front door after he went downstairs to the street...

Credible moderation would score you on this and you would lose the debate and you and your claims would be officially discredited in the community...You are obviously ignoring evidence in order to enter false claims...

>
> Oswald that day carried out his normal routine He brought his lunch to work, went to the second floor and purchased a coke from the machine and went back down to eat. At 12:25, he looked through the domino room windows and saw Jarman and Norman re-enter from outside. a few minutes later, he went out and stood briefly in the back corner. Since the position he was in gave no view of the parade, he went back inside and was in or near the storage room when Campbell and others rushed in. He was unaware that Kennedy had been shot, He probably assumed like others, that the bangs he heard were really motorbikes backfiring. Now with people rushing in, he new somethng must have happened. That is the commotion that caused him to go out and see what was going on. But he is stopped by a cop as he is going down the steps and is called backed and asked to stand aside until they are ready to start taking names and contact details. When Kaminski and Truly are ready, he flashes his library card to Kaminski who noted the old address, and Truly gives him the all-clear by telling Kaminski that "he is okay. He works here." Oswald then takes at least two different buses to go to the movie theatre in Oak cliff (per the interrogation report of Agent Kelley).

I'm pressed for time so I can't answer this like it deserves...Dougherty made clear Oswald was up eating lunch in the 2nd floor Lunch Room while he himself ate his lunch in the Domino Room...The real witnessing shows Sarah Stanton heard Oswald say he was going back in to the Break Room...Shortly after Oswald told that to Stanton Carolyn Arnold would see Oswald sitting in the same seat the other secretaries said Oswald regularly sat in...Truly & Baker would then come upon Oswald in that same Lunch Room 6 minutes after Arnold...Buell Frazier would later admit that a person he could not name told him a partly-eaten sandwich and apple were seen on the table where Oswald was sitting...Frazier could not name that person (probably Truly) because it exposed the conspiracy too much and their true knowledge...

The Prayer Man as Stanton evidence has already been proven, so your contention that Oswald slipped out front unseen and was Prayer Man is already credibly refuted...The reason Stanton is not visible to Frazier's left in the clear Altgens image is because Prayer Man is Stanton...

>
> Do you get it, yet Brian? He was on the first floor when he went down the front steps to check out what had happened, but was called back... all of which was witnessed by Lovelady who over the next few work days, told some of his fellow workers what he had seen.... with Jarman relating this story to the HSCA years later...

HSCA avoided following-through on Lovelady's lie to Jarman because they knew it was a lie designed to cover for CIA Shelley...Buell Frazier made quite clear that "Oswald did not exit the Depository through the front door"...

>
> There was no Harvey. The real historical Lee Harvey Oswald was framed. And Yates was experiencing a complete mental breakdown not because of the FBI, but because he could not admit why he was cruising around Oak Cliff picking up youung male hitch-hikers on company time.

Spoken like a true COINTELPRO Op posing as a well-researched CT...Which makes us ask why DiEugenio praises Parker so much?...

You clique members have hijacked the entire JFK internet so you and your dirty moderation have prevented my evidence from being exposed at the proper peer level it merits...I have made several highly important discoveries that the people who dare pose themselves as the main researchers have gone out of their way to totally ignore...

Scrum Drum

unread,

Nov 9, 2021, 2:31:22 PM11/9/21

On Friday, October 22, 2021 at 5:28:14 PM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:

Alex Wilson is a creative writing troll on Parker's ROKC forum...He has switched the subject and asked me to answer for Harvey's Russian skills in his diversion from answering what I am posting here...

Harvey's Russian skills were discussed at length on the Education Forum and could be searched over there...There were numerous posts describing the witnesses to Oswald preferring high literature in his reading of Russian while in Russia...This preference suggested a person whose Russian language skills were beyond the rudimentary skills claimed by the Warren Commission...There were very good analyses on the EF of Oswald's letters and the Russian skills represented in Oswald's writing...Some of those analyses were done by the Commission...They did fit someone like Harvey who was raised in a Manhattan family that spoke Russian...Wilson is obviously unresearched on Harvey & Lee and bases his approach on his obvious yes-man support of Parker and little else...

Wilson simply pronounces that Prayer Man cannot be Stanton while ignoring my evidence that proves why it is...Parker lied when he said Prayer Man looked like he had wide hips because of a reflection in the glass...I instructed Parker that if Prayer Man was reflected in the glass his most reflective part in the form of his bright white cheek would be the most visible thing that was reflected...If we go to Darnell there is no reflection of the cheek in the glass so therefore nothing else is reflected...Typical of Parker he knows that Prayer Man is way too wide to be Oswald...Even ROKC member Jake Sykes proved Prayer Man was too wide to be Oswald when he overlaid Oswald on to Prayer Man in his avatar (talk about stupid)...In Sykes' overlay Prayer Man is 1/3rd wider than Oswald...Jim DiEugenio commented on Facebook that when he first saw Darnell he thought Prayer Man was too stocky to be Oswald...It is well-known that Prayer Man is facing towards Frazier in Darnell after pivoting towards him from Wiegman...This is the exact action Frazier described Stanton as doing at that exact time...Greg decided to offer a false claim from 2014 that Prayer Man has his arms folded in front of him and is leaning against the wall...Any simple photo analysis will show that Prayer Man is facing Frazier - therefore his right arm is seen by itself and is not folded with the left arm...Any analysis of that right forearm and hand will instantly show it is way too fat to be Oswald's and perfectly matches Stanton's obese arm and hand as seen in the family photo...In any case Wilson has not answered where Stanton is to Frazier's left in Altgens?...You cannot ignore that and failure to answer incurs judgment that dismisses you from the debate...

Ben Holmes

unread,

Nov 22, 2021, 9:00:49 AM11/22/21

On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:24:08 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

>On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 7:41:19 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 10:55:21 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
>> wrote:
>>>On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 10:51:03 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 07:26:45 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
>>>> <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I thought this board would die out a long time ago...
>>>>
>>>> This is like me saying Chess is dying, as I push my pawn...
>>
>> LFD.
>>
>> It's amusing how often logical fallacies are used by believers...

LFD.

Scrum Drum

unread,

Dec 26, 2021, 12:38:03 PM12/26/21

On Friday, October 22, 2021 at 5:28:14 PM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:

ROKC piles on you with posts over on their forum but only when the person they are addressing has been banned with both hands tied behind his back and can't defend himself...

This is the cowardly playing field their cult leader Greg Parker prefers...

The reason you can't see the full wrist-less obese arm of Sarah Stanton on Prayer Man is because her purse is jutting in to her wrist blocking the full arm...Otherwise the obese mitt-like hand is seen as well as the thick forearm...

Parker lied when he said Prayer Man is reflected in the glass and that was why she looked like she had wide hips...She's not reflected in the glass, so therefore Parker can see Sarah's obese hips on Prayer Man...

These are losers who take over the entire JFK internet and censor just so they can avoid admitting wrong-ness on Prayer Man...

unread,

Aug 4, 2022, 3:06:10 PM8/4/22

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 7:10:49 PM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:
> On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 3:54:52 PM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:
> > On Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 11:49:23 AM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, July 27, 2022 at 11:47:14 AM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:

Alex Wilson seems to have a problem breaking away from his trolling and giving a simple answer...

The references were quite simple and more than adequately shown...They are Altgens-6 and the Z255 Wiegman frame...Easily referenced and simple enough...

If Greg Parker wasn't such a coward I would be let back on ROKC, display those images, and wipe up the floor with the Prayer Man people...

Greg is a cheap coward because he knows as well as I do that the only reason I am banned from ROKC is because he knows I'll wipe up the floor with the Prayer Man people if given fair access...

There are cowards on Greg's website that have Altgens-6 and Z255 Wiegman and could post it but they won't because they don't want to help me disprove them...These are the people and methods Gordon protects...

> Barto HAS answered your question, and , to my eyes at least, the figure he has identified looks a damn sight more like Sarah Stanton, ironically the photo you provided , than the Prayerman figure.

> NO HE HASN'T AND YOU ARE LYING...KAMP'S FAKE CHOICES WERE DISPROVEN BY THE FACT KAMP HIMSELF POSTED THE EVIDENCE THAT STANTON WAS UP ON THE LANDING PLATFORM...BOTH OF KAMP'S FALSE PICKS ARE 3 STEPS DOWN AND THEREFORE EXCLUDES THEM ON THAT BASIS ALONE...THEIR BEING ABLE TO SEE THE LIMO AT THE TIME OF THE SHOTS WHEN STANTON SAID SHE COULD NOT SEE THE LIMO AT THE TIME OF THE SHOTS ALSO EXCLUDES THEM, WHETHER YOU TROLLISHLY IGNORE THE PROOF OR NOT...AND THEIR BEING IN BRIGHT SUNLIGHT INSTEAD OF DEEPEST IN TO THE SHADOWS ALSO EXCLUDES THEM...YOU AND THAT NUT KAMP WILL, OF COURSE, IGNORE ALL THIS AND REPOST THAT KAMP'S CHOICES ARE LEGIT...YOU ARE BOTH TROLLS WHO ARE NOT HERE FOR SERIOUS RESEARCH PURPOSES...A TROLL THAT JIM DIEUGENIO MISSES VERY MUCH...

Robert seems like a perfectly sane and reasonable chap.

> Because thinking logically ( and outside your fevered imagination) Mrs Stanton has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the issue at hand. Thus any questions regarding her location in Weigmann are rendered totally moot.
>
>
>
>
> THAT'S JUST STUPID AND KAMP HIMSELF IS THE ONE WHO DID THE SERIOUS ANALYSIS OF STANTON'S WHEREABOUTS...STANTON'S LOCATION IS A PRIME SUBJECT OF THE PRAYER MAN TOPIC...

LOL... nah...

YOU ARE JUST TRYING TO TROLL AROUND THE FACT YOU CAN'T CREDIBLY LOCATE STANTON TO FRAZIER'S LEFT IN ALTGENS OR Z255 WIEGMAN...

But he can INcredibly do it. And your naysaying around that placement is UNcredible.

> Because it has been conclusively, dare I even say, definitively proven that the figure simply cannot be Mrs Stanton.
>
>
>
>
> YOU'RE JUST TROLLING...

Learn what trolling is. IT ay help break your habit.

> Each reason on their own would have been pretty compelling, but taken together , as a whole, they leave absolutely no scope for dissent, or for reasonable, informed disagreements
>
> 1 The figure has black hair, and a clearly visible receding hairline. Mrs Stanton had grey hair

> BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT THAT BRIGHT AND DON'T POSSESS GOOD RESEARCH ANALYSIS SKILLS YOU FAIL TO REALIZE SOME FILMS AND CAMERAS REGISTER LIGHT HAIR AS DARK IN SHADE...THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE THE FILM AND EQUIPMENT REGISTER LIGHT HAIR AS DARK IN THE SHADE...

Blonde-haired woman standing in the dar. Hair color still shows.
https://elements-video-cover-images-0.imgix.net/files/64bcee3b-2bb6-4f23-b287-7542066069a6/inline_image_preview.jpg?auto=compress%2Cformat&fit=min&h=394&w=700&s=e16e8364418d66e1819e0e3aec368696

> ADDITIONALLY YOU DO NOT POSSESS THE INTELLECTUAL SOPHISTICATION OR INTELLIGENCE TO REALIZE THAT THE HAIR COLOR DOES NOT MAKE THE OTHER CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE GO AWAY...I HAVE ALREADY TOLD YOU THIS REPEATEDLY BUT YOU TROLLISHLY IGNORE IT AND COME BACK AND REPEAT THE SAME SIMPLE-MINDED CLAIMS...PRAYER MAN'S HAIR COLOR DOES NOT MAKE THE SPOKEN TESTIMONY,

The spoken stestimony... is none existent. No one was ever asked by the Dallas Police, the FBI or WC who was standing in that corner..

> 5 FOOT 4 HEIGHT,

Hmm. Must be a typo. The only valid measurements of the figure I am aware of say he was around 5' 9".

> OBESE FOREARM,

Optical illusion. I keep telling you it is caused by a reflection in the glass panel behind him, but you keep trollishly ignoring this valid scientific observation.

> HAND, AND HIPS, DRESS BUTTONS, OR DAVIDSON'S FEMALE FACE GO AWAY..

Everyone has hands ands hips. Dress buttons are just your imagination from created distortion. And finally, what has Davidson's female face have to do with it? He can't help how he looks.

>.NOR DOES YOUR FALSE HAIR COLOR CANARD MAKE THE FACT PRAYER MAN PIVOTS LEFT BETWEEN WIEGMAN AND DARNELL IN ORDER TO FACE FRAZIER, EXACTLY AS FRAZIER DESCRIBED STANTON AS DOING,

LOL... nah.

robert johnson

unread,

Aug 7, 2022, 2:30:36 AM8/7/22

"BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT THAT BRIGHT AND DON'T POSSESS GOOD RESEARCH ANALYSIS SKILLS YOU FAIL TO REALIZE SOME FILMS AND CAMERAS REGISTER LIGHT HAIR AS DARK IN SHADE...THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE THE FILM AND EQUIPMENT REGISTER LIGHT HAIR AS DARK IN THE SHADE...''

Complete bullshit Doyle it is a lie of grotesque proportions.
Shame on you, you disgusting liar.

David Healy

unread,

Aug 7, 2022, 2:36:44 AM8/7/22

On Saturday, August 6, 2022 at 4:23:11 PM UTC-7, Tropp...@aol.com wrote:
> On Saturday, August 6, 2022 at 2:33:54 PM UTC-4, robert johnson wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 6, 2022 at 7:33:06 PM UTC+1, robert johnson wrote:
> > > On Saturday, August 6, 2022 at 5:29:56 PM UTC+1, Tropp...@aol.com wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, August 4, 2022 at 3:32:16 PM UTC-4, robert johnson wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, August 4, 2022 at 8:06:10 PM UTC+1, Tropp...@aol.com wrote:
> > > > > > On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 7:10:49 PM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:
> > > > > > > On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 3:54:52 PM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:
> " A/ Barto pointed out Mrs Stanton in Weigmann ages ago. Granted, the figure in question actually resembles a small, thickset, grey haired woman , so you'll no doubt be inclined to dismiss it. Whither you dismiss, or dispute his identification, it's utterly disingenuous to keep up this ridiculous charade. "
>
>
>
>

> I HAVE REPEATEDLY REFUTED BART KAMP'S DESPERATE ATTEMPTS TO PICK RANDOM WOMEN {...}

did I ban you from Rich DellRosa's forum 20 years ago? There was a sorry assed soul there, forget his name, there were so many that got the boot (even DVP), but this guy always posted in CAPS, whining about the same useless photo shit you do. Had the latest imagery answers to everything -- Jack White did this and that and....his mantra. Right around the time DellaRosa received death threats on his and his family and he even received a strange white powder in a USMail letter -- a nationwide anthrax scare at the time... I was the moderator on Rich's JFKAssassination Research Forum, covering all film/photo threads/posts...
It appears your gig here is to waste bandwidth, to distract... unless you can PROVE what the lineage of an image or series of images you profess conclusions concerning. You are pullin' pud, hon! A *noise* maker if you will -- and a disgruntled one at that....
I don't think you are going to get a referral from this board or me re your "alleged" skills.
Do something constructive for a change, tomorrow the start of the National Purple Heart Convention, throw up a prayer for those that received the medal that didn't make it home...

robert johnson

unread,

Aug 7, 2022, 2:42:05 AM8/7/22

In a nutshell, drumroll please.

Brian Doyle is a shitposter!

Scrum Drum

unread,

Aug 9, 2022, 12:11:39 PM8/9/22

On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 2:42:05 AM UTC-4, robert johnson wrote:
> On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 7:36:44 AM UTC+1, David Healy wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 6, 2022 at 4:23:11 PM UTC-7, Tropp...@aol.com wrote:
> > > On Saturday, August 6, 2022 at 2:33:54 PM UTC-4, robert johnson wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, August 6, 2022 at 7:33:06 PM UTC+1, robert johnson wrote:

Parker is trolling so that pretty much defaults and loses the debate over Prayer Man...This current research community looks at the best arguments of evidence that prove Prayer Man is Stanton and ignores it and then sides with Parker's trolling and Gordon's censorship...They aren't credible and they are responsible for the Prayer Man theory still being pushed...Parker says there is no spoken testimony but he contemptuously ignores Frazier's repeated locating of Stanton in multiple statements where Frazier put her in the Prayer Man spot according to Gloria Calvery's doings...Parker ignores this and tries to get around it with trolling...Parker is a fraud and coward because if you try to debate him he refuses unless you agree to a Satan's contract of self-serving rules that pre-emptively allow Greg to get away with his bullshit...However once Greg's obnoxious trolling above was ever subjected to serious academic moderation where he was held accountable for his responses he would be filtered-out to the looney hamper in research where he belongs and his damage to good research would be repaired...Greg is probably a Sunstein agent and since DiEugenio approves of him you have to wonder about him too...If Greg isn't a gov't Op then he's a garden variety internet kook...

Here is what Alex failed to make any attempt to answer in his attempt to wear people out with lengthy trolling instead of credible response:

BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT THAT BRIGHT AND DON'T POSSESS GOOD RESEARCH ANALYSIS SKILLS YOU FAIL TO REALIZE SOME FILMS AND CAMERAS REGISTER LIGHT HAIR AS DARK IN SHADE...I HAVE ALREADY ANSWERED THIS REPEATEDLY...IF YOU LOOK AT DARNELL YOU WILL SEE NO LIGHT-HAIRED PERSON IS SEEN IN THE SHADE...THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE THE FILM AND EQUIPMENT REGISTER LIGHT HAIR AS DARK IN THE SHADE...ADDITIONALLY YOU DO NOT POSSESS THE INTELLECTUAL SOPHISTICATION OR INTELLIGENCE TO REALIZE THAT THE HAIR COLOR DOES NOT MAKE THE OTHER CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE GO AWAY...I HAVE ALREADY TOLD YOU THIS REPEATEDLY BUT YOU TROLLISHLY IGNORE IT AND COME BACK AND REPEAT THE SAME SIMPLE-MINDED CLAIMS...PRAYER MAN'S HAIR COLOR DOES NOT MAKE THE SPOKEN TESTIMONY, 5 FOOT 4 HEIGHT, OBESE FOREARM, HAND, AND HIPS, DRESS BUTTONS, OR DAVIDSON'S FEMALE FACE GO AWAY...NOR DOES YOUR FALSE HAIR COLOR CANARD MAKE THE FACT PRAYER MAN PIVOTS LEFT BETWEEN WIEGMAN AND DARNELL IN ORDER TO FACE FRAZIER, EXACTLY AS FRAZIER DESCRIBED STANTON AS DOING, GO AWAY...BETWEEN WIEGMAN AND DARNELL YOU CAN SEE PRAYER MAN TURNING TO TELL FRAZIER "I THINK SHE SAID THE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN SHOT"...AND, NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU LIE, STANTON'S CHUBBY FACE IS SEEN IN DAVIDSON ON THAT SAME PERSON WHO PIVOTED...

Neither Greg nor Alex made any attempt to honestly answer my point that you can't show any light-colored hair in Darnell that appears light-colored in the shade...Greg tried the retarded end-around of showing modern photography but that isn't what I said...I specifically said he wouldn't be able to do it in Darnell and that was correct...So not only did Greg and Alex fail to answer my evidence challenge but they both trolled to try to get around it...Both Greg and Alex also contemptuously ignored that Prayer Man is Stanton's exact 5 foot 4 height...In credible debate, if you ignore a correct point you lose...They also ignored the fact that you can see Stanton's obese arm and hand on Prayer Man in Darnell (DiEugenio clearly saw it but now he is gaining political mileage by pretending he didn't while "best image" Gordon looks the other way)...The two trolls Greg and Alex never make any attempt to answer the timing of Gloria Calvery in relation to Frazier talking to Stanton, as he detailed in the spoken testimony...They make no attempt to honestly address the photographic legitimacy of Davidson (nor does Davidson himself because he is friends with the AWOL Sean Murphy - Also dishonestly tolerated by "best image" Gordon)...They ignore in trolling contempt the fact that Prayer Man pivots to her left towards Frazier exactly at the time Frazier said Stanton turned to him to tell him what Calvery had shouted...When you ignore damning evidence like this and troll it instead you lose the debate (In a credible research community and not the current Prayer Man-hijacked one overseen by that priggish funds-crook Gordon)...They ignore the fact that the clearly-seen chubby face of Sarah Stanton is seen on Prayer Man in Davidson seconds before Prayer Man pivots towards Frazier exactly like he described Stanton as doing...And in the exact same location at the "far right of the entranceway" that Billy Lovelady had placed Stanton...And never once did Greg and Alex attempt to honestly discuss the fact they can't show Stanton to Frazier's left in either Altgens or Wiegman Z255...Once you fail to show Stanton over to Frazier's left in the photography then common sense and good research forces Stanton to be the person with Stanton's face that Chris Davidson brought out - which just so happens to be Prayer Man...Greg and Alex are lying assholes, evidence scofflaws, and trolling idiots...Alex tries to play dumb and pretend he can't find the photography...That rabid punk Bart Kamp could easily show Alex Altgens and Wiegman Z255 but he won't because the cowardly little toxic punk knows that they prove me correct and that is the kind of "research" the hosting Fagin Greg Parker encourages and protects on his notorious troll farm while Robbie Robertson vapes with that dumb look on his face...You don't see those two assholes Gil and Healy showing up over here when you get to the credible stuff...The main offenders all hide behind Gordon's dirty censorship while Mark Knight lies and says the subject isn't censored...

James Gordon is a Luciferian who operates by the darkness and method of Satan (British in other words)...He ignores a clear-cut, superior, undeniable argument of proof that Prayer Man is Stanton while getting rid of the best and brightest expert on the subject for "failing to follow the rules when shown" (of all the pathetic ironies)...This is the UK at its dirty best with suck-ups like Beckett and Knight going along with it...

robert johnson

unread,

Aug 9, 2022, 1:09:21 PM8/9/22

Blah blah nothingness.
Blah blah blah more nothingness.
And so forth.
Nobody cares.
Back in the cage you dog.

Scrum Drum

unread,

Aug 12, 2022, 10:10:59 AM8/12/22

On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 12:11:39 PM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:
> On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 2:42:05 AM UTC-4, robert johnson wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 7, 2022 at 7:36:44 AM UTC+1, David Healy wrote:
> > > On Saturday, August 6, 2022 at 4:23:11 PM UTC-7, Tropp...@aol.com wrote:

Alex Wilson already lost this one but here it is again and trolling it doesn't count the same as credibly answering it:

> Neither Greg nor Alex made any attempt to honestly answer my point that you can't show any light-colored hair in Darnell that appears light-colored in the shade...Greg tried the retarded end-around of showing modern photography but that isn't what I said...I specifically said he wouldn't be able to do it in Darnell and that was correct...So not only did Greg and Alex fail to answer my evidence challenge but they both trolled to try to get around it...Both Greg and Alex also contemptuously ignored that Prayer Man is Stanton's exact 5 foot 4 height...In credible debate, if you ignore a correct point you lose...They also ignored the fact that you can see Stanton's obese arm and hand on Prayer Man in Darnell (DiEugenio clearly saw it but now he is gaining political mileage by pretending he didn't while "best image" Gordon looks the other way)...The two trolls Greg and Alex never make any attempt to answer the timing of Gloria Calvery in relation to Frazier talking to Stanton, as he detailed in the spoken testimony...They make no attempt to honestly address the photographic legitimacy of Davidson (nor does Davidson himself because he is friends with the AWOL Sean Murphy - Also dishonestly tolerated by "best image" Gordon)...They ignore in trolling contempt the fact that Prayer Man pivots to her left towards Frazier exactly at the time Frazier said Stanton turned to him to tell him what Calvery had shouted...When you ignore damning evidence like this and troll it instead you lose the debate (In a credible research community and not the current Prayer Man-hijacked one overseen by that priggish funds-crook Gordon)...They ignore the fact that the clearly-seen chubby face of Sarah Stanton is seen on Prayer Man in Davidson seconds before Prayer Man pivots towards Frazier exactly like he described Stanton as doing...And in the exact same location at the "far right of the entranceway" that Billy Lovelady had placed Stanton...And never once did Greg and Alex attempt to honestly discuss the fact they can't show Stanton to Frazier's left in either Altgens or Wiegman Z255...Once you fail to show Stanton over to Frazier's left in the photography then common sense and good research forces Stanton to be the person with Stanton's face that Chris Davidson brought out - which just so happens to be Prayer Man...Greg and Alex are lying assholes, evidence scofflaws, and trolling idiots...Alex tries to play dumb and pretend he can't find the photography...That rabid punk Bart Kamp could easily show Alex Altgens and Wiegman Z255 but he won't because the cowardly little toxic punk knows that they prove me correct and that is the kind of "research" the hosting Fagin Greg Parker encourages and protects on his notorious troll farm

>

unread,

Sep 1, 2022, 1:38:32 PM9/1/22

On Tuesday, August 30, 2022 at 2:05:59 PM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:
> On Monday, August 29, 2022 at 3:41:25 PM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 20, 2022 at 3:18:38 PM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:
> > > On Friday, August 12, 2022 at 10:10:59 AM UTC-4, Scrum Drum wrote:

Alex Wilson made no attempt to honestly answer the detailed evidence in my last post...

ROKC is a troll farm that is designed to harbor trollish individuals like Wilson and their attempts to disrupt serious research...

Do Altgens-6 and Wiegman Z255 prove Stanton is not to Frazier's left?... - They do...

Did Alex Wilson intentionally avoid honestly answering that or getting Kamp to post those images on ROKC?... - He did...

robert johnson

unread,

Sep 2, 2022, 3:52:22 AM9/2/22

Wilson nailed it/you with the following.

"Time and time again you simply choose to ignore the basic facts, the irreconcilable discrepancies that make it impossible for the Prayerman figure to be Mrs Stanton.

You ignore them, or else you attempt to brush them off, with increasingly bizarre rationalization

You simply can't keep ignoring the facts. Choosing to return to the relative safety of the shadowlands .

Your argument is quite honestly risible. Its maddeningly juvenile. Stubborn nonsense. One of the worst, most egregious examples of conspiracy thinking."

END OF STORY DOYLE!

It is loading more messages.

0 new messages