• Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

Steve Mcdonagh

Members
  • Content count

    126
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Steve Mcdonagh

  • Rank
    Experienced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Los Angeles, California

Recent Profile Visitors

7,566 profile views
  1. Hi Everyone Has anyone heard of or seen Sean Murphy? His profile page says he has not been active on here since Nov 22nd 2013. Thanks - Steve
  2. I'm sorry you're so frustrated, Bill. All I've been trying to do is show how the Second Floor Lunchroom Encounter, whether it happened or whether it was just a fabricated story, did not necessarily exonerate Oswald. You think it obviously exonerates Oswald and therefore couldn't have been fabricated, because only idiotic bad guys would have been so stupid as to fabricate a story that actually exonerated Oswald. I'm saying it didn't necessarily exonerate Oswald, so it very well could have been fabricated by non-idiotic bad guys. I'm finished arguing with you on this. My head is sore from beating it against the wall. Sincerely, --Tommy Tommy I think you are right! The story worked and it has done its job for fifty years regardless of any imperfections it has. Bill makes some good points with his reasoning of how a second floor encounter may have played out but I find his comments and insistence that the second floor encounter exonerates Oswald misguided. It doesn’t exonerate Oswald. It never has exonerated Oswald and it never will exonerate Oswald and if it did, could or would then Oswald would surely already be exonerated? The thing that bothers me about this whole second floor encounter is not that Truly is (or is not) sufficiently leading Baker (a gun toting professional law enforcement officer) up the stairs in search of at least one (could be more for all they knew) gun toting assassin(s) and misses Oswald supposedly going through, walking by or just hanging around a second floor vestibule door; but why was Truly leading Baker at all? Why would Baker allow a civilian to sufficiently lead him (a gun toting cop) up the stairs in search of possible assassins? Why would Truly wish to put his life in danger by sufficiently leading a gun toting cop up the stairs looking for assassins? The reason I suspect is because it simply did not happen like that. I have serious issues believing that the unarmed Truly is charging up the stairs ahead of an armed professional policeman (Baker) in any way shape or form. I also have difficulty believing that Truly (after first supposedly vouching for Oswald) later becomes suspicious of him to such an extent that he has to alert the DPD? In my opinion if anyone is susceptible to leading (or having their story enhanced) then surely an apparently unassuming Truly becoming both hero and detective in the same day is a viable candidate. Is Truly the lynchpin of the second floor encounter? Regards - Steve
  3. Steve, you appear to have inferred content in my post that was neither there, nor implied. • At no point did I say a group of people entered the Lunch Room. That is an element you introduced. • You also introduced "both lunchroom encounters" ?? I am aware of only one alleged encounter in the Lunch Room. • Likewise your last two paragraphs also appear to be taking me to task for items that were not in my post. Were these directed at me? Just to clarify, my original post had one main idea: Prayer Man/Oswald may have gone up to the second floor. If he did go up to the second floor, it is possible he may have been seen in the vicinity of the Lunch Room. My replies in purple - RH Hi Richard Actually I am not taking you personally to task on any issue, so I am sorry if you perceived that from my response as it was not my intention. I was merely commenting that both encounters cannot coexist and it has to be one or the other. I still do not know what you mean by "both encounters" ... ? RH Your comments did however seem to imply there was another option but actually it appears to be just another way of describing a possible second floor encounter which is fine if your hold sway to that event happening. As for the group of people going up the stairs shortly after the assassination and LHO potentially doing the same, well of course this is possible, but again it seems to be just another explanation of how Oswald gets to the second floor lunchroom encounter? I am not "endorsing" a 2nd floor encounter. I am saying that Oswald may have been seen on the 2nd floor (perhaps in the vicinity of the Lunch Room). There is a difference. In piecing together Oswald's movements after the shooting, I don't think we should assume he never went to the 2nd floor. RH Don’t get me wrong I understand you want to explore all possibilities and I respect that (after all I have read all 60+ pages) but Sean is trying to lay the foundation for the second floor lunchroom encounter never happening at all and ironically with every anomaly you guys raise with the second floor encounter you are indirectly helping him to lay it. Exploring all the possibilities will hopefully lead to the most accurate explanation of what happened. As I have said several times in this thread, Sean is doing a remarkable job. For the most part, I believe he is spot on. There are however, a few points in his narrative where I think alternative possibilities exist. RH I am no expert like some of you and I don’t pretend to be, but if the encounter did not take place on the second floor, then logically wouldn’t this explain why much of it doesn’t make sense? Bill makes a good point when he says “it would be physically impossible for Truly not to see Oswald if he was going through the lunchroom door” and I not only agree with this point but I believe it to be a perfect example that if you can’t make the second floor encounter work after fifty years then surely there is something fundamentally wrong with it? What if the second floor lunchroom encounter (SFLE) anomalies are in fact errors because there was no second floor lunchroom encounter? As far as I know nearly every single piece of the JKF case has been argued a thousand times or more; but I have personally never heard anyone argue this point before. The recent introduction of Prayer Man into the mix has stirred things up a bit. As I said in another thread, early researchers did an outstanding job, but they did not have this information on Prayer Man available to them. RH Regards – Steve PS: For what it’s worth Richard I think you have been doing a good job in this thread and have made some excellent points. Thanks, Steve Hi Richard As with Tom above I have edited my post because I felt my response was also a little too curt and after re-reading your post (above) I feel I have a better understanding of your points. Thank you for your patience. Kind regards - Steve
  4. Steve, you appear to have inferred content in my post that was neither there, nor implied. • At no point did I say a group of people entered the Lunch Room. That is an element you introduced. • You also introduced "both lunchroom encounters" ?? I am aware of only one alleged encounter in the Lunch Room. • Likewise your last two paragraphs also appear to be taking me to task for items that were not in my post. Were these directed at me? Just to clarify, my original post had one main idea: Prayer Man/Oswald may have gone up to the second floor. If he did go up to the second floor, it is possible he may have been seen in the vicinity of the Lunch Room. [...] ...Sean is trying to lay the foundation for the second floor lunchroom encounter never happening at all... [...] Bill makes a good point when he says “it would be physically impossible for Truly not to see Oswald if he was going through the lunchroom door” Steve, A fact that has to be taken into consideration when critiquing the Lunch Room Encounter Story is that, in the story, Baker obviously had to let Oswald get away. Sean is trying to show that the lunch room encounter story, although flawed, was sufficiently plausible for the task at hand, which was to place Oswald significantly closer to the sniper's nest than the front steps, and to let him "get away" in a manner that was believable and therefore not bound to scandalize the Dallas Police Department. Truly's telling Baker that Oswald was a TSBD employee didn't exactly exonerate Oswald, but it did lower his "suspect status" so that, given the urgency of the situation, Baker could let him go. This seemed to be a reasonable thing to do, especially since the alleged encounter puts Oswald a full six floors below the place where Baker thought the shots had come from, and because Oswald appeared to be cool, calm, and collected. Although a Lunch Room Encounter Story was necessary in order to not only put Oswald reasonably close to the sniper's nest but also in a place that was a secluded part of the building where such a private encounter could realistically "happen", and although Baker had to let Oswald "get away," it would have been unrealistic for the fabricators to say, "Baker encountered Oswald in the lunch room and strongly suspected him of killing JFK, but decided to let him go" or "Baker encountered Oswald in the lunch room but didn't suspect Oswald because he didn't notice that he was breathing heavily and sweating profusely." or my favorite "Baker encountered Oswald in the lunch room and was trying to arrest him, but Oswald got away." The story they decided upon was much better than the ones above: "Baker encountered Oswald in the 2nd floor lunch room, which is not far from the north west stairs. Due to the fact that Oswald appeared normal and that Baker was told (by the accompanying) superintendent of the building that Oswald was an employee, Baker decided to let Oswald go so that Baker could continue on his way up to the roof to look for the sniper." Given the circumstances, it would have been unprofessional of Baker to arrest a cool, calm, and collected male TSBD employee for simply being in the 2nd floor lunch room by himself at the time (if indeed that's where Oswald was). In the story, if Baker had arrested Oswald in the lunch room, I suppose he could have handcuffed him to a drain pipe or something, but Baker still had the roof to search. In the story, Baker makes the rational decision to let Oswald go because Oswald is only a low-level suspect and because Baker has much more urgent things to do. In short, The Lunch Room Encounter Story was very well done. It placed Oswald closer to the sniper's nest and let him get away, plausibly. --Tommy edited and bumped Tom I have edited my post because I felt my response was a little too curt and on reflection I would like it to be more considerate to your views and opinions. Thanks for your reply above. Kind regards - Steve
  5. Steve, you appear to have inferred content in my post that was neither there, nor implied. • At no point did I say a group of people entered the Lunch Room. That is an element you introduced. • You also introduced "both lunchroom encounters" ?? I am aware of only one alleged encounter in the Lunch Room. • Likewise your last two paragraphs also appear to be taking me to task for items that were not in my post. Were these directed at me? Just to clarify, my original post had one main idea: Prayer Man/Oswald may have gone up to the second floor. If he did go up to the second floor, it is possible he may have been seen in the vicinity of the Lunch Room. Hi Richard Actually I am not taking you personally to task on any issue, so I am sorry if you perceived that from my response as it was not my intention. I was merely commenting that both encounters cannot coexist and it has to be one or the other. Your comments did however seem to imply there was another option but actually it appears to be just another way of describing a possible second floor encounter which is fine if your hold sway to that event happening. As for the group of people going up the stairs shortly after the assassination and LHO potentially doing the same, well of course this is possible, but again it seems to be just another explanation of how Oswald gets to the second floor lunchroom encounter? Don’t get me wrong I understand you want to explore all possibilities and I respect that (after all I have read all 60+ pages) but Sean is trying to lay the foundation for the second floor lunchroom encounter never happening at all and ironically with every anomaly you guys raise with the second floor encounter you are indirectly helping him to lay it. I am no expert like some of you and I don’t pretend to be, but if the encounter did not take place on the second floor, then logically wouldn’t this explain why much of it doesn’t make sense? Bill makes a good point when he says “it would be physically impossible for Truly not to see Oswald if he was going through the lunchroom door” and I not only agree with this point but I believe it to be a perfect example that if you can’t make the second floor encounter work after fifty years then surely there is something fundamentally wrong with it? What if the second floor lunchroom encounter (SFLE) anomalies are in fact errors because there was no second floor lunchroom encounter? As far as I know nearly every single piece of the JKF case has been argued a thousand times or more; but I have personally never heard anyone argue this point before. Regards – Steve PS: For what it’s worth Richard I think you have been doing a good job in this thread and have made some excellent points.
  6. STEVE, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU AND RICHARD AND A FEW OTHERS ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE LATEST RESEARCH IS AT THE ED FORUM, AND WHILE THAT IS TRUE IN SOME CASES - IT IS VERY FAR FROM TRUE IN OTHERS - AS THERE WILL BE A NUMBER OF NEW BOOKS WITH NEW INFORMATION THAT COULD BE GAME CHANGERS - INCLUDING BILL SIMPICH'S NEW BOOK TO BE AVAILABLE ON LINE TOMORROW - FRIDAY - BILL TURNER'S NEW BOOK ON THE CIA IN CUBA, JOHN NEWMAN'S BOOK ON THE CIA AT JMWAVE, TONY SUMMERS UPDATE ON HIS BOOK "NOT IN YOUR LIFETIME" THAT I SUSPECT HAS A NEW INTERVIEW WITH THE MAN ON THE MOTORCYCLE IN MEXICO CITY, AND JOAN MELLEN'S THIRD BOOK OF HER TRILOGY ON THE TEXAS MAFIA, AND I'M SURE THERE WILL BE OTHERS. THE ONLY THING THAT WILL BREAK DOWN THE BARRICADES OF STUBBORNESS IS TO COME UP WITH REAL EVIDENCE - EVIDENCE AND NEW WITNESSES THAT CAN BE INTRODUCED IN TO COURT AT A GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS - AND THAT WILL GO BEYOND ANY SILLY INTERNET ARGUMENT BY LONE NUTTERS AND CONSPIRACY THEORISTS. Bill Thank you for your honest reply and for the heads up on the new books coming out. Steve
  7. Hi Bill “Whether it happened or not, the second floor encounter was a narrative written for the Warren Commission by military historian Alfred Goldberg - that's a fact Jack. “ This could very well be true and its food for thought but one question springs to mind. When was the first report of the lunchroom story aired?“Since 80% of the people don't believe Oswald killed JFK alone, and many site the Second Floor Lunchroom encounter as a reason, it has been effective in helping to exonerate Oswald.“ Even though I believe the Grassy Knoll to be the reason many people believe there was a conspiracy I cannot fathom for the life of me why you would say it (the ‘second’ floor lunchroom encounter) is “effective in helping to exonerate Oswald”? Nothing has been effective in exonerating Oswald because he is not exonerated? The second floor lunchroom encounter merely places Oswald closer to the sixth floor, its basic math and no doubt if there was a lunchroom on the third floor they may have even gone for that one. Oh wait; didn’t Baker mention the third and fourth floors already?“And I thought "Prayer Man" was Buell Wesley Frazer until Gary Mack said he showed the photo of "Prayer Man" to Frazer and he couldn't identify himself standing on the top step.” Maybe Gary should have shown the picture Sean (and others) have included in this thread that clearly seems to show Frazier on the steps. If Frazier cannot even recognise himself in a picture how can he be so certain that the curtain rod bag was only about 24”?“Whether Oswald is "Prayer Man" or not, he most certainly was somewhere on the first or second floor at the time of the assassination, and entered the second floor lunchroom via the office door and was seen by Baker as he walked past the closed lunchroom door that Oswald didn't go through.” Bill although many would disagree with you that “he most certainly was somewhere on the first or second floor at the time of the assassination” the second floor lunchroom encounter is by no means certain. If Oswald is Prayer Man then the second floor lunchroom encounter is hastily starting to look a little like Don King’s “slim”.“And though when asked, Sean said he thought the whole second floor lunchroom fiction was concocted by the FBI, I don't think so. They are following Goldberg's orders, so whether it happened or is fiction, the narrative of the story as published in the Warren Report was written by Goldberg, who is a living witness and can still be questioned about all this. “ Once again if they are following his orders then how far back or should I say how soon after the assassination was Goldberg pulling the strings (in your opinion of course)?Bill I respect you and I like reading what you say, but it’s starting to seem like you have difficulty (like so many others) of embracing potentially new possibilities that do not support or lay within the parameters of your own personal views. This is probably the reason why the JFK case appears to have been at a gridlock for so many years and it is also likely the reason that barring some extraordinary new dense piece of evidence that through its own weight can break down the barricades of stubbornness, it is likely to stay that way until all the LN’s and CT’s have joined that big forum in the sky. Regards - Steve
  8. Hi Richard “Bill feels that the traditional Lunch Room story accepted by both the WC and the Critical Community is strong enough to stand on its own to vindicate Lee Oswald.” Yes I get that part but obviously in official circles it doesn't otherwise we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Furthermore if it could or was ever likely to ‘stand on its own to vindicate Lee Oswald” we still wouldn’t be having this conversation.“I think there is another option. We cannot exclude the possibility of Prayer Man/Oswald going up to the second floor after Truly and Baker had passed through the Lobby. And perhaps after Campbell had ascended the Lobby stairs to the 2nd floor (to vindicate the sighting by the storage closet). Getting Oswald from the 6th floor to the lunch room in time to see Baker is problematic. Getting Oswald from the front lobby to the 2nd floor is not” Whilst it is true that the second floor lunchroom encounter cannot be discounted it is also true that both lunchroom encounters cannot coexist. Therefore one or the other has to be in error or even an error that led to a fabrication?“We know a group of employees went up to the 2nd floor offices right after the assassination. It is entirely possible LHO also decided to go. We have no evidence that precludes this possibility. Could he have made it all the way to the lunch room? Possibly.” There are many things that could have happened and some are indeed possible but by all accounts the Baker/Oswald (+Truly) encounter did not involve a group merely these three. So common sense dictates (just like common sense would dictate if someone is going to take the time to hide a gun they would also take the time pick up the shells) that the incident happened before a group ascended on the second floor otherwise there would have been many more accounts of the event.“A simple sighting of Oswald on the 2nd floor would give strength to any lunch room story, whether it happened as advertised by the WC or was simply a last resort fabrication by the conspirators to get LHO as close to the NW stairs as possible.” And this is why I assume this encounter is important to the FBI/DPD but not for reasons of potentially exonerating Oswald but because they needed to put him closer to the sixth floor. At the end of the day in my opinion there is one fundamental problem with the Baker sees Oswald on the second floor story and that is that Truly did not see him. Truly (according to reports) led this charge of the light brigade up the stairs but he didn’t see or hear anything that alerted his attention to the second floor lunchroom and the question is why? Are we really to believe that he was fearlessly so far ahead of the gun toting Baker in search of the big bad guys that had just shot JFK that he didn’t see or hear anything when he passed the door thus allowing Oswald and opportunity to slip past the door but unfortunately for him just in time for Baker to see him? Then we have the body popping Oswald sitting, standing and leaning against the table, the counter and the coke machine. I am sorry but it’s just too much of a pill to swallow. I think Sean is onto something when he says it likely happened on the first floor and the reason Truly didn’t see Oswald through any door before Baker was probably because he hadn’t caught up with Bakers 0-60 in 3.2 seconds dash to the front door vestibule yet. Maybe he should have worn his Nike’s? Regards - Steve
  9. "But, then again, Bill says that if they did fabricate it, he says he knows who did it!" Hi Tom Is this a first step on a path of 'first floor lunchroom encounter' exploration? If so with Bills knowledge it could surely lead somewhere. Steve
  10. Hi Bill I don't want to point out the obvious but Sean is trying to exonerate Oswald by trying to prove he is in fact ‘Prayer Man’. The Oswald/Baker/Truly encounter on the second floor having a coke and singing ‘I do like to be besides the sea-side’ has done nothing to exonerate Oswald in fifty (50) years? So I really don’t get why you (if you believe Oswald is innocent) are so unwilling to entertain the ideas Sean is putting forward. The Oswald/ Baker encounter (initially with or without Truly) happened on the first floor close to where Oswald/Prayer Man was already located (near the first floor steps/doors/vestibule?The fact that Oswald/Prayer Man had a coke/didn’t have a coke/maybe had a brandy and coke doesn't change the fact that if Oswald is Prayer Man (who we can clearly see is standing on the steps at the time of the shooting) he can’t be the 6th floor sniper? The statements of Baker/Truly have evolved over time and been ironed out to make the whole encounter plausible and more favourable to a descending Oswald from the 6th floor coupled with the lone nut persona of an Oswald calmly smooching around the second floor lunchroom drinking a coke and listening to Nat King Cole whilst everyone else in Dealey Plaza is in a state of turmoil and concern because the President has just been shot.In my opinion the Oswald in the lunchroom looking like an Arctic cucumber distorts and negates the image of an Oswald doing a Usain Bolt down four flights of stairs to such an extent that the Oswald Bolt image (however improbable) is conveniently replaced with the cool callous ‘he must be one psycho SoB’ killer drinking a coke image and therefore counteracts any exoneration one may afford Oswald. The chances that Baker (with or without super hero Truly) encountering Oswald twice (once on the first floor and once on the second floor) would appear to be (using a Don King quote) “slim and none and slim is out of town”.Baker and truly mention one incident (even though there appear to be countless versions of it: sitting Oswald, standing Oswald, sleeping Oswald, Oswald dancing around with a brandy and coke, leaning Oswald, walking Oswald ... Oh I give up!) and herein lies the basis of Seans thesis. If there was only one incident and it happened on the first floor and without any other/new proof that Prayer Man is someone else (and we are not talking about people who work somewhere else or even just flew into Dallas that very morning and decided “out of all the bars steps in all the towns you had to walk stand on this one”) by process of elimination Prayer Man becomes more likelier with every fallen Prayer Man candidate to be Oswald. Now that’s what you would call exoneration. Will Sean pull it off? I don’t know. Is he having a good go? You bet he is. However he still has a long ways to go and of course he has to avoid the 'Big Guns' who could start throwing a few more ‘credible’ Prayer Man alternatives in to the works at any time, but that aside the cog of Prayer Man being Oswald and the Marrion Bake encounter taking place on the first floor is slowly beginning to turn. Regards - Steve Hi Steve, Addressing only the section of your last paragraph that I have bold faced, what other credible Prayer Man alternatives do you feel are out there? My belief is we have already covered the alternatives in a thorough manner. And the outcome keeps turning out the same. Big Gun or squirt gun, they all have to pass the same litmus test. Hi Richard I guess a nicer way to put it would be to say that from a laypersons point of view (an average perspective if you like) there doesn't seem to be much input (either way) from many of the so called ‘big names’ or more ‘renowned’ researchers and naturally I mean no disrespect to any of the people who have contributed when I use those phrases. It just seems that considering the potential significance of Oswald being ‘Prayer Man’ one would assume that every lone nut man and his dog would have been chiming in with reasons why it can’t possibly be him and presumably suggesting alternatives. I suppose the silence and the lack of ‘credible’ alternatives being suggested could very well speak volumes in and of itself, but the only person that I can recall thus far to offer any alternatives was Pat Speer? And even though I don’t personally subscribe to a necessity for considering people who are on vacation from other offices or even who live in Dallas; at least he tried. Right now it looks pretty interesting and although I am rooting for Sean only time will tell.
  11. Hi Bill I don't want to point out the obvious but Sean is trying to exonerate Oswald by trying to prove he is in fact ‘Prayer Man’. The Oswald/Baker/Truly encounter on the second floor having a coke and singing ‘I do like to be beside the sea-side’ has done nothing to exonerate Oswald in fifty (50) years? So I really don’t get why you (if you believe Oswald is innocent) are so unwilling to entertain the ideas Sean is putting forward. The Oswald/ Baker encounter (initially with or without Truly) happened on the first floor close to where Oswald/Prayer Man was already located (near the first floor steps/doors/vestibule?The fact that Oswald/Prayer Man had a coke/didn’t have a coke/maybe had a brandy and coke doesn't change the fact that if Oswald is Prayer Man (who we can clearly see is standing on the steps at the time of the shooting) he can’t be the 6th floor sniper? The statements of Baker/Truly have evolved over time and been ironed out to make the whole encounter plausible and more favourable to a descending Oswald from the 6th floor coupled with the lone nut persona of an Oswald calmly smooching around the second floor lunchroom drinking a coke and listening to Nat King Cole whilst everyone else in Dealey Plaza is in a state of turmoil and concern because the President has just been shot.In my opinion the Oswald in the lunchroom looking like an Arctic cucumber distorts and negates the image of an Oswald doing a Usain Bolt down four flights of stairs to such an extent that the Oswald Bolt image (however improbable) is conveniently replaced with the cool callous ‘he must be one psycho SoB’ killer drinking a coke image and therefore counteracts any exoneration one may afford Oswald. The chances of Baker (with or without super hero Truly) encountering Oswald twice (once on the first floor and once on the second floor) would appear to be (using a Don King quote) “slim and none and slim is out of town”.Baker and truly mention one incident (even though there appear to be countless versions of it: sitting Oswald, standing Oswald, sleeping Oswald, Oswald dancing around with a brandy and coke, leaning Oswald, walking Oswald ... Oh I give up!) and herein lies the basis of Seans thesis. If there was only one incident and it happened on the first floor and without any other/new proof that Prayer Man is someone else (and we are not talking about people who work somewhere else or even just flew into Dallas that very morning and decided “out of all the bars steps in all the towns you had to walk stand on this one”) by process of elimination Prayer Man becomes more likelier with every fallen Prayer Man candidate to be Oswald. Now that’s what you would call exoneration. Will Sean pull it off? I don’t know. Is he having a good go? You bet he is. However he still has a long ways to go and of course he has to avoid the 'Big Guns' who could start throwing a few more ‘credible’ Prayer Man alternatives in to the works at any time, but that aside the cog of Prayer Man being Oswald and the Marrion Bake encounter taking place on the first floor is slowly beginning to turn. Regards - Steve Steve, I think what Bill is trying to say is that the lunchroom encounter must have happened because, Bill thinks, it is highly unlikely that the bad guys would have been so stupid as to fabricate such a (Bill thinks) Oswald-exonerating scenario. --Tommy Hi Tom Yes I understand the premise of Bills point/argument but historical fact dictates otherwise. It does not exonerate Oswald and if it did/had we would not be having this conversation. The second floor lunchroom story (according to Sean) is the lesser of the two evils (for DPD/FBI) because whatever chance Oswald had of getting to the second or third floors was more likely than any he had of getting to the ground floor. So they simply morphed the story and thanks to a certain Jack Ruby the morph could go into overdrive and practically uncontested after Oswalds death. It is then reasonable to assume a "So what if some of the statements didn’t match up with earlier ones" attitude would then be introduced. And guess what, it obviously worked because Oswald is still ‘guilty’ and the ‘Second floor lunchroom encounter exonerates Oswald guide to the Galaxy’ book can and should be thrown out of the window. What person (Truly/Baker/Frazier/) in their right mind would stand alone and say anything that attempts (directly or indirectly) to exonerate Oswald after his death given that all the “evidence” (accumulated by the FBI/DPD) points to a “case closed” Oswald did it? Hmmm... I seem to recall someone tried that once? Steve
  12. Hi Bill I don't want to point out the obvious but Sean is trying to exonerate Oswald by trying to prove he is in fact ‘Prayer Man’. The Oswald/Baker/Truly encounter on the second floor having a coke and singing ‘I do like to be besides the sea-side’ has done nothing to exonerate Oswald in fifty (50) years? So I really don’t get why you (if you believe Oswald is innocent) are so unwilling to entertain the ideas Sean is putting forward. The Oswald/ Baker encounter (initially with or without Truly) happened on the first floor close to where Oswald/Prayer Man was already located (near the first floor steps/doors/vestibule?The fact that Oswald/Prayer Man had a coke/didn’t have a coke/maybe had a brandy and coke doesn't change the fact that if Oswald is Prayer Man (who we can clearly see is standing on the steps at the time of the shooting) he can’t be the 6th floor sniper? The statements of Baker/Truly have evolved over time and been ironed out to make the whole encounter plausible and more favourable to a descending Oswald from the 6th floor coupled with the lone nut persona of an Oswald calmly smooching around the second floor lunchroom drinking a coke and listening to Nat King Cole whilst everyone else in Dealey Plaza is in a state of turmoil and concern because the President has just been shot.In my opinion the Oswald in the lunchroom looking like an Arctic cucumber distorts and negates the image of an Oswald doing a Usain Bolt down four flights of stairs to such an extent that the Oswald Bolt image (however improbable) is conveniently replaced with the cool callous ‘he must be one psycho SoB’ killer drinking a coke image and therefore counteracts any exoneration one may afford Oswald. The chances that Baker (with or without super hero Truly) encountering Oswald twice (once on the first floor and once on the second floor) would appear to be (using a Don King quote) “slim and none and slim is out of town”.Baker and truly mention one incident (even though there appear to be countless versions of it: sitting Oswald, standing Oswald, sleeping Oswald, Oswald dancing around with a brandy and coke, leaning Oswald, walking Oswald ... Oh I give up!) and herein lies the basis of Seans thesis. If there was only one incident and it happened on the first floor and without any other/new proof that Prayer Man is someone else (and we are not talking about people who work somewhere else or even just flew into Dallas that very morning and decided “out of all the bars steps in all the towns you had to walk stand on this one”) by process of elimination Prayer Man becomes more likelier with every fallen Prayer Man candidate to be Oswald. Now that’s what you would call exoneration. Will Sean pull it off? I don’t know. Is he having a good go? You bet he is. However he still has a long ways to go and of course he has to avoid the 'Big Guns' who could start throwing a few more ‘credible’ Prayer Man alternatives in to the works at any time, but that aside the cog of Prayer Man being Oswald and the Marrion Bake encounter taking place on the first floor is slowly beginning to turn. Regards - Steve
  13. Strange. The link at youtube says "This video is no longer available because the YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated." Steve.
  14. Excellent that we finally have heard from Buell Frazier. Would have been nice to see the actual correspondence between BWF and Gary. But I agree, Sean. BWF, who was standing a couple feet away at the time, has effectively limited the possibilities to Shelley and Lovelady. A powerful statement against any other employee or any stranger being at Prayer Man's location. And we have thoroughly covered the possibilities of either Shelley or Lovelady being PM previously. This thread just got a turbo boost. On a side note, this throws a knuckleball into the previous discussions concerning the identification of Shelley and Senkel in the William Shelley thread. Hi Guys Are there any pictures, images or film of Shelley circa November 1963? Was he interviewed by any TV crew, snapped in a clear(ish) image or does Buell Wesley Frazier even have an old image of the two of them together around that time? Sean, I have a couple of questions if you don’t mind. After reviewing the Darnell film we can clearly see Baker running towards the steps at speed and apart from a lightly running lady in a dress no one else appears to be travelling or even reacting with anywhere near the same speed or purpose. From the speed of Bakers motion it stands to reason that unless he (Baker) suddenly slows down, pauses or stops when he reaches the steps of TSBD, his forward motion will likely carry him right up the steps and into the building. In fact this is the very reason I am convinced Baker enters the building alone and without Truly. Now herein lays my question. PM man can clearly be seen standing towards the top left of the steps in a relatively consistent position and pose as we have seen him in earlier film/images as Baker reaches the bottom step. So if Baker does indeed continue his run up the steps he will surely pass PM man before entering the building. How does this fit into the sequence and timing of the Baker/Oswald encounter? Could you please clarify or elaborate on how Oswald/PM, entering the building after Baker but before Truly (whom I presume is somewhere in the melee at the bottom of the steps) and projects himself into a position where he encounters, attracts suspicion and is questioned by Baker necessitating the need for Truly to interject that he (Oswald) is an employee? Kind regards - Steve Hi Steve, here is a link to a thread that tried to establish the photo ID of William Shelley: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=19178&hl=%2Bwilliam+%2Bshelley After BWF's description of Shelley being taller than Lovelady, red hair, and slender, it is probably time to revisit. Thanks Richard.
  15. Darnell Film?