James R Gordon Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 I have contacted Sean Murphy today and have invited him to return and contribute to this thread. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 James, thanks for doing that. But I suspect that if Mr Murphy had wanted to engage with the EF he would have done so long ago. Perhaps it's now up to the rest of the research community to carry forward Mr Murphy's research rather than rely on him to do all the heavy lifting again. There is a push to move ahead with Mr Murphy's research and that push has been lead by Greg Parker. If you are really interested in pursuing the Prayer Man thread then the best thing you could do would be to lift the ban on Mr Parker. As I've stated a number of times now ROKC is not disputing the rules of EF around language or rudeness. We are disputing the uneven application of those rules. Since his return to the EF Mr Parker has not used any foul language apart from the word 'xxxxe'. In the posts that you have banned him for he did not swear, be rude or dispute the rules of the forum and neither did Mr Graves. They did not break any rules of this forum so why have the two of them been banned and suspended, respectively? I would really appreciate an answer to this question James. It goes to the issue of bias. If Greg and Tommy did not break the rules why have they been banned? I have contacted Sean Murphy today and have invited him to return and contribute to this thread. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 I have contacted Sean Murphy today and have invited him to return and contribute to this thread. James I have contacted Sean Murphy today and have invited him to return and contribute to this thread. James James, it appears that the posts on this thread relating to Lovelady and Altgens still have not been removed. That is almost 2 weeks since it was first requested. Why is it that Greg Parker's posts disappear in a flash (even when they haven't broken any rules) yet despite my repeated requests and your assurances this Lovelady/Altgens nonsense, which as far as I'm aware no respected researcher in the community actually believes in, is still on this thread? I'm sorry if that sounds rude but are we really not allowed to say that the emperor has no clothes on this forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James R Gordon Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Vanessa, It might seem curious, but for reasons neither I nor Invision can comprehend the sequence to move a post from one thread to another appears to have a broken link. That is why the posts have not been moved. When I get the situation sorted the posts will be moved. The protocols for hiding a post are working perfectly well. That is why posts can be hidden when the administration decide. Insulting the administration might not be the wisest way to get sympathy for your cause. James. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Vanessa, It might seem curious, but for reasons neither I nor Invision can comprehend the sequence to move a post from one thread to another appears to have a broken link. That is why the posts have not been moved. When I get the situation sorted the posts will be moved. The protocols for hiding a post are working perfectly well. That is why posts can be hidden when the administration decide. Insulting the administration might not be the wisest way to get sympathy for your cause. James. James, thanks for the update on Invision. I hope it gets sorted out soon. I was not aware I had insulted the administration. Apologies if I have. Who did I insult and how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 I have contacted Sean Murphy today and have invited him to return and contribute to this thread. James Excellent! I hope he graces us with his presence again. Since the last time I spoke with him, I have collected quite a few questions I would dearly love to put to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 I have contacted Sean Murphy today and have invited him to return and contribute to this thread. James Excellent! I hope he graces us with his presence again. Since the last time I spoke with him, I have collected quite a few questions I would dearly love to put to him. I have contacted Sean Murphy today and have invited him to return and contribute to this thread. James Excellent! I hope he graces us with his presence again. Since the last time I spoke with him, I have collected quite a few questions I would dearly love to put to him. Hi Bob Just in case Sean Murphy doesn't come back why don't you post your questions here and the rest of us can have a go at answering them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 I have contacted Sean Murphy today and have invited him to return and contribute to this thread. James Excellent! I hope he graces us with his presence again. Since the last time I spoke with him, I have collected quite a few questions I would dearly love to put to him. I have contacted Sean Murphy today and have invited him to return and contribute to this thread. James Excellent! I hope he graces us with his presence again. Since the last time I spoke with him, I have collected quite a few questions I would dearly love to put to him. Hi Bob Just in case Sean Murphy doesn't come back why don't you post your questions here and the rest of us can have a go at answering them? I've already asked several of them in this thread, " Who saw Baker enter the TSBD? but they did not seem to generate much interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Hi Bob. I thought we had discussed those and the conclusion was that, as you note, no-one on the steps seemed to have seen Baker enter the TSBD. Which is a good and valid point about the strange testimony of those on the steps that day who didn't see a couple of people who were within touching distance. But I didn't think we'd come to any agreement about what exactly happened after the Weigman film moves from the steps. My own view is that given all of SM's evidence of Oswald being on the steps and Baker's evolving statements about what happened is that the Baker/Oswald encounter happened on those steps and that is why no-one 'saw' Baker or Prayer Man. It was much easier if they saw 'nothing' than to even go there. Otherwise why wouldn't BWF just say "Yes the police officer ran up the steps and went into the building" and btw "He didn't talk to the guy I didn't see, standing right in front of him, on the doorstep". But. for the sake of argument, let's say we didn't have all that evidence then I would still wonder what could have deflected Baker from going up those steps. He's in full flight in the Weigman film - his momentum and direction seem pretty focussed on those steps. What would have stopped him? Thanks for your views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Actually, Vanessa, the films all show him running in the general direction of the steps but, to say he is actually "focused" on the steps is a bit of a stretch. As to his destination, he might just as easily have ran right past the steps and down Houston St. to check out something at the back corner of the TSBD. As for entering the TSBD, there is a back door to the building; several of them, actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Hi Bob If we look at this piece of the film (if the link doesn't work it's "Couch Film shows Baker Running to TSBD" on youtube) then we can see Baker runs past the first entrance to the TSBD that is closer to him than the eastern (?) entrance. So he could have gone in that first entrance but went further down the street to the eastern entrance for some reason. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIdbO3S2J6o Also if we look at comment #72 back on this thread Baker is running in from the left at an angle to the TSBD steps rather than running straight down the street which we might expect if he was heading past the entrance. He crosses the road to get to the footpath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 James, Just following up on my queries about why Greg and Tommy were banned/suspended from EF given they did not appear to break any EF rules in their last comments? I would appreciate a response when you have a moment. Also as you have not responded to my private message request for a right of reply to the Forum Rules thread after it was locked I would like to emphasise my support for Larry Hancock's idea of a separate area for documented research. I think it's an excellent idea and hopefully would go some way towards distinguishing the real research on here from the chat about various theories. That way the serious reader can more easily find the information that is documented and evidence-based. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Hi Bob If we look at this piece of the film (if the link doesn't work it's "Couch Film shows Baker Running to TSBD" on youtube) then we can see Baker runs past the first entrance to the TSBD that is closer to him than the eastern (?) entrance. So he could have gone in that first entrance but went further down the street to the eastern entrance for some reason. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIdbO3S2J6o Also if we look at comment #72 back on this thread Baker is running in from the left at an angle to the TSBD steps rather than running straight down the street which we might expect if he was heading past the entrance. He crosses the road to get to the footpath. According to the floor plan for the first floor, there was only one entrance on Elm St. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Quite right, Bob. This a present day photo, showing the TSBD. The only thing that has changed is the doorway at the top of the steps has been moved rearwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 Pardon my ignorance, Bob and Ray but isn't the modern day building missing the loading dock area? I agree most of the maps of the floors of the TSBD show only one entrance on Elm in the main building but in the annex area there is another door at the side. And if that's not a doorway to the annex on Couch what is it? This is the best picture I can find so far. If that doesn't work it's at www.citiesgallery.com https://www.google.com.au/search?q=tsbd+toronto&biw=1301&bih=590&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=51ZEVdCgKcHlmAWDt4H4Aw&sqi=2&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ#tbm=isch&q=texas+school+book+despository+map&imgrc=SUfzcqsuyg3aFM%253A%3BHp6EctKbJcFstM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fboingboing.net%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2011%252F08%252FiHmgcp41O3s_Tjb2rWbUkxI_AAAAAAAAA4M_6U-WvAK3dpk_s1600_texas-school-book-depository-dallas-replica-landmark.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.citiesgallery.com%252Ftexas-school-book-depository%252F%3B369%3B380 A really key question about Baker and his intentions is: if he was really on his way past the TSBD to Houston St then why did he get off his bike in Elm St, leave it there and run towards the TSBD entrance? Why not just ride on down the street to his destination on Houston (or around the back of the TSBD) and then get off? It would have been a lot quicker than running to Houston. Thanks for your thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts