Great New Movie Spells out the Case for Oswald as Prayer Man

[Vanessa Loney]

The MOVIE???? OMG. First "the book", now the movie? I guess there are no more topics to explore on this case so one has to start inventing them.

This ranks up there with Ralph Cinque's "doorway man" obsession.

Say goodnight Gracie.

Dawn

Hello Da

Actually it's quite commonplace for books to be turned into movies so I'm not sure what you're on about.

In any case, the movie is Bart's own research and he will also be issuing a book based on that.

Like Duncan, you don't seem to have any factual points to make about the film either.

Funny, how you are also prepared to come on here to debate PM and yet Duncan-like won't allow any of us on DP to discuss it. What are you lot so afraid of?

That is a lie Vanessa. You were on DPF. And Bart still is, as far as I know. Of course book are turned into movies. Books that are actually about something beyond a fuzzy image that one can only speculate. Hardly research.

Now Dawn, perhaps you should consult with a legal expert before making a statement like that. Because I’m sure they’ll tell you that legally-speaking it is not very nice to call someone a lying person.

Yes, I was on DPF for a few days until I got banned. My attempts to be reinstated have not been successful.

As I understand it Barto is also unable to post on DP.

Dawn, if you have watched the movie you will know it goes in detail into the documentation that supports PM being Oswald. Something that none of you guys seem able to address.

So Dawn will you be joining with us in pressing NBC5 to make available the Darnell film for a high resolution scan?

Edited December 7, 2015 by Vanessa Loney

[Vanessa Loney]

Vanessa and Thomas,

It's a matter of perception and logic.

I observe a photograph and perceive X. X might mean nothing. Vanessa or Thomas observes the same photograph and perceives Y.

Who is correct? Jon? Or Vanessa or Thomas?

Answer: Take your choice.

What I object to is the assertion that there is only one conclusion to be drawn from the photograph.

Vanessa and Thomas,

It's a matter of perception and logic.

I observe a photograph and perceive X. X might mean nothing. Vanessa or Thomas observes the same photograph and perceives Y.

Who is correct? Jon? Or Vanessa or Thomas?

Answer: Take your choice.

What I object to is the assertion that there is only one conclusion to be drawn from the photograph.

Mr Tidd

The person standing next to PM in the photo is Buell Wesley Frazier. BWF himself has confirmed that. The hairline, height and clothing all matches BWF's appearance that day. His position also matches his WC testimony and the testimony of others on the TSBD steps. No-one is suggesting or has demonstrated that the film has been altered to put BWF in there.

Do you accept that is BWF in the photo?

[Vanessa Loney]

Toupe wearing Fred Lego with a syrup that would make Donald Trump jealous speaks with forked tongue, as does his parther in slime, ROKC's resident cross dressing drag artist and Author of " Books For The Gullible And How To Manipulate Them" the one and lonely Dan Stain.

Any fakery from me is all in both of your warped ROKC less than empty Neanderthal skulls.... PP = PW.... I Win.......Get over it losers

I’m not sure that sentence even makes any sense. You might want to rewrite it.

And while you’re doing that you really need to address the case that Ed has made that you have been using a doctored picture in your discussions of Prayer Man. Why is that?

[Vanessa Loney]

Vanessa,

Apologies on the delayed response. Had to visit a hospitalized family member who's the better part of a day's drive away. Just got back to cyberspace. You seem to be slighted that I have not shown the same kind of adoration for Sean's hallowed hoax hypothesis as you. And it's true that I don't esteem your opinion very much. I have read several of your posts over the past year and still do not see you rising above being an ROKC cheerleader. But your response is good, you are getting somewhere.

But you set up a false dichotomy between me & Greg. My beef is with the attacks & insults that are hurled daily from his forum, which has a long laundry list of people it disdains, on a continual basis. Especially those who express opposing views to that forum's consensus. That is disrespect, plain and simple.

You are misunderstanding my position if you don't think I sign on to Prayer Man. I did in 2010 and have never wavered. There is more about that, and a critique of the methodology of ROKC's study of Prayerman, in the beginning of Part 1 of my Rob Clark interview. Part 3, from 13:00- 32:15, discusses the lunchroom hoax issue.

http://www.spreaker.com/user/thelonegunman/ep-88-inside-job-pt-3-final-with-richard

Baker was not going to night school studying to be an architect. He had a nickname with the force- "Mommason"- and was considered somewhat of a dope. Fritz, who assumedly read Baker's affidavit, does not exactly brim over with unequivocable assurance that Baker had in reality met Oswald on a stairway.

This is another of the negative data points assembled to construct the lunchroom hoax hypothesis. They all get assembled in the negative region of the x-y coordinate system. Hoaxers simply ignore data that doesn't fit in this negative region- the filmed Baker interviews, the will-call counter bump, WC Exhibit 3076, the lack of corroboration for Kent Biffle's news blurb, to name several.

This negative region is not the real world. Sean has seen the problem the Stroud document introduces since 2011. When you couple it with an understanding of the A & S and T & B timelines, it invalidates his hypothesis. This led him to discredit the Stroud document as just hearsay, and construct another fantasy- that T & B had taken the west elevator up- in order to salvage his lunchroom hoax fantasy. (see "Murphy's Postulate" at the end of my first lunchroom essay, which has a separate listing in the table of contents at the old ROKC site.)

The hoax hypothesis has yielded no results, save added confusion, in its 10+ years. It gives an imaginary confrontation between Baker & Oswald on the front landing. There is no substantiable evidence for this, just wishful thinking. It gives an imaginary encounter with "Spooky", i.e. the "3rd or 4th floor" man, who was "walking away from the stairway". It leads neophytes to believe Ira Trantham met Spooky and kept that hidden until his HSCA interview.

Believing the lunchroom incident happened gives these results:

1) the traditional critique, that Oswald was too calm to have just raced down from the sniper's nest

2) Howard Roffman's & Bill Kelly's point- that Oswald had to have entered from the direction of the central offices

3) A & S passed T & B while they were in the lunchroom, which Sean conveniently ignored when I posted it at Lancer in 2011

4) If Sean's research about Adams hearing the cables is correct, the west elevator began its descent approx. 60 seconds after the assassination.

Richard

No problems, I’m sure I would have been happy to wait longer for your response while you tended to sick relatives.

Baker was a trained police officer. Are you saying he was unable to tell the difference between a lunchroom and a stairway? His same day affidavit seems crystal clear that it was the stairs.

Fritz may stumble over saying Baker’s name (which is significant in itself) but he is clear that someone told him that Truly and Baker met Oswald on the stairs and that this was found to be incorrect by the investigation.

You can’t have it both ways with Baker. If he was not smart enough to know that he met Oswald on the stairs then how could he be smart enough to know that he met Oswald in the lunchroom?

He’s either an unreliable witness who can’t tell the difference between the stairs and the lunchroom.

Or his same day affidavit is the truth and Fritz’s statements about the investigation having to find Baker to be incorrect are also the truth.

Which is it?

[Ed LeDoux]

That is what I thought, bad photoshop skills from MacRae.

Just proves my point he has poorly altered and manipulated the Darnell frame.

[Ed LeDoux]

I agree that PM presents the perfect enigma, and that pursuit of solving this enigma might be the most important research into the JFK assassination yet. I judge how close to the truth PM research has gotten by the almost panicked reactions of such LN super freaks as Duncan MacRae. This matter has the Dark Side deeply concerned, make no doubt about it.

However, in the process, let us not be so gullible as to swallow whole other "accepted" pieces of evidence in this investigation. For example, everyone simply "knows" that Baker was entering the front door of the TSBD within 15-22 seconds of the last shot. Excuse me for being a pest but, what proof is there that Baker immediately went up the TSBD steps, after crossing the Elm St. extension?

Ba Ba,

What evidence is there that Baker sprinted down to the corner to talk with one or two policemen, instead?

Did anyone say they saw him do that?

--Tommy

Tommy that amount of evidence would be zero,

What evidence is there Baker ran up the steps?

Pauline Sanders.

"She advised she could not recall the exact time but immediately after the presidential parade passed she heard three loud blasts and she immediately realized that the shots or whatever it was came from the building above her. 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."

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/exhibits/ce1434.htm

[Thomas Graves]

I agree that PM presents the perfect enigma, and that pursuit of solving this enigma might be the most important research into the JFK assassination yet. I judge how close to the truth PM research has gotten by the almost panicked reactions of such LN super freaks as Duncan MacRae. This matter has the Dark Side deeply concerned, make no doubt about it.

However, in the process, let us not be so gullible as to swallow whole other "accepted" pieces of evidence in this investigation. For example, everyone simply "knows" that Baker was entering the front door of the TSBD within 15-22 seconds of the last shot. Excuse me for being a pest but, what proof is there that Baker immediately went up the TSBD steps, after crossing the Elm St. extension?

Ba Ba,

What evidence is there that Baker sprinted down to the corner to talk with one or two policemen, instead?

Did anyone say they saw him do that?

--Tommy

Tommy that amount of evidence would be zero,

What evidence is there Baker ran up the steps?

Pauline Sanders.

"She advised she could not recall the exact time but immediately after the presidential parade passed she heard three loud blasts and she immediately realized that the shots or whatever it was came from the building above her. 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."

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/exhibits/ce1434.htm

Ed,

Bingo. I'd forgotten about her.

She must have been one of the conspirators. Or maybe her testimony was altered. LOL

--Tommy

Edited December 7, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Prudhomme]

I agree that PM presents the perfect enigma, and that pursuit of solving this enigma might be the most important research into the JFK assassination yet. I judge how close to the truth PM research has gotten by the almost panicked reactions of such LN super freaks as Duncan MacRae. This matter has the Dark Side deeply concerned, make no doubt about it.

However, in the process, let us not be so gullible as to swallow whole other "accepted" pieces of evidence in this investigation. For example, everyone simply "knows" that Baker was entering the front door of the TSBD within 15-22 seconds of the last shot. Excuse me for being a pest but, what proof is there that Baker immediately went up the TSBD steps, after crossing the Elm St. extension?

Ba Ba,

What evidence is there that Baker sprinted down to the corner to talk with one or two policemen, instead?

Did anyone say they saw him do that?

--Tommy

Tommy that amount of evidence would be zero,

What evidence is there Baker ran up the steps?

Pauline Sanders.

"She advised she could not recall the exact time but immediately after the presidential parade passed she heard three loud blasts and she immediately realized that the shots or whatever it was came from the building above her. 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."

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/exhibits/ce1434.htm

Ed,

Bingo. I'd forgotten about her. She must have been one of the conspirators, eh? Or maybe her testimony was altered. LOL

--Tommy

Oh really? Pauline Sanders testified? To whom?

Mind providing a link to her "testimony"?

[Robert Prudhomme]

Hi Ed

I was waiting for someone to bring up Pauline Sanders.

Think hard about this for a moment. Out of the 10-20 people standing on the steps of the TSBD (some directly in front of the entrance door) is it not just a bit odd that only one of these people can recall seeing a white helmeted motorcycle cop running up the steps immediately after the shots were fired? Is it also not just a bit odd that neither Buell Wesley Frazier nor Joe Molina, in their testimony to the WC, could recall seeing this white helmeted cop, despite the fact they were standing in Baker's way at the top of the steps?

Further, let's take a look at her "statement".

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Date 11/24/63

PAULINE E. SANDERS, 4226 Delmar, a Clerk, Texas School Book Depository, 411 Elm Street, advised she arrived at work at 8:45 a.m., on November 22, 1963, and immediately reported to the main office where she was employed. She said she was aquainted with LEE HARVEY OSWALD who worked in the warehouse sectio and she has seen him three or four times during lunch breaks in the lunch room but did not talk to him on any occasion. She said he was very quiet and she had never seen him talking to any of the other employees that she could recall. She said she would not be in a position to observe what time he arrived at work or the way he arrived.

She said on the morning of November 22, 1963, she went outside to watch the Presidential parade at about 11:25 a.m. She said she did not see OSWALD during this time and she stood in the last line of spectators nearest the door to the Texas School Book Depository building. She advised she could not recall the exact time but immediately after the presidential parade passed she heard three loud blasts and she immediately realized that the shots or whatever it was came from the building above her. 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.

Mrs. SANDERS advised that Mr. Campbell, Office Manager, arrived shortly after the police officer entered the building and she told him she believed the blasts came from the upper part of the building however he insisted the shots came from the embankment. She advised she did not pursue the matter any further and she entered the building within five minutes of the blast. She said she did not observe OSWALD in the lobby but the lobby was crowded with people at this time. She said she did notice a uniform police officer talking to an individual dressed in grey clothing with a silver type construction helmet and he claimed to be an engineer. She said he definitely did not work in the building and she had never seen him before. She said the police officer appeared to be taking his name and address. She said she did not observe whether the elevator was in use or not and she could not recall whether it was on the first floor but she did use the stairwell and walked to the second floor where their offices are maintained. She said she could not recall seeing OSWALD the entire day and at this time the only thing that was on her mind was whether the President had died.

Mrs. SANDERS advised that this morning she called GERALDINE REID, another employee, telephone number FE 1-6617, who told her that the police officer who had first entered the building ran into the lunch room where Mr. TRULY, the warehouse manager, and OSWALD were evidently lunching. The police officer put his gun into OSWALD's stomach but TRULY advised the police officer that OSWALD worked for him. Police officer turned turned away and evidently left the area. She said according to REID, OSWALD then went to the main office and REID, although she had not observed the initial incident with the police officer, told OSWALD that the President had been shot. According to SANDERS, Mrs. REID claimed that OSWALD just mumbled something and left the office. She said Reid did not mention how OSWALD left the office or for that matter if she knew how he might have left the building. SANDERS advised that the stairwell would probably have been the easiest way to leave without being too noticeable since the stairwell is in need of repairs and employees had been instructed not to use the stairwell.

on 11/24/63 at Dallas, Texas File # DL 89-43

By Special Agent ROBERT E. HASAM and ROBERT J. ANDERSON Date Dictated 11/24/63

***********************************************************************************

Pauline Sanders' "statement" is typical of much of the "evidence" provided to the Warren Commission by the FBI. I am not completely familiar with the American court system but, in Canada, such a piece of hearsay evidence would be thrown out by any judge here.

First off, there is no signature on this FBI report. Did Ms. Sanders have the chance to read this report? Did she approve its contents? Did she even know of its existence?

Then we have the "mixed up" lunch room encounter Ms. Sanders received from Geraldine Reid. How cute. The details are off just enough to pass for female gossip but, most importantly, the story establishes that Baker, Truly and Oswald were, at some point, in the 2nd floor lunch room together.

Lastly, look at the date of this report, 24/11/63, right about when the coverup was getting into full swing, and also about the time Baker had changed his story from seeing an employee on the 3rd or 4th floor, walking away from the stairs, to seeing Oswald in the lunch room.

And no, Thomas, I don't believe Pauline Sanders was lying. The FBI took care of that for her. I defy anyone to produce anything by her to corroborate or deny the above report.

“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” ----- Mark Twain

Edited December 7, 2015 by Robert Prudhomme

[Robert Prudhomme]

Now, why don't we make this discussion complete and take a look at the other two witnesses who "saw" Baker (and Truly) ascending the steps of the TSBD?

[Thomas Graves]

Hi Ed

I was waiting for someone to bring up Pauline Sanders.

Think hard about this for a moment. Out of the 10-20 people standing on the steps of the TSBD (some directly in front of the entrance door) is it not just a bit odd that only one of these people can recall seeing a white helmeted motorcycle cop running up the steps immediately after the shots were fired? Is it also not just a bit odd that neither Buell Wesley Frazier nor Joe Molina, in their testimony to the WC, could recall seeing this white helmeted cop, despite the fact they were standing in Baker's way at the top of the steps?

Further, let's take a look at her "statement".

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Date 11/24/63

PAULINE E. SANDERS, 4226 Delmar, a Clerk, Texas School Book Depository, 411 Elm Street, advised she arrived at work at 8:45 a.m., on November 22, 1963, and immediately reported to the main office where she was employed. She said she was aquainted with LEE HARVEY OSWALD who worked in the warehouse sectio and she has seen him three or four times during lunch breaks in the lunch room but did not talk to him on any occasion. She said he was very quiet and she had never seen him talking to any of the other employees that she could recall. She said she would not be in a position to observe what time he arrived at work or the way he arrived.

She said on the morning of November 22, 1963, she went outside to watch the Presidential parade at about 11:25 a.m. She said she did not see OSWALD during this time and she stood in the last line of spectators nearest the door to the Texas School Book Depository building. She advised she could not recall the exact time but immediately after the presidential parade passed she heard three loud blasts and she immediately realized that the shots or whatever it was came from the building above her. 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.

Mrs. SANDERS advised that Mr. Campbell, Office Manager, arrived shortly after the police officer entered the building and she told him she believed the blasts came from the upper part of the building however he insisted the shots came from the embankment. She advised she did not pursue the matter any further and she entered the building within five minutes of the blast. She said she did not observe OSWALD in the lobby but the lobby was crowded with people at this time. She said she did notice a uniform police officer talking to an individual dressed in grey clothing with a silver type construction helmet and he claimed to be an engineer. She said he definitely did not work in the building and she had never seen him before. She said the police officer appeared to be taking his name and address. She said she did not observe whether the elevator was in use or not and she could not recall whether it was on the first floor but she did use the stairwell and walked to the second floor where their offices are maintained. She said she could not recall seeing OSWALD the entire day and at this time the only thing that was on her mind was whether the President had died.

Mrs. SANDERS advised that this morning she called GERALDINE REID, another employee, telephone number FE 1-6617, who told her that the police officer who had first entered the building ran into the lunch room where Mr. TRULY, the warehouse manager, and OSWALD were evidently lunching. The police officer put his gun into OSWALD's stomach but TRULY advised the police officer that OSWALD worked for him. Police officer turned turned away and evidently left the area. She said according to REID, OSWALD then went to the main office and REID, although she had not observed the initial incident with the police officer, told OSWALD that the President had been shot. According to SANDERS, Mrs. REID claimed that OSWALD just mumbled something and left the office. She said Reid did not mention how OSWALD left the office or for that matter if she knew how he might have left the building. SANDERS advised that the stairwell would probably have been the easiest way to leave without being too noticeable since the stairwell is in need of repairs and employees had been instructed not to use the stairwell.

on 11/24/63 at Dallas, Texas File # DL 89-43

By Special Agent ROBERT E. HASAM and ROBERT J. ANDERSON Date Dictated 11/24/63

***********************************************************************************

Pauline Sanders' "statement" is typical of much of the "evidence" provided to the Warren Commission by the FBI. I am not completely familiar with the American court system but, in Canada, such a piece of hearsay evidence would be thrown out by any judge here.

First off, there is no signature on this FBI report. Did Ms. Sanders have the chance to read this report? Did she approve its contents? Did she even know of its existence?

Then we have the "mixed up" lunch room encounter Ms. Sanders received from Geraldine Reid. How cute. The details are off just enough to pass for female gossip but, most importantly, the story establishes that Baker, Truly and Oswald were, at some point, in the 2nd floor lunch room together.

Lastly, look at the date of this report, 24/11/63, right about when the coverup was getting into full swing, and also about the time Baker had changed his story from seeing an employee on the 3rd or 4th floor, walking away from the stairs, to seeing Oswald in the lunch room.

And no, Thomas, I don't believe Pauline Sanders was lying. The FBI took care of that for her. I defy anyone to produce anything by her to corroborate or deny the above report.

“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” ----- Mark Twain

Dear Robert,

You're saying that "only one" (Pauline Sanders) is the same as "none"?

Did Pauline ever say, "No, that's not what I told the FBI at all!" ???

Would you really expect everyone who saw Baker enter the building to mention that fact?

BTW, Robert --

Why didn't anyone say they saw Baker sprinting all the way to the street corner (wearing his highly-noticeable uniform, motorcycle boots, and white helmet)?

Sprinting motorcycle officers always catch my attention.

--Tommy

Edited December 8, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Prudhomme]

Don't be ridiculous, Thomas.

I am saying it is very odd that only one "witness", if we dare even call her that, could recall seeing Baker going up the steps immediately after the shots were fired.

Any luck finding Sanders' testimony yet?

[Thomas Graves]

Don't be ridiculous, Thomas.

I am saying it is very odd that only one "witness", if we dare even call her that, could recall seeing Baker going up the steps immediately after the shots were fired.

Any luck finding Sanders' testimony yet?

Dear Robert,

Why in the world wouldn't you "dare" call Saunders a witness? She has been spotted in photographs standing where she said she was standing during the assassination -- on the front steps. She witnessed the assassination and its aftermath.

As to her "testimony," I think her statement to the FBI qualifies as such. You know, in the broad meaning of the word "testimony" ?

Maybe I should have said "statement to the FBI" instead? Would you have been happy with that?

--Tommy

Edited December 7, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[James R Gordon]

I concurr with the recent post that Kathy has just made. I have hidden a large number of posts by members who really should have known better.

Of late we administrators have been very pleased with the tone of debate and conversation between members. I am assuming that this present debate is just an isolated incident and not something that will be repeated.

However if any member decides to repeat this behaviour - that you all know to be unacceptable - then that member ( or members ) will have their posting privileges removed for weeks!!!

Please let us all return to the very civilised level of debate and conversation we have become used to.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Don't be ridiculous, Thomas.

I am saying it is very odd that only one "witness", if we dare even call her that, could recall seeing Baker going up the steps immediately after the shots were fired.

Any luck finding Sanders' testimony yet?

Dear Robert,

Why in the world wouldn't you "dare" call Saunders a witness? She has been spotted in photographs standing where she said she was standing during the assassination -- on the front steps. She witnessed the assassination and its aftermath.

As to her "testimony," I think her statement to the FBI qualifies as such. You know, in the broad meaning of the word "testimony" ?

Maybe I should have said "statement to the FBI" instead? Would you have been happy with that?

--Tommy

FBI reports do not qualify as statements or testimony, for the simple fact they are written by an agent in the third person and are not signed. Period.

In the JFK murder case, there are numerous instances where FBI reports containing so called "statements" by assassination witnesses were completely contradicted when those witnesses gave testimony to the Warren Commission.

Pauline Sanders was the only witness on the steps of the TSBD who saw Baker going up the steps, immediately after the shots were fired. Why was she not called to testify to the Warren Commission?