Mark Knight

So...has anyone who is taking issue with Greg Parker's book actually READ the book? I can't attack his work--or praise it--because I have yet to read it.

Cui Bono? NIxon, for one...but not immediately. That came about 5 years later. I don't think he was at the top of the pyramid by any stretch, but he clearly benefitted from the elimination of two Kennedys. In 1962, we "won't have Dick Nixon to kick around..." And in 1968, he's elected to the highest office in the land. This would suggest to me that the sponsors of the JFK assassination were behind Nixon's election. But by '74, they had reason to leave him "twisting slowly, slowly in the wind." Just an observation...

OK, here's the conundrum: If Oswald was a "dangle," the Soviets weren't biting. The cutting of the wrists was an act of desperation...for some reason. Obviously, if Ozzie had to slash his wrists to be allowed to stay in the Soviet Union, it would have been obvious to whomever set him up as a "dangle" that the Soviets didn't really want him. So the "dangle" was a collossal failure...if it existed at all. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that Oswald truly was a "dangle." Let's also assume that perhaps his sponsoring organization--whoever they were--was getting impatient. Perhaps they communicated to him that, if the Soviets didn't allow him to stay by "x" date, the operation [assuming there was some sort of operation] was to be aborted. From those assumptions, it's fairly obvious that Oswald's cutting of the wrists was unscripted, as far as the sponsors' purposes were concerned. At this point, the Soviets had to take him in, from a propaganda standpoint, as a humanitarian gesture. But it can be argued that the Soviets considered such a man as unstable as his American sponsors now did...and therefore Oswald was to serve NO useful purpose, intelligence-wise, in the USSR. From these assumptions, the only way Ozzie COULD have been useful to an American intelligence sponsor would have been as a courier...as Greg Parker has suggested. And I haven't seen a lot of evidence that Oswald was used as a courier...but only because there seems to have been so little investigation of that particular angle. Just my thoughts...

If he was carrying the Hidell ID prior to the assassination, then you MIGHT believe that he was being directed by someone else?Please clarify. I don't wish to make further assumptions as to what you mean to say. Because, if he NOT a self-directed "odd duck," as you seem to contend, then does a different set of rules come into play? Or was the Hidell ID the "rabbit pulled out of the hat" to tie the rifle to Oswald [because nothing else does]?

The problem, Greg, is that it's difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff when if comes to Oswald. Some of it is due to his own actions, at trying to leave a confusing trail [AS IF he MAY HAVE BEEN at least INFLUENCED by persons or agencies involved in intelligence work*]. And those attempts seem to have worked well for the past 51+ years. * Added in an attempt to make my point without offending Mr. Jon G. Tidd.

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=pv&GRid=69084902

Chris, I'm having trouble with your "zippyshare" links. It keeps wanting me to download them, rather than simply letting me see them [browser is Chrome]. And my old laptop doesn't have enough space left to download them.

Great find, Chris! Wonder why there was NO discussion of what they did or did not see from there?.....

This, then, might be considered evidence [not proof, mind you, but evidence] of a conspiracy.

And I didn't mean my comment as a criticism. Just stating the obvious, as we search for the meaning of Prayer Man, and whether or not he and Oswald are one.

My point was that, at this point, even with those measurements [within 1-2 inches], we still can't conclusively rule out Oswald as Prayer Man, or vise-versa.

...which would fit a 5-foor-9 Oswald, if he was slumped even 1 inch, rather than standing at full attention.

http://www10.zippyshare.com/v/HqzImRLR/file.html Brad, I'm more inclined to agree with Dr.Shaw that the "all in one" Connally wound came from the west end of the TSBD. Along the line of the photos provided. Not necessarily when "on the Zfilm" as Shaw determined. No Queen Mary obstacles. No JFK obstacle. Downward angle more realistic. imo chris And I'm on board with you, Chris. I think the angles make more sense.

More great use of modern technology to try to come to a solution; I love it! I think that ALL of the evidence, and alleged evidence, in the case should be examined in a like fashion. If we end up deciding that Oswald IS Prayer Man, then the case is wide open, and needs reinvestigation. If we end up deciding that PM is NOT Oswald, then we STILL should examine other evidence to see if anyone can, beyond a reasonable doubt, place him "in THAT window, with THAT rifle" at the time the shots were fired...because that is the basis of the WC case. My position is, if the WC case can be DISPROVED beyond a reasonable doubt, we still don't have a solution to the JFK murder. But that will free up time and resources to THEN pursue the true culprit(s), and ALL [except maybe David Von pein and McAdams, who I'm sure would refuse to participate] can join in the search for truth.

Depends upon whether he kept the stub or not. Might have even lost it in the struggle with McDonald et al... We simply don't know the answer to that. But it's logical that, if you're going to enter a movie theater, and you don't want to seem out-of-place, you'd buy a ticket. And I'm guessing that's exactly what Oswald did.

This is possiby the most insightful comment of the day. Yet it simply points out the obvious.

Robert, I'm already addicted to old cars and trucks....I own a '51 and a '52 International pickup, and my "holy grail" cars would be either a '46-'47 Hudson coupe, a '54 Hudson coupe, or a '56 Hudson Hornet Special Holywood hardtop. The "52 is my rod project [lots of parts accumulated, not a lot of work completed], and my '51 still has the original engine and drivetrain [but needs other work]. "Baskets? We don' need no steenkeen baskets...." [Or something like that...]

Cliff, I'm becoming convinced that Bundy and Harriman were near the top of the pyramid. Not sure I'd say they were AT the top, but they were very, very close...in my opinion. And the study of Oswald is, as you say, the study of the cover-up. I think Jon Tidd has given us plenty of food for thought in that area, and yet managed to tie it [loosely] to Bundy et al. And I think the Walker-led conspiracy idea is yet another "rabbit hole" which leaves us seeing things "through the looking glass."

I really would like for someone to make the necessary scans from the movies that are available, and see if we can determine for a certainty whether Prayer Man is Oswald or not. I know it will be expensive, as Gary Mack has pointed out. But it's worth the cost, if it brings us to the truth. Too many things about the assassination are still "debatable" after 51 years. If this one issue could be settled, it might open new doors into determining what other evidence that has been taken for granted might also be examined in a new light, with new technology.

Well laid out by Colin. Thanks to "everyone" involved in seeing that the link got posted here. I think this subject may have been touched upon on this forum a long, long time ago...but if I'm remembering correctly, I was quickly "swept under the rug." I'm inclined to believe that Bonnie Ray Williams lied his ass off...

The more details I read, the more I'm inclined to agree with you.

GREAT stuff, Larry! And Cliff...I think this ties to an earlier thread in which you were involved: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18120

Put in those terms, I understand what you mean.

THANKS for the separate thread. Now, carry on....

Tommy, I hope it works. I'm not holding my breath because it's always more "fun" to divert a thread from its topic.