Jump to content
The Education Forum

How Important is Bill Kelly's Thread?


Recommended Posts

This, in my opinion, is the single most important thread contained on this, or any other forum, for a number of specific reasons:

  1. The topic and most of the content contained here has the ability to attract new interest in this case. The combination of the thoughtful and meticulous research combined with the tantalising photographic evidence takes us almost to the point of completely and finally closing the case against Oswald once and for all. No if’s – no but’s – no maybe’s. Now, what self-respecting and honest person wouldn’t want that?
  2. Only one thing will prove or dismiss the overwhelming possibility and probability that ‘Prayerman’ is Lee Harvey Oswald. High definition scans and technological analysis of the Darnell, Weigman and Towner films are necessary. Given that the captured frames, each and every time we have received better versions, have only made the figure look even more like Oswald I sincerely believe that technology will put the question of identity to bed. I, along with Vanessa, would certainly contribute financially to making this happen.
  3. When Buell Wesley Frazier initially declined to identify himself as the person stood to the left of ‘Prayerman’ at the top of the steps, in the exact spot where BWF said he was stood - - even though every single seasoned researcher on the planet could identify him in the picture - - it told us all we needed to know about how unsettling this photograph was to an individual who still holds many secrets.
  4. The thread has garnered over 200,000 views and more than 1,600 replies across more than 100 pages. Even the time wasters, nay-sayers and obfuscators couldn’t stop this juggernaut.

At this moment in time, the individuals and institutions with the ability and the resources to put this to bed do not seem the slightest bit interested in helping pave the way. Including Mr. JFK himself Robert Groden. That, from my perspective, is interesting, perplexing and quite telling. Perhaps when the issue is settled there will be less $100 books to sell on the knoll? The Sixth Floor Museum has the control and has the power to finish this debate and even though we finally got a confirmation from Buell Wesley Frazier that, yes, the individual stood next to the person who could be his friend Lee Harvey Oswald, was in fact Buell Wesley Frazier, the powers that be have been silent on providing HD film scans of the movies.

If ‘Prayerman’ is Oswald the information provided in this thread outlines the exact details of how the case against him was constructed, how witnesses were manipulated and coerced and how evidence was fabricated.

I hate to disagree with Bill Kelly here. This one issue is the game-changer.

The arguments about the second floor encounter and myriad of other evidence the critics have accumulated over the years will continue unabated. If the question of Prayerman is concluded, and is concluded the way I imagine it will be concluded, there is no debate. It ends. Period.

The efforts to work out the real who, how and why will no doubt go on but the vindication of the man who was set-up and accused of performing this heinous crime will be complete and the history books can be rewritten.

Hi Lee

In regards to No. 2, I read this interesting post from Stan Dane over at Greg's forum, ROKC.

"According to Tina Towner:

"Due to risk of copyright infringement, none of the photographs taken by my father or me on November 22, 1963, will be posted.

"Effective February 2015, The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza obtained the copyrights to the Towner film and photos. Please contact the museum regarding use of the images."

http://www.tinatowner.net/photographs

I guess that means Gary Mack is the gatekeeper for any of the Towner images.

Wonderful."

It seems very strange that the 6th Floor Museum would suddenly move on obtaining copyright to the Towner film, after all these years. I believe our chances of gaining further access to the Towner film are diminishing rapidly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 145
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It would be wonderful if Gary Mack would allow someone qualified to have access to some of these films and images to use modern enhancement techniques in an attempt to prove or disprove the "Prayer Man" story.

[NO, Mr. Mack...I'm NOT that person.]

After all...aren't we all merely seeking the TRUTH? Or do some have other agendas?

[Yes, I can answer my own question.]

In the past, Gary Mack has been helpful to me, directing me to important information I was otherwise unable to find. I'm not a fan of the "back-channel communications" he uses, but then I suppose that's simply him exercising his own freedom [or lack thereof]. But based upon my most recent exchanges with Mr. Mack a few years back, I doubt he'd let me within 1000 feet of the Sixth Floor Museum...so it might be wise to send someone else to seek permission to access the films and images that make up the Prayer Man story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a shocker.

Just to be clear - Greg - you don't think prayerman is Oswald?

Edited by Paul Brancato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of the photo evidence is a Game Changer - they said that about Oswald in the doorway and it turned out to be Lovelady, they said that about the Tramps and we still can't agree on who they are despite the clear pix, and Landsdale at DP, etc.

Despite the great strides in facial recognition software - nobody seems to have even tried to get a specialist to look into this -

Game Changers must be solid - undesputable evidence of an assassination related crime not attribuable to Oswald that is admissible in court or can be investigated by Congress - and they are out there.

And yes Thomas, I will make you a copy of the tape and send into you as soon as I can - and have arranged for the original to be preserved at the Baylor Library, as we agreed.

And I would appreciate it if someone could tell me what button to push to get to the most recent posting on a thread as I only go to the first post.

Thanks,

BK

Edited by William Kelly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find the Prayer Man discussion the single most fascinating idea about the assassination of John F. Kennedy. In no other place anywhere have I seen the case for Lee Oswald being Prayer Man so comprehensively and effectively captured as it is here in this thread. It's a signature product that the Education Forum should be proud of and it's worthy of special consideration.

If the simple act of pinning the thread creates too many challenges or is too disruptive, then consider creating a "Greatest Hits" or "Hall of Fame" category for threads that encapsulate significant bodies of work and thought. Recognize threads that have clearly risen above the rest in terms of quality of research, longevity, member interest, etc. It shouldn't be too difficult to figure out what the MVP threads are.

Since research in not a linear process—progress generally happens in spurts with longer dry spells—why allow an important topic currently in a quiet phase to drop off the radar screen and potentially be forgotten because it gets pushed into oblivion by here-today-gone-tomorrow discussion? Always look closely at the trees but never lose sight of the forest in the process.

FWIW.

Well said, Mr. Sorenson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find the Prayer Man discussion the single most fascinating idea about the assassination of John F. Kennedy. In no other place anywhere have I seen the case for Lee Oswald being Prayer Man so comprehensively and effectively captured as it is here in this thread. It's a signature product that the Education Forum should be proud of and it's worthy of special consideration.

If the simple act of pinning the thread creates too many challenges or is too disruptive, then consider creating a "Greatest Hits" or "Hall of Fame" category for threads that encapsulate significant bodies of work and thought. Recognize threads that have clearly risen above the rest in terms of quality of research, longevity, member interest, etc. It shouldn't be too difficult to figure out what the MVP threads are.

Since research in not a linear process—progress generally happens in spurts with longer dry spells—why allow an important topic currently in a quiet phase to drop off the radar screen and potentially be forgotten because it gets pushed into oblivion by here-today-gone-tomorrow discussion? Always look closely at the trees but never lose sight of the forest in the process.

FWIW.

That sounds like an eminently feasible compromise, Randy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carmine

Listen very closely. You seem to want to divide people into two distinct camps, those that believe PM is Oswald, and those that don't. I have always been highly suspect of those wishing to make every issue that comes along either black or white, as this tends to stymie further investigation into the issue. Is that what your intention is?

One more time, I do NOT believe PM is Oswald, as I have not seen conclusive proof to confirm this, but I believe it highly PROBABLE PM is Oswald. Do you see the difference?

For that reason, I wish this thread to have some sort of prominence, if only for the chance it may attract some brilliant SOB with the means to move the investigation into PM forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carmine

Listen very closely. You seem to want to divide people into two distinct camps, those that believe PM is Oswald, and those that don't. I have always been highly suspect of those wishing to make every issue that comes along either black or white, as this tends to stymie further investigation into the issue. Is that what your intention is?

One more time, I do NOT believe PM is Oswald, as I have not seen conclusive proof to confirm this, but I believe it highly PROBABLE PM is Oswald. Do you see the difference?

For that reason, I wish this thread to have some sort of prominence, if only for the chance it may attract some brilliant SOB with the means to move the investigation into PM forward.

Bob, listen very closely, I use verifiable evidence. That is the divide. Try as you might this is not about me, but a bad idea that some claim is the truth.

Verifiable evidence is what we are seeking in the PM matter. Would you rather we not find it? You seem more eager to discourage anyone from looking for it than you are to see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob,

I don't care about PM or any other unproven claim, just the attacks on those who disagree for using evidence. Feel free to gather evidence, it would be a welcome change.

I have never attacked you on this forum, or any other forum. And I do not appreciate comments such as "Feel free to gather evidence, it would be a welcome change."

Methinks you are trying just a bit too hard to put the PM theory into a bad light. What is it about PM that really bothers you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In lieu of an identifiable photo of Oswald in that corner we can and have looked at the other evidence and the statements of most everyone it COULD have been and none appear to equate themselves with that corner - the closest anyone comes is Shelley, yet Shelley is in a white shirt, tie & jacket.

I would remind you of Carolyn Arnold and the fact that the FBI did not publish either of her statements nor did they call her to testify.

Oswald was wearing a darkish brown button down button front shirt over a t-shirt, no glasses, bracelet on left hand and grey pants.

Since I too do not believe that Lunchroom scene ever happened - or at least not with Oswald - his being "out front with Shelley" and Bookout's explanation that it was after the fact may be a CYA on his part. It's not that Lovelady is really Oswald - it's that Oswald is set back, like Shelley.

The ONLY thing that keeps me from accepting it outright is that not a single person claims they said he was there in any of the 50 years of independent research that's been done.. While so many other areas of error have been pointed out by witnesses. Until we find a reasonable alternative to it being Oswald (aint it strange that we are doing everything we can to prove it was NOT him, just to cover all bases?) I think we have to start accepting the probability that it's really him out there and the lunchroom charade was to move him from these steps into the building. If it was Oswald coming down the stairs in Baker's affidavit - I'd think it would have said so.

Carolyn%20Arnold%20FBI%20Statement%20-%2

Prayer%20man%20info%20just%20not%20there

Edited by David Josephs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carmine - cease and desist. Show a little self control. You've made your point. No one is asking you to make it over and over again. It's upsetting to me, and I don't have a dog in this fight, of that is even what it is. The subject is interesting, clearly important, and nothing, absolutely nothing you can say here can change that. So be respectful. You are not being attacked, you are just being asked to stop repeating your objections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...