Prayer Man Is A Woman

[David Von Pein]

Duncan can see all kinds of things in that photo that no one else can see.

Gee, that sure sounds familiar. Where have I heard stuff like that before?

The pot/kettle irony that emanates from CTers nearly every day is unparalleled.

Badge Man.

Prayer Man.

Black Dog Man.

Tan Jacket Man.

Etc., etc...

And just two days ago, conspiracy theorist and nine-year Education Forum veteran Kathleen Collins took the time to send me a private e-mail in order to provide me with this bombshell proof of a gunman she sees in the Nix Film. The assassin in the film apparently decided to fire a rifle at the President while standing right out in the open where everybody could easily see (and film) him. Those Presidential assassins sure were brilliant planners, weren't they?....

Subject: Nix film

Date: 9/16/2015 11:58:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time

From: Kathy Collins

To: David Von Pein

----------------------------

Dear David,

Here is a link to the Nix film that shows a man, leaning on a car, shooting. Whoever put the clip up is pointing to 2 other men. But clearly, the man at the car is shooting.

youtube.com/watch?v=gvz6sxhb3PA

Kathy Collins

Edited September 18, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Cliff Varnell]

No love lost between me and the ROKCers but I agree with Parker's analysis of the figure with arms folded, elbow reflected.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Duncan can see all kinds of things in that photo that no one else can see.

Gee, that sure sounds familiar. Where have I heard stuff like that before?

The pot/kettle irony that emanates from CTers nearly every day is unparalleled.

Badge Man.

Prayer Man.

Black Dog Man.

Tan Jacket Man.

Etc., etc...

And just two days ago, conspiracy theorist and nine-year Education Forum veteran Kathleen Collins took the time to send me a private e-mail in order to provide me with this bombshell proof of a gunman she sees in the Nix Film. The assassin in the film apparently decided to fire a rifle at the President while standing right out in the open where everybody could easily see (and film) him. Those Presidential assassins sure were brilliant planners, weren't they?....

Subject: Nix film

Date: 9/16/2015 11:58:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time

From: Kathy Collins

To: David Von Pein

----------------------------

Dear David,

Here is a link to the Nix film that shows a man, leaning on a car, shooting. Whoever put the clip up is pointing to 2 other men. But clearly, the man at the car is shooting.

youtube.com/watch?v=gvz6sxhb3PA

Kathy Collins

So, you agree that Dunc's "analysis" of PM is bogus?

[David Von Pein]

So, you agree that Dunc's "analysis" of PM is bogus?

It's impossible for me to tell. It's an analysis of pure mush and trying to make it solid. Can't be done with the awful, worthless image we have to deal with there. (IMHO.)

One thing is a certainty, however --- "Prayer (Wo)Man" is definitely NOT Lee Harvey Oswald. Even Oswald himself confirmed that fact....

REPORTER -- "Did you shoot the President?"

LEE HARVEY OSWALD -- "I work in that building."

REPORTER -- "Were you in the building at the time?"

LEE HARVEY OSWALD -- "Naturally, if I work in that building, yes, sir."

Edited September 19, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Robert Prudhomme]

I will accept that as a total putdown of MacRae's "research analysis" or whatever he calls it.

Believe it or not, I, too, would like to see a better refining of this still of PM before I am completely convinced of anything about it.

P.S.

Still pretty shaky interpretation of him being in that building. If I was to step out on the steps, but never left the alcove at the top of the steps, I might, if quickly answering a reporter's question, still have considered myself "in" that building.

Edited September 19, 2015 by Robert Prudhomme

[James DiEugenio]

Gary Mack came up with Badge Man.

I, for one, never bought it.

[David Von Pein]

Still pretty shaky interpretation of him being in that building. If I was to step out on the steps, but never left the alcove at the top of the steps, I might, if quickly answering a reporter's question, still have considered myself "in" that building.

Bob,

I've discussed that "Inside or Outside?" subject with other people in the past, such as this discussion with J. Raymond Carroll in July 2014....

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-741.html

RAYMOND CARROLL SAID:

Slight problem there, David: No motive, no means, and he was watching from the front steps. But you are correct that he acted alone!

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

J. Raymond Carroll is one of the very few conspiracy theorists on the planet who thinks Lee Oswald was totally innocent of everything regarding JFK's death---that is: Lee didn't even have any knowledge at all of the plot to kill the President. Lee was as innocent as Mother Teresa, per J. Raymond. That's how far afield from reality Mr. Carroll has strayed.

And I see that Raymond has been gullible enough to fall for the worn-out "Oswald Was Doorway Man" schtick too. Oh, my. Ray is in trouble.

I wonder if Ray can explain to us why Oswald HIMSELF lied about his location at the time of the assassination? Or does Raymond think that being on the front steps of the Book Depository is the same thing as being "inside" the building?

RAYMOND CARROLL SAID:

Lee Oswald was "out with Bill Shelley in front," just as he told Fritz. The front steps are actually "in the building," as you can see for yourself if you go there.

The proof is in the Darnell film, discovered by Sean Murphy, and you can see it for yourself in this thread on the Education Forum.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Nobody who was standing on the TSBD steps would ever say they were "in the building". That's nuts. The steps are OUTSIDE the front door, for Pete sake [see photo below]. And it goes to show how desperate CTers like Raymond Carroll truly are to exonerate a double-murderer.

RAYMOND CARROLL SAID:

He never said he was "inside," he said he was "in the building." Since the steps he was standing on are within the building's structure, he was quite correct in stating he was "out with Bill Shelley in front" yet still "in the building."

Actually, we cannot hear the question in the video, and the question may have been "were you in the building TODAY?"

Anyway, we don't have to parse what he said. The Darnell film PROVES he was on the front steps.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The Darnell Film proves no such thing. Your "Prayer Man" could be almost anybody. But you now like the idea that "PM" was Oswald---so, it's Oswald.

And we most certainly CAN hear the reporter's question to Oswald. The reporter clearly says: "Were you in the building at the time?"

Oswald's answer: "Naturally, if I work in that building, yes sir."

And what do you think Oswald thought the reporter meant by "AT THE TIME"? Considering the previous question had been: "Did you shoot the President?", I don't think there's much doubt.

[...]

Again, only a person hell-bent on finding Oswald innocent for some odd reason could possibly think these steps are located "in the building"....

David Von Pein

July 2014

Edited September 19, 2015 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

And if Oswald had really been standing on the steps in front of the Book Depository Building at 12:30 PM, why did he tell Captain Fritz that he was on the first floor eating lunch at just about that same time?....

"I asked him what part of the building he was in at the time the President was shot, and he said that he was having his lunch about that time on the first floor." -- Captain J.W. Fritz; Warren Report; Page 600

Edited September 19, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Robert Prudhomme]

Still pretty shaky interpretation of him being in that building. If I was to step out on the steps, but never left the alcove at the top of the steps, I might, if quickly answering a reporter's question, still have considered myself "in" that building.

Bob,

I've discussed that "Inside or Outside?" subject with other people in the past, such as this discussion with J. Raymond Carroll in July 2014....

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-741.html

RAYMOND CARROLL SAID:

Slight problem there, David: No motive, no means, and he was watching from the front steps. But you are correct that he acted alone!

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

J. Raymond Carroll is one of the very few conspiracy theorists on the planet who thinks Lee Oswald was totally innocent of everything regarding JFK's death---that is: Lee didn't even have any knowledge at all of the plot to kill the President. Lee was as innocent as Mother Teresa, per J. Raymond. That's how far afield from reality Mr. Carroll has strayed.

And I see that Raymond has been gullible enough to fall for the worn-out "Oswald Was Doorway Man" schtick too. Oh, my. Ray is in trouble.

I wonder if Ray can explain to us why Oswald HIMSELF lied about his location at the time of the assassination? Or does Raymond think that being on the front steps of the Book Depository is the same thing as being "inside" the building?

RAYMOND CARROLL SAID:

Lee Oswald was "out with Bill Shelley in front," just as he told Fritz. The front steps are actually "in the building," as you can see for yourself if you go there.

The proof is in the Darnell film, discovered by Sean Murphy, and you can see it for yourself in this thread on the Education Forum.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Nobody who was standing on the TSBD steps would ever say they were "in the building". That's nuts. The steps are OUTSIDE the front door, for Pete sake [see photo below]. And it goes to show how desperate CTers like Raymond Carroll truly are to exonerate a double-murderer.

RAYMOND CARROLL SAID:

He never said he was "inside," he said he was "in the building." Since the steps he was standing on are within the building's structure, he was quite correct in stating he was "out with Bill Shelley in front" yet still "in the building."

Actually, we cannot hear the question in the video, and the question may have been "were you in the building TODAY?"

Anyway, we don't have to parse what he said. The Darnell film PROVES he was on the front steps.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The Darnell Film proves no such thing. Your "Prayer Man" could be almost anybody. But you now like the idea that "PM" was Oswald---so, it's Oswald.

And we most certainly CAN hear the reporter's question to Oswald. The reporter clearly says: "Were you in the building at the time?"

Oswald's answer: "Naturally, if I work in that building, yes sir."

And what do you think Oswald thought the reporter meant by "AT THE TIME"? Considering the previous question had been: "Did you shoot the President?", I don't think there's much doubt.

[...]

Again, only a person hell-bent on finding Oswald innocent for some odd reason could possibly think these steps are located "in the building"....

David Von Pein

July 2014

To be quite frank with you, David, I don't even read your posts anymore, once I see you are on one of your obsessive rants again.

[Robert Prudhomme]

I see I have made the mistake of responding to DVP and MacRae. I should know by now that the worst thing you can do with these types is give them a platform to spread their propaganda from.

[David Von Pein]

I seldom read your posts anymore either, Bob. They aren't worth the time. Fantasy rarely is. (Unless it's a

Stephen King story.)

Edited September 19, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Jim Hess]

I believe Duncan has made an important alternative identification of the figure in the TSBD entrance...it looks a lot more like this woman than it does like LHO.IMO

[Greg Parker]

I believe Duncan has made an important alternative identification of the figure in the TSBD entrance...it looks a lot more like this woman than it does like LHO.IMO

That's right, Jim! That's exactly it!

It is important to Dunc and others because it's an alternative to the facts.

Well dissected with a minimum of verbiage. Give yourself a pat.

[Thomas Graves]

I believe Duncan has made an important alternative identification of the figure in the TSBD entrance...it looks a lot more like this woman than it does like LHO.IMO

That's right, Jim! That's exactly it!

It is important to Dunc and others because it's an alternative to the facts.

Well dissected with a minimum of verbiage. Give yourself a pat.

What is important is to get to the truth. Prayer Woman says Hi

Duncan,

If you keep this up, we gonna have to invite Fetzer and Cinque back to argue Lovelady was Oswald.

LOL

--Tommy

Edited September 19, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[James DiEugenio]

One last question Duncan, which I think is quite fair.

If you expect your argument here to be accepted in good faith and respected on its own grounds, then I think its only fair to ask you to tell us a rather important fact about it.

Namely, who is John Mytton? We know that is not his real name. We also know he pulled a real stunt with the Kennedy autopay evidence, which does not give him a credible track record. Based on that, I think its important that you tell us who he or she is.

If you do not, then one has to ponder as to why not. Or if this person insists on having his name remain buried, then again, why is that so? It would naturally lead one to think there must be a reason for this refusal, and it is not likely benign.

This is important for two reasons. First, people on your side of this issue--that is the Krazy Kid Oswald pack--have a history of disguising themselves. They do this so that they can deliver the same old arguments under a different name, therefore delivering the illusion of more than one person being there of this persuasion, e.g. Paul May.

Second, if John Mytton is, say Tink Thompson--which is very hard to believe--, that is one thing. But if John Mytton is actually, say, Dave Reitzes, that is another kettle of fish altogether, since it brings into question now all the methodologies used.

In the spirit of full disclosure, we await your answer.

Edited September 19, 2015 by James DiEugenio