Then went outside to watch the P. parade

[François Carlier]

33 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

For any person who believes that the "Prayer Man" figure is Lee Harvey Oswald and for those who are unaware of the document linked below, I'd recommend that they read that document, which is an April 3, 1964, FBI report consisting of signed statements from 73 different Book Depository employees. The FBI, in these statements, sought to discover some basic information from those 73 TSBD employees, including whether each of the employees had seen Lee Harvey Oswald at the time of JFK's assassination.

And if you read through all 73 statements, you'll find that there wasn't a single employee who said they saw Oswald at the time the shooting took place --- not even among the several people who said they were located on or near the front steps of the Depository at 12:30 PM on 11/22/63.

Do the "Prayer Man" advocates think all of the people who were in a position to see Oswald on or near the steps were lying? Or were they all just not very observant? And if it's the latter option, then conspiracy theorists have got to admit one thing for sure --- any conspirators who might have been attempting to frame Lee Harvey Oswald for President Kennedy's murder on November 22nd sure as heck got awfully lucky when their designated "patsy", who was standing right out in the open in front of the building for all to potentially see, just happened to go totally unnoticed in the eyes of every single spectator who was standing nearby.

Patsy-framing assassination plotters don't get that lucky very often. Do they? ....

Just as I said yesterday.
The more I learn about that case, the more I am convinced that Lee Oswald was not "prayer man".

[David Von Pein]

1 minute ago, Bart Kamp said:

Nor is there one pic of those films showing her standing next to Lovelady at all.

The best you can hope for is.

 

And Lovelady had left by then.

Stanton stood east and at no time did she stand west, like Oswald did.

You think that batch of worthless fuzziness can tell us ANYTHING at all?

Get real.

[Guest]

That pic tells me more than anything you ever brought forward.

HA! Get real yourself, using Brian Doyle to put an argument forward.

Pathetic. Get some sleep you are tired and not up to it any more.

[David Von Pein]

Just now, François Carlier said:

The more I learn about that case, the more I am convinced that Lee Oswald was not "prayer man".

Seeing as how ALL of the physical evidence in the whole case points right at Oswald.....how could anyone believe "Prayer Man" is LHO?

~shrug~

[Cory Santos]

She did not see LHO that day apparently.  How familiar was she w him?  This testimony needs questions.  Clearly there were more people on the steps then those few individuals she listed.  Moreover, how could so many other people see LHO that morning but she did not?  It calls into question her credibility about not seeing LHO.

[François Carlier]

1 hour ago, Tony Krome said:

Can't see Frazier on her list

I quote : "I did not see Lee Harvey Oswald at that time"
Yet another person who was there and who says unequivocally that Lee Oswald was not there !
Sadly, I doubt that the Larsen/Kamp group will take that into account.
As I wrote yesterday, they don't take those things into account...

[Cory Santos]

No, see my post, using legal standards, fc, it is not difficult to explain.

[David Von Pein]

4 minutes ago, Bart Kamp said:

That pic tells me more than anything you ever brought forward.

HA! Get real yourself, using Brian Doyle to put an argument forward.

Pathetic. Get some sleep you are tired and not up to it any more.

Kamp uses a batch of pure mush and visual slop to try and prove a point, and yet it's me who is "pathetic".

Ya gotta love the arrogance of ABO CTers.

[David Von Pein]

6 minutes ago, François Carlier said:

I quote : "I did not see Lee Harvey Oswald at that time"
Yet another person who was there and who says unequivocally that Lee Oswald was not there !
Sadly, I doubt that the Larsen/Kamp group will take that into account.
As I wrote yesterday, they don't take those things into account...

And there's 70+ more in CD706. All of which say "I did not see Lee Harvey Oswald...". These statements mean NOTHING to the PM CTers, of course....

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11104&relPageId=2

Edited February 18, 2019 by David Von Pein

[François Carlier]

25 minutes ago, Bart Kamp said:

Enabling, ex member and xxxxx extraordinaire Brian Doyle now Von Pein? Someone who is a serial l-i-a-r and does not provide the means to strengthen his claims? Hearsay at best.

Let's have a look at that thread 'over there' at 280 pages long and filled with l-i-e-s and innuendo. 

Here area few good examples on the zero credibility he has, and just keeps making things up and John Iacoletti looks straight through that clown.

Page 259 "Where, and how do you know it's Shelley?  Put up or shut up.

and
"Well, well, well....the people on the Jimi Hendrix forums can't stand Doyle either.  Go figure.

http://crosstowntorrents.org/showthread.php?5424-quot-Until-We-Meet-Again-The-Last-Weeks-Of-Jimi-Hendrix-quot/page24

"You make a lot of false claims.  "Doyle says so" does not make anything "basic evidence"."

"Your problem is that you think repeating the same claims over and over again constitutes evidence for those claims."

 

page 268 "Doyle isn't even telling the truth about what Stanton's relatives said."

page 270 "Says the guy who was booted from that forum for misconduct and so tries to use this forum as his own personal surrogate EF."

page 271 "Of course you are.  You want to continue to lie about the evidence without being accountable."

 

And so on. 

 

So Von Pein why don't you bring every titbit of Brian Doyle's dross over here....it's what he would want more than anything else....be part of EF again.

 

 

That non-answer by Kamp is very telling !
David Von Pein mentions the Texas School Book employees who were there and said unequivocally that they did not see Oswald. They gave their statements at the time, on the spot.
Bart Kamp has no answer for that but can only try to criticize someone who writes in another forum nowadays.
What does this have to do with the actual evidence ? Nothing.

Edited February 18, 2019 by François Carlier

[Guest]

Nighty night dahling!

[Guest]

Carlier is as deluded as Brian Doyle, so het gets one final answer from me as his posts are a complete waste of my time.

 

CE 1389 is not of much use as a document.

The same six questions put together by Hoover asked to 73 TSBD employees.

4 months after the deed

Oswald is dead anyway so why go against the grain and stick your neck out and risk your job, livelihood or worse your life.

The south in the 60's? Need I say more.

 

Question for Carlier!!

Who is Prayer Man?

Can't be a stranger as per your fave document.

So who is it?

 

Thrill us all for a change.

 

Edited February 18, 2019 by Bart Kamp

[Tony Krome]

1 minute ago, David Von Pein said:

And there's 70+ more in CD706. All of which say "I did not see Lee Harvey Oswald...". Means NOTHING to the PM CTers., of course....

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11104&relPageId=2

All his TSBD workmates said Oswald was a quiet guy who was happy to avoid people.

Where would a guy with this personality stand? ...... In the corner, in the shadows and behind.

What attracted his colleagues attention out on the steps? .... A motorcade, a President, a First Lady, gunfire

I just can't work out why they weren't staring at Oswald

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, François Carlier said:

That non-answer by Kamp is very telling !
David Von Pein mentions the Texas School Book employees who were there and said unequivocally that they did not see Oswald. They gave their statements at the time, on the spot.
Bart Kamp has no answer for that but can only try to criticize someone who writes in a forum nowadays.
What does this have to do with the actual evidence ? Nothing.

What do the large majority of your posts have to do with the evidence brought forward?

Absolutely nothing!!!!!!!!!!!!

[David Von Pein]

59 minutes ago, Bart Kamp said:

CE 1389 [sic; Kamp is wrong about the CE number here; it's really CE1381] is not of much use as a document.

The same six questions put together by Hoover asked to 73 TSBD employees.

4 months after the deed.

Oswald is dead anyway, so why go against the grain and stick your neck out and risk your job, livelihood or worse your life?

This is a very poor argument, in my opinion.

Kamp is obviously implying that at least a FEW employees on the steps DID see and recognize Lee Oswald as a person who was also on the front stoop of the Depository Building at 12:30 PM, but due to the evil strong-arming tactics of the authorities (FBI, DPD, etc.), absolutely none of these TSBD employees (zero!!) had the courage to come forth in CE1381 (aka Commission Document No. 706) and tell the truth about Oswald being on the front porch of the Depository.

In other words, all of those witnesses who DID see Oswald out there simply LIED through their individual and collective teeth in CD706/CE1381! And Buell Frazier, who would have been standing within just a few short feet of LHO, must surely be one of those l-i-a-r-s, right Kamp?

 

Edited February 18, 2019 by David Von Pein