Brian's Wasteland. For Brian Doyle il miglior fabbro trollem

First topic message reminder :

I myself saw the Cumean Sybil hanging in her jar.  Some boys asked her, " What do you want Sybil?"
" I want to die" , she replied 

Brian,  having just finished reading your latest pronouncements,  I decided,  after much deliberation to post this final message to you. Hopefully Greg will be kind enough to leave it up for a couple of weeks before deleting it. 

There's absolutely no point in attempting to engage you in any sort of meaningful dialogue. In fact,  by doing so,  your interlocutors are only further enabling your delusions. I know I'm only wasting more time Brian,  but here goes. 

Your fundamental problem is this: you are trapped in the  no man's land between your grandiose delusions and  the actual reality. No matter how often,  or how loud you shout; no matter how many " facts" you have to mangle, or misrepresent, no matter how many lies you tell,  you are never going to " outargue" the simple truth. 

Oswald or not, the figure known as Prayerman isn't Sarah Stanton. Full stop. End of story. 

It's blatantly obvious,  having carefully read through all the available data, and studied ( to the best of my non expert knowledge) the various stills/ gifs,  Macrae started the whole Prayerwoman escapade out of sheer spite. 

He even admitted it. Claiming it was " a prank" 

The reason I started this thread ( against my better judgement) was after reading Brian is busy frantically emailing Messrs Simpich and Schnapf,  trying to persuade them not to include the Darnell Weigmann films in their case. 

I  couldn't believe what I was reading. Trying to sabotage what may very well prove to be the last chance to make a significant impact on the consciousness of the wider public,  out of petty vindictive ness and spite.

This isn't about fantasies of " outarguing " imaginary cabals on obscure websites,  it's about trying to uncover facts. Your severely limited perception partly explains your inability to master the very basics of historical research. 

Your opinions come first, and whatever " facts" you can dredge up, or somehow distort, come a distant second. 

Your idea of ' arguing " is calling anyone who dares question your infallibility trolls,  liars,  or variations thereof. Ignoring the salient points before launching into a variation of the standard rant. 

Embellishments added according to mood and circumstance. 

I tried to ask you,  in good faith, after going out of my way to research the subject,  to back up your claims: how certain cameras turn dark hair light. My answer? A volley of truculent abuse,  juvenile braggadocio,  then some barely coherent blather about Altgens 6.

Brian,  just because you choose to ignore these huge inconsistencies and these inconvenient facts doesn't mean they just disappear into the ether. 

The figure in Owen's for example,  is clearly a plump diminutive female with light coloured hair and clothes. How anyone can possibly claim this is the same figure as Prayerman is quite simply bizarre. 

I don't know why I'm wasting my time. 

Have you attempted to transpose the photos? What about producing some verifiable,  falsifiable data that can be peer reviewed? Of course not 

I couldn't believe what I was reading. Claiming being banned from the Education forum was a more grievous injustice than someone spending 20 years in prison for a crime they didn't commit. 

You need to take a long hard look at yourself and realign your moral compass. Somethings badly skewered. 

James Gordon hasn't logged on since February,  he hasn't posted in over a year,  and the last thread he started  was so he could  start  passing the hat( a tartan Lyle and Scott waterproof golf bunnet of course)

He doesn't give a fuck about Prayerman. He's a doddering old fossil,  absentee landlord par excellence,  to imagine him coordinating some insidious multi forum cabal,  dedicated to silencing Brian Doyle and his " correct evidence " is almost as laughable as trying to pass off a grey haired 300lb lady as Prayerman. 

Just because something is important to you doesn't automatically mean it's important to the whole fucking world. You make yourself look small, petty and incredibly immature,  babbling on and on about being banned from a shitty website. 

You simply cannot be trusted to behave like a responsible adult. Full stop. The evidence is scattered across the internet. The Prayerman research thread for example. Your attitude was deplorable. A condescending prick,  talking down to everyone,  making demands,  acting like you are the sole arbiter of correct science. When it's blatantly apparent you don't know what you are talking about. 

Pitzers alleged suicide,  Mary Pinchot Meyer,  the reprehensible anti semite Piper,  Ralph Yates, time and time again,  you know better than the people who had actually done the research. 

With Prayerman and the 2FLRE in excelsis. Setting yourself up as the leading researcher,  denigrating Greg and Barto,  real experts who have done the hard graft,  trying to pass off your shoddy 2 or 3rd hand junk as cutting edge research. Have you ever checked out Wanda Daniels statement? Got any confirmation? Don't be ridiculous. You just twisted,  misinterpreted,  confabulated and outright lied about what she said. 

As for HARVEY and LEE? You run around castigating all and sundry for the sin of " denying " Armstrong.  When I know for an absolute certainty you don't have the first clue about the actual mechanics ( rather the imaginary mechanics) of the theory. I'd back myself against anyone in this so called community when it comes to Soviet/ Russian history, culture and language. And I know for a fact,  as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow that so called HARVEY was a native born English speaker. 

I have absolutely nothing against you personally Brian. Until you start using your eyes to see, your ears to hear and your brain to think,  you're just going to keep going round and round,  on the same relentless unfulfilling treadmill.  I'm sorry Brian,  I truly am. I tried my best but for your own sake and mine I'm not going to waste any more time on this fruitless endeavour. I'm doing you no favours by indulging your strange psychodrama. 

If you think you have some actual facts,  evidence that can withstand real world professional scrutiny then for God's sake, present it. Forget the theatrics and the limp pyrotechnics. 

To paraphrase the famous Spanish philosopher Unamuno,  " You will not convince if you think only of winning,  but to win, first you need to convince "

You are doing neither. You've managed to alienate practically everyone,  and what do you do? After ending up in the forum at the edge of the universe? The only place you can't get banned? You start musing wistfully about moderators and banning!!!

I can say in all sincerity ive never encountered anyone so lacking in self awareness. You make Fezzo the Fez and the doppelganger brigade seem like zen masters!

The 60th anniversary may well be the very last chance to make a real impact. The Prayerman footage, if skilfully aimed and deployed,  may well provide the necessary firepower to breach the wall of silence and denial. 

If it turns out not to be Oswald,  so what? Does it make him guilty,  or any less innocent? Of course not. Twice, in the 70s and the early 90s, the Z film came close,  but not close enough. There was just enough doubt to keep the circuits of denial whirring away and the bullshit churning. 

This footage has the potential to settle the argument definitively. Condensing all the exculpatory evidence into one simple compelling,  and,  dare I say,  poignant image. 

To keep up with this ridiculous charade,  claiming youve proved Prayerman is actually a small fat grey haired woman, is, quite frankly,  embarrassing. Not only that, but to claim some nefarious coven of moderators are conspiring to keep your " correct evidence " occluded, just makes us all look like the kind of tin foil hatted crazies the so called  M$M love to caricature. 

Not only that,  its a provable lie. Your correct evidence is all over the fucking internet. People have decided Brian,  okay,  I fully accept there's a lingering element of doubt,  until the 1st generation prints emerge , we won't know conclusively just who the fuck that enigmatic figure was, but there's just no fucking way it was Sarah Stanton. 

And to keep claiming you have proved it, when you can't even muster up the courage to accept the monumental flaws in your argument,  much less begin answering them,  threatens to turn the whole subject into slapstick. 

Brian,  you and characters like Ben Holmes, Healy and ole Porcelain Throne do more damage to the cause you supposed espouse than any number of clown cars full of lone neuter trolls. 

You all commit the cardinal sin, like your ex confreres on the now seemingly terminally defunct wonder that was deep fOO- you make the case seem ridiculous. A playground for conspiracy crazed zealots to build pretty sandcastles in...

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/LYYvuGwPq4I

No credible researcher would still be calling for further examination of the Prayer Man films...It has already been proven to be Sarah Stanton...These people are not credible researchers....They are a wolf pack of internet assholes pretending to be credible JFK researchers...That dishonest son of a bitch Jim DiEugenio is not going to step up and tell you he already admitted to me that I had proven Prayer Man was Stanton...Instead he told Gordon that banning me "was the right thing to do"..


So now Doyle does not want the PM films released. Guess he is frightened at what they will actually show.

Poor old Brian 

I have to confess,  I was mildly impressed  you were able to spell psychology correctly and count up to 101( although when it comes to being censorious I would stick with calling people trolls. If there's anything worse than an unimaginative conspiracy theorist trying to conjure up conspiratorial  scenarios fron their atrophied imaginations,  its when a borderline remedial scholar, tries  to look intelligent, by  attempting  to expand his meagre vocabulary,  and fails miserably)

Although,   I must admit I am still angry at myself for wasting so much of my time on a no mark loser and perennial fantasist,  I thought an epoch defining genius like yourself would have worked out" Albrecht Doyle " referred to your infamous holocaust denying late father.  If I have any regrets it's that I haven't spent more time combating the odious lies you and your late father peddled. 

Whom, in a rather Oedipal like fashion you chose to impersonate. Both in name and belief. 

My advice to you, is , if you choose to persist with this hobby, playing around on the JFK internet's equivalent of bouncy castles and paddling  pools;don't embarrass yourself,  keep your water wings on and stay splashing around with ole Porcelain Throne down in the shallow end, or carry on playing with yourself and your echo , over on Deep fOO 

I hate being so blunt,  but I have to admit I'm starting to get a tad miffed about being referred to as a demented troll by a parasite who possesses no discernible talent . A nasty vindictive hate filled little bigot,  consumed by envy and hamstrung with gross incompetence. 

Along with Doyle's shameful outbursts ( I know I'm no angel but Doyle takes it TOO far,  from the realms of good natured badinage and admittedly occasionally barbed satire,  into the disturbing thoroughly disconcerting rbadlands of morbid psychosis. Wishing death on another human,  celebrating another human beings death?) and his shamelessly parasitic nature,  teaching onto anyone in an attempt to worm his way back in, it's the sheer scale of the decent and delusion involved in peddling the anti intellectual trash he calls " his" correct evidence, that I find so irritating 

In nigh on a decade he has produced nothing. 

Sweet fuck all 

No books, essays,  articles,  films, podcasts or interviews. 

But yet he feels emboldened to compare himself with genuinely talented researchers. Researchers who have put the hard work in. Researchers who have made a difference. 

You've damn fucking tooting he's shit scared of the 1st generation prints emerging. His last recourse is interminable piles of bile splattered waffle. Claiming " his" good evidence has proved this and that. 

Oswald or not,  I don't believe anyone can seriously compare the Prayerman figure with Mrs Stanton and say they are the same person. 

Doyle,  embarking on his maniacal frothing at the mouth anti Prayerman/ ROKC jihad latched onto Macrae's " prank" footage. And instead of doing the reasonable thing,  something probably 99% of rational people would do: namely give a rueful smile,  shrug their shoulders,  admit they were duped before moving on. Having learned a valuable lesson. 

Doyle lacks the maturity and the integrity ( amongst other things) so instead he's launched into an embittered,  utterly irrational , flirting with full scale derangement,  hate spree. Vandalising the JFK internet with his splenetic outbursts 

If he was the " serious credible researcher " he claims he is, there is absolutely nothing James Gordon could possibly do. Write a book, or submit a detailed paper/ monograph,  make a film, build a proper website,  start a forum of your own,  apply to speak at one of the 60th anniversary conferences. 

But, no. Instead of doing something productive,  he'll sit on the sidelines,  hurling invective and abusing anyone who dares voice an opinion contrary to his.

The sheer arrogance. Claiming practically every leading researchers; highly respected and qualified authors/ professionals/ historians/ academics etc. would wilfully sabotage their work,  some having spent a considerable portion of their lifetime researching this case, simply to spite some fucking loud mouthed non entity. 

I can understand many of the newer members, lurkers,  serious students who shy away from personal grievances/ public bickering,  rolling their eyes and wondering why certain members bother engaging Doyle. 

I can sympathise,  to a certain extent,  while also acknowledging attention is primarily what he's after. 
In reality he's a lost troubled soul who deserves our pity. 

His " research" is embarrassing too  Risible hackwork. . 

I admit it's partly personal with me. I abhor holocaust deniers,  and someone so obviously ignorant of the basic facts mouthing off such stomach churning bilge  makes me angry. Likewise his  slanderous attacks on researchers who I respect. And his persistent,  albeit hapless attempts to derail the Prayerman subject,  turning it into slapstick. 

Imho Doyle,  along with the likes of Jeffries,  represent the ultimate nadir of intelligent factually oriented historical research. Gullible buffoons who exactly mirror the sheeple they excoriate with such monotony. As if believing one lot of shite instead of another somehow makes them inordinately superior. 

HARVEY and LEE represents " sophisticated intel  tradecraft " quoth our chum from Sanibel. Perfectly encapsulating the mixture of delusion,  gullibility and willingness to suspend disbelief in the name of belief. 

Greg,  Barto and the other core members here are widely known and respected as genuinely talented researchers. Because they have actually put the work in,  advancing the case, and our knowledge of the case significantly. 

You,  on the other hand have contributed sweet fuck all research wise. 

Or in any wise. Except either boring everyone,  or causing a minor irritation with your juvenile chapter 

Grow up for fuck sakes. Learn how to behave like an adult.  Learn to respect other people and their opinions. 

Repeating " I'm a skilled credible researcher " over and over again doesn't magically transform you into one. If you want people to respect your research,  respond to your posts and take your opinions seriously go out and do some actual fucking work. Instead of sitting on your arse, spewing bile or hollow pontifications. 

You felt for Macrae's alleged prank. So what? Everyone makes mistakes. Instead of punishing others for your own fuck ups try learning from them. 

Instead of constantly repeating them.

P.S. Doyle I wouldn't mourn too much over the remains of your murdered intellect,   going by your performance over the past decade it's pretty apparent you have precious little intellect to murder. 

You're nothing but a stupid overgrown baby with unparalleled delusions of competence

Waaah waaah waaah That nasty James Gordon banned me back in 2016, I dared to use my skill by calling him rude names on another forum and for refusing to post the photos to back up my incredibly  brilliant research. Waaah waaah waaah. People who disagree with me are either dishonest,  government agents or trolls,  because I'm just so skilled and credible

If DPF hoped that letting Brian back in would lead to a re-invigoration of the site they are badly mistaken. Nobody cares enough to respond to Doyle's moaning there. He is basically talking to himself. Even his old buddy and fellow ROkC hater Gilbride no longer responds to him there.

Now he thinks he is an expert on the Lennon assassination.

The only reason I waste my time with this infantile dreck,  is because Doyle persists in trafficking in egregious falsehoods .

Kindergarten logic dictates his " correct evidence " CANNOT possibly be true,  because the empirical evidence utterly eviscerates his puerile claims. 

It really IS kindergarten level stuff. Imagination day trumps hard evidence. 

Look at the fucking images for Chrissakes,  they,  quite literally couldn't be more different. 

His denial is so perversely pervasive, not to mention maddeningly depressing,  it really feels like explaining to a particularly truculent toddler that D doesn't follow A in the alphabet. 

Does Doyle's " correct evidence " change Mrs Stanton's size, girth,  hairline,  haircolour,  sex and clothes?

Of course not. 

After his perfunctory " out arguing " ( you're a troll, retard, liar, booby or variations thereof) and before launching into yet another self pitying diatribe,  cursing the world and the JFK internet for daring to disagree with him, Doyle expects you to ignore these basic facts. 

He wants,  no, he demands that you, close your eyes and accept his version of reality,  bowing down before the altar of his infallibility. 

It's there in black and white for anyone with the stamina,  resilience and fortitude to look: pages 27 to 36 over on the original Prayerman or Prayerwoman " Research Thread"

Judge for yourself if this was the unjust vilification and JFK internet martyrdom of an innocent researcher. Persecuted for the crime of being too skilled. 

Or the ill mannered juvenile ravings of a deluded fantasist. The  supremely talented photo analyst who couldn't even post photos to be analysed. Read,  in Doyle's own words, his churlish intemperate reply to Professor Sanford,  saying clearly and unambiguously he was basing his " analysis " on the MACRAE/ DAVIDSON ENHANCEMENT. 

Look at the " woman's faces" for yourself,  because Doyle sure as fuck won't be posting them. Stevie Wonder himself could see they were obviously heavily doctored. Davidson PHOTOSHOPPED a commercially available DVD for fuck sakes 

You'll see no mention of " chubby cheeks ", au contraire,  Prayerwoman circa 2016, was a svelte dark haired gal, with eyeglasses. Just like Doyle's scientific etch a sketch avatar on his FB page. 

Her cheeks only became chubby , her hair only changed colour and her weight only ballooned when Doyle saw an actual photo of Mrs Stanton. 

I'm not criticising him for changing his mind. It's the sheer disingenuousness , not forgetting the unwavering absolutist stance. 

Even when you show him a photo,  clearly demonstrating the impossibility of his claims,  he'll only call you a dishonest troll, for not considering his " correct evidence "

The basic problem is Doyle wildly overestimates his own intelligence ( he can't overestimate his skills,  because you can't really estimate something that doesn't fucking exist) , while at the same time,  underestimating other people's intelligence. 

Throw in his adolescent fanaticism and his outrageously disrespectful and downright dickish behaviour and it's a toxic combination. 

James Gordon has banned Doyle from 1 fucking website. His tortured ramblings are splattered all over the JFK internet. No one is censoring him, no one us stopping him writing a book,  making a YouTube film, launching a website or even applying to speak at a conference. 

James Gordon and Greg are simply Doyle's one size fits all excuses to do fuck all. Except play the victim and whine interminably. 

There's no " clique " , in fact it's a completely ridiculous,  not to mention downright insulting notion. As if the JFK internet move in lockstep  of course nothing could be further from the truth. 

Apart from Gilbride,  another crank with a potemkin village sized chip on his shoulder,  no one is dumb or credulous enough to buy Doyle's nonsense. 

That's pretty much it in a nutshell. 

Doyle can't accept reality. He lacks the backbone to accept the consequences of his own behaviour,  he refuses to acknowledge,  much less confront the actual visual evidence,  just as he won't accept that people have reached their own conclusions. 

Thus, he is forced to invent these surreal fantasy scenarios,  interspersed with pure in your face deceit.

No footage exists of BWF saying " we looked at each other for the longest time "

Doesn't matter,  the trolls deleted it. You're a booby and a liar...etc etc etc. 

Go ahead Doyle,  dare to unleash those skills of yours. Out argue me by calling me a troll, booby or a retard 

Then spend another couple of thousand words blaming James Gordon and Greg for your own glaring inadequacies and ineptitude. 

It'll make absolutely no difference 

Just as it made no difference thousands of times before 

I damn well know what you WON'T do: post the actual photos,  Prayerman and Mrs Stanton side by side,  or the woman's faces, or a transcript or a link to the most important evidence in 45 years..

50 year + 2nd ir 3rd heasay,  further diminished by your irresponsible interviewing technique , especially the outrageous leading questions 

If you want to be respected as a researcher start doing some actual research. 

Trying to piggyback on the back of other people's work hasn't really worked out for you. 

Treat other people and their beliefs with some respect. And stop behaving like a spoilt brat

How can Hosty perjure himself to Turner? Did Turner place him under oath?
More bullshit from the Sheik of Shite.

Calling Gil " under researched" for not listening to some shitty internet radio show. 

Our Brian likes his evidence like his women: at least 3rd or 4th hand, buried for over 50 years and " psychically incontinent "

Our chum is like some crazy mutant hybrid,  an escapee from the Island of Dr Fez- zeau. 

The head of an unicorn,  the brain of a Dodo and the body of a giant flightless Auk. 

Fuck that, he's the first,  and to date only,  anti research parasitical antibody. Throughout history some of humankind's greatest minds have grappled with esoteric mysteries of alchemism. Daring to exert his skill this Saint Germain of Sanibel has gone one better.

Turning ( research) gold into base metal ( or, according to the as yet unpublished Gilbridean Periodical Table,  pure unadulterated shite)

Flapping his flightless wings , the giant Auk of conspiracy,  swoops down and steals other people's research,  before heading back to his basement nest. Where he will sit on it, incubating it for up to 6 months,  until it hatches and heads straight for the giant Auk's natural  habitat- the excrement caked wastelands of the fOO( voted the 3rd loneliest place on earth by the Lonely Planet guide. After John Butler's " The Wunnerful World of Toenail Clippings Interactive Theme Park and, in joint 1st place,  anywhere within a 5 mile radius ( or, according to the States of Florida,  Massachusetts,  California and Louisiana,  the 5 mile preemptive restraining order exclusion zones) of Dick Gilbride or Brian Doyle)

In the words of the Adonis like philosopher poet, Tommy " the Ugly Duchess " Graves ( incidentally Tommy's cerebral cortex was voted the 4th loneliest place,  since his pea sized brain fell out , while banging his head to the Charles Drago and the Giant Exploding Bongo's bebop and free bongo remake of Jailbait,  featuring spoken word rap by Baba Goat's Butt , Swami Hackett II)

LOL

Our Brian's " Summer/ Autumn 2023 Comeback Tour" is proving to be quite the triumph!!

Adding racism to a repertoire already including holocaust denial,  anti semitism,  casual bigotry and misogyny ( if you want to accurately gauge the mindset of this character just replace British with Jewish or African American. And remember: Racism is still racism,  regardless of the race)

I'm delighted he's been allowed back onto Stinky Mac's Pissarium. No one debunks our chum Brian quite like our chum Brian!! In the process revealing the true sordid depths of his horrendous obnoxious hate filled character and the ridiculous hodge podge of lies,  fantasy and delusion he attempts to pass off as his " correct evidence "

It really is through the looking glass.

Arguing about,  and attempting to " analyse " footage of a heavy set light haired woman ( with clearly visible cleavage) in light coloured clothes,  then trying desperately to pass her off as their flat chested dreamgirl,  " Prayerwoman "

Who, of course,  in actuality is obviously a male, with a dark visibly receding hairline,  wearing a dark shirt over a white t shirt. 

But, I keep forgetting,  silly old demented troll that I am, it was the shadows wot dunnit,  guv. 

Right,  Brian?

Maybe " CIA" Shelley helped develop special prototype intel spook " Smart Shadows ", not to mention the super duper Hi Tech Intel Spook cameras Messrs Darnell Weigmann and Couch cunningly deployed. 

I mean these shadows must have been damn fucking smart shadows (you should really ask your Dick, UFO related intel spookery being his particular speciality,  maybe they were alien shadows deployed in the doorway that tragic day, cue Twilight Zone theme) they were able to trace and replicate Prayerman's hairline and his clothes,  darkening them whilst leaving his skin and t shirt light and shadow free...

There's no fucking censorship,  no nefarious cliques,  and James Gordon exerts zero influence over the imaginary " JFK internet community " , people ignore ( or mock) Doyle's " work " because it is self evident gibberish. 

Genuine Through the Looking Glass fantasyland stuff. I suspect our chum has chased one too many white rabbits down far too many wrong holes. 

Over to our chum,  his dedicated worldwide fanbase ( and just about every leading peer reviewed scientific/ medical research journal this side of Viz) are clamouring for one of his trademark replies. 

Apart from the cutting edge research,  each one chock full of troofy self effacing goodness,  insight and tolerance

After much thought,  introspection and at least a dozen primo grade Sanibel Gold brownies,  ive decided to bite the bullet ( but not the one Sturmfuhrer Albrecht von Doyle dug out of Blondi's skull in the Bunker,  not after paying £100 000 on Alexander Auctions site, you certainly do live and learn,  I didn't know the Fuhrer Begleitkommando issued plastic bullets made in Taiwan) and sent the nomination form off to the Nobel Prize Committee. 

What with that spineless British bastard,  James Gordon,  orchestrating a campaign of cowardly ignoring and JFK internet censorship,  I think it's a downright fucking disgrace. 

Brian Doyle's contributions to the JFK internet and geniusy stuff in general MUST be recognised 

Forget Tolstoy being ignored,  and never winning the Nobel Prize for Literature. 

It'll be an even worse travesty if Brian Doyle's groundbreaking research goes unacknowledged. 

Surely cracking the JFK assassination conspiracy singlehandedly,  having outargued 95% of the JFK internet after being denied peer review by a cabal of power crazed boobies,  deserves a measly fucking Nobel Prize?

Ive recommended the create an entirely new and unique category,  In honour of  a truly visionary genius,  beyond mere categorisation:

The Nobel Prize for Genius and Tolerance. 

After creating  the Final Solution to the  British  Problem,  after rewriting the laws of physics,  photography,  intel spookery and invisible titties, and  singlehandedly  reinvigorating the pornographic magazine  industry, t's the very least he deserves. 

Maybe an honorary knighthood too?  Sipping Earl Grey and nibbling cucumber sandwiches in the Long Gallery,  with the corgis sniffing his freshly polished zen sandals. What an honour for a humble Sanibel unicorn!! Prancing across Horse Guards Parade!! 

Send your petition,  Brian Doyle @ Nobel Laureate,  to Trine Day Lobbyists,  Lagos, Nigeria,  and don't forget to enclose your $10000 petitioners fee. Cash only

Gil has Peer Reviewed Doyle's work.


https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/VRMVhLae3Kw



My peer review of Brian Doyle's interview of Sarah Stanton's relatives

I've listened to the entire interview Doyle claimed to have conducted with the relatives of Sarah Stanton.

This is my peer review of that interview:

1. Witness said she was told by Sarah Stanton that she ( Stanton ) encountered Oswald on the stairs. ( 2:08 )

The witness never said that Stanton said she saw Oswald in the second floor lunchroom.

This was interjected by Doyle who suggested it to the witness using Carolyn Arnold's alleged sighting of Oswald in the second floor lunchroom. Doyle assumed that it was the second floor stairway and that it was the stairway closest to the lunchroom. But the witness never said any such thing.

In her statement to the FBI on November 23, 1963 ( CD7, pg. 20 ), Stanton said that she, "did not see Oswald on November 22, 1963". She repeated this in her sworn affidavit of March 18, 1964 , written and signed by her, in which she states that, "I did not see Lee Harvey Oswald...at any time that day." ( CE 1381 / 22 H 675 )

Doyle can fall back on his imagination, but the evidence is the evidence.
Stanton never said she saw Oswald in the second floor lunchroom. Not on paper and not to her relatives.

2. The witness remembered being told Oswald was holding a Pepsi. ( 3:18 ) She was then corrected by Doyle that it was a Coke.

3. The witness was told Oswald hadn't come down to eat, he just came down to get the soda ( 5:00 ) and that he was going back to "his room". ( 5:50 ) She said after Stanton encountered Oswald, "he went upstairs" ( 8:14 ) and that he "went upstairs" before the motorcade came by. ( 13:00 )

An allegation not supported by the evidence.

4. Finally, when the relatives were shown Chris Davidson's enhanced picture purportedly of Stanton as "Prayerman", they said that it wasn't her. ( 21 :10 )

This was a witness who was unreliable. She stammered and stumbled her way through questions. Her memory was in and out. Doyle had to repeatedly inject the experiences of Carolyn Arnold to get the witness to agree with his narrative. He repeatedly had to correct her facts and it's obvious to any researcher worth his salt that this witness offered little in the way of evidence.

Doyle is a terrible interviewer. He sends witnesses copies of what other witnesses say in order to influence their accounts.

And he's a terrible researcher. Researchers don't tell the witnesses the facts, they let the witnesses tell them the facts. And they certainly don't tell witnesses what other witnesses said. And they don't jump to conclusions.

I invite all interested parties to listen to the interview and peer judge this interview for yourselves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYpjGBg5cDU

Kudos to Gil for having the patience and fortitude to decipher Doyle's rancid gibberish. 

In many ways his long awaited return to Stinky Mac's- the prodigal unicorn - has been even less successful than his attempt to Deep fOOify John Cage's avant garde " masterpiece " 4 minutes 33 seconds 

Filling the forum dedicated to uncovering " Magick and the Borderlands " and  " the Panopticon of Global Surveillance " with the eerie stillness of the mausoleum. Perhaps the fOO has finally found its true purpose: a de facto Elephant's Graveyard for the most preposterous assassination related fantasies and falsehoods. 

Over on the Pissarium - a place seemingly dedicated to recreating the ambience of Bedlam in the 18th century , a place where the " thousands "(sic) of regular guests can press their faces up against the digital bars, to peer in at the hilarious japes of the gibbering inmates- our Brian is having his unicorns horn mercilessly shaved by the redoubtable John Iac. 

Forcing Doyle's galaxy of lies to implode and collapse inwards,  folding themselves up into an infinitesimal knot of cosmic nothingness. 

Doyle's gifts as a liar and fabulist are about as clumsily non existent as his gifts as a researcher. 

In his desperation to prop up a subsidiary lie he was forced to utter the truth. A truth that utterly decimated his Big Lie.

Determined to prove the figure in Owen's is Mrs Stanton ( like all true fanatics his obsession blinds him, in this instance quite literally,  to the actual facts. The purported " Mrs Stanton " is the wrong shape, size and sex, with a different hair colour,  faceshape and outfit,  diametrically opposed in fact,  to the Prayerman figure) Doyle is forced to admit Mrs Stanton has " white hair "

Ergo, by his own words she CANNOT be Prayerman. 

I KNOW no camera or shadows could alter her hair colour. In fact it's not just a case of altering hair colour,  the magical cameras and CIA " smart shadows " obligingly followed Mrs Stanton's exact hairline,  leaving her skin light. Likewise her " dress" and her er " camisole undershirt"

John Iac is spot on. Along with a bottomless Pandora's Box of unresolved Oedipus related complexes,  Doyle's primary motivation is jealousy. 

Certainly,  over the years it has metastised , mutating into an obscene hydra like mass, but fundamentally it's rooted in envy.

He's desperate for recognition. For some unfathomable reason " research " has become intertwined with his sense of identity. He refuses to acknowledge,  much less confront and accept the stark reality. 

Thus, his only recourse is abuse,  lies, adolescent boasting,  " my brilliant discovery " the perennial wallflower of the JFK internet prom has transformed into poisonous weeds...

For Armstrong's sake Brian,  no, for your own sake and what remains of your own sanity and self respect,  find yourself a new hobby,  or a new interest. 

You don't understand what historical research actually involves. 

It's not an arena for you to play out your narcissistic fantasies.

OK Brian,  here's your chance to shine.

Prove the cameras/ shadows turned Mrs Stanton's white hair dark. Quotes from at least a couple of reputable photo analysts/ experts will suffice, for starters ,  and perhaps scientific accredited and footnoted article or two explaining the actual mechanics of the phenomenon. 

You do understand falsifiability is key to the academic peer review process?

Here's your chance,  if only to spite James Gordon and his cabal of boobies,  produce your brilliant leading edge research so it can be peer reviewed 

Yes, we all know you're the most brilliant,  skilled researcher ever to draw breath and we're all unworthy uncredible boobies,  not fit to touch the hem of your intellectual garment,  so instead of yet another monotonous self aggrandising monologue how about giving us the actual details. 

In your own words 

Starting with the make and model of the cameras,  the film stock,  exposure,  shutter mode/ speed etc.. 
Then perhaps,  providing appropriate footnotes you can describe how these cameras managed to follow Mrs Stanton's hairline ( actually her real hairline was noticeably different,  but that's a separate argument) , exactly,  darkening her hair but leaving her skin white. Likewise her " dress" and her " underskirt"

If you think academic peer review consists of uncorroborated assertions then perhaps this partly explains why you are such a hapless research neophyte 

You see Doyle,  I have actually done the research ( more fool me for wasting time on surrealistic gibberish) all the photo analysts/ experts I spoke to , online or by phone,  dismissed your claims as laughable 

And they are.

Furthermore,  you  haven't come near to  answering any questions sensibly or coherently. Not once  The figure in Owen's probably is Mrs Stanton,  but, exponentially this makes it even more certain ( from 99.99998% to 99.99999%) that Mrs Stanton cannot possibly be Prayerman. 

She's the wrong shape,  size, sex, with different coloured clothes,  faceshape and hair colour. 

Your projection is almost as jaw dropping as your denial and your lack of self awareness. Accusing others of what you yourself have been doing for nigh on a decade. Vandalising the JFK internet with your dishonest fantasy simply because you haven't the courage,  integrity,  maturity or the decency to admit you were wrong 

Instead you are quite happy to persist with this ridiculous charade in an despicable attempt to bolster your fractured ego and maintain this bizarre narcissistic psychodrama 

I don't often agree with Len Osanic but in this particular occasion he was absolutely spot on. 

Your nonsense does indeed damage the cause you supposedly espouse. Although,  in reality the only cause Brian Doyle is interested in is Brian Doyle. 

If you were a little more smart, savvy and articulate your carry on may well have turned the entire subject into a farce. Claiming you have " proved" Prayerman,  who, Oswald or not,  is quite clearly an adult male figure with a dark visibly receding hairline and a dark over shirt, is, in actuality a diminutive barrel of a 300lb plus grey haired woman wearing light coloured clothes,  rates alongside your buddy,  Porcelain Thrones rib tickling fooleries as without question one of the most asinine " theories " ever preferred.

Time and time again you overrate your own intelligence as calamitously as you underrate other people's. People aren't stupid,  certainly not stupid enough to believe such cretinous nonsense. 

In nearly a decade,  by my count, you have managed to convince a grand total of 2 and a half people and 1 doltish pea brained tovarisch loving Tyrannosaurus Tom( the 2 and a half being Your Dick,  Vince Palamara and Larrytrotter,  the latter being the half, as he could just as easily have been talking about the gender politics in Kublai Khan's court)

Both Dick and Tom( where's Harry?) are bitter cranks with agendas,  while Palamara will say just about anything,  depending upon which way the wind seems to be blowing..

Maybe you can change this. By daring to use your oft mentioned skills 

So go  ahead,  get posting. You say any photo expert will confirm this hitherto unknown phenomenon,  go ahead,  find a couple. 

I hope you don't think " honest credible research " means simply believing what some untalented amateur,  with zero credibility,  credentials and proven ability pulls out of thin air and calls " his correct evidence "?

I told you years ago Brian,  your opinions are not tantamount to Great Immutable Truths and I told you also how persistent self praise is one of the surest admissions of failure. 

But, as always you knew best. You refuse to listen,  to learn,  to profit from your mistakes and move on.

Instead you remain stuck, trapped and ossified in bitterness and rancour. 

No matter how often you repeat them,  lies do not become true. 

Seriously,  isn't it time you stopped this nonsense? Go out and live a bit. Find a new hobby,  a more profitable way of spending your time?

Poor old Brian 

I write this more out of pity than anger. 

If you seriously think, and I  paraphrase" Ive already proved certain cameras turn white hair dark " constitutes " evidence " then obviously we're dealing with fundamental issues of basic comprehension 

Seriously Brian,  have you got some  sort of learning disability? Or intellectual impairment?

You seem incapable of understanding some very basic concepts. 

Your uncorroborated assertions are not proof. I'm not being facetious Brian,  I'm starting to think these simple facts are beyond your level of comprehension. It would make a great deal of sense. 

Attempting to compensate for, or somehow disguise your intellectual shortcomings under a paper thin shroud of hollow boasting. 

Don't you understand how ridiculous you make yourself look? Attempting to lecture someone,  who has just performed a demolition job, worthy of Jim DiE at his most rotund and combative,  on the fabulous construct you persist in referring to as " your correct evidence " ?

Castigating him for his lack of " detective smarts"

I'm sorry for being so blunt but no one believes you. No matter how often you claim to have " proved" Sarah Stanton was Prayerman. 

Do you not realise you are wasting your time on utter nonsense? A pointless meaningless squabble you're having, mostly with yourself. 

People can't ignore " your correct evidence " simply because there's no actual evidence to ignore 

Just a garbled tissue of fantasy,  deceit and semi rational wish dreams 

How can anyone possibly peer review " I have already proved certain cameras turn white hair dark "?

You've provided zero reviewable facts. 

You don't understand what academic peer review actually involves. It's just another buzzword you've picked up,  like metadata,  or academic debate or the bizarre sciencey sounding jargon you season your cholesterol loaded word salads with 

As for Davidson's so called woman's face? I don't blame you for never posting the actual images. I wouldn't either if I was unlucky enough to be flopping around in your zen sandals. 

Someone photoshopping footage from a commercial DVD, footage that was then further tampered with for a " prank " is not evidence. I dare you to present it to any semi reputable scientific organisation 

I think a large part of the problem stems from the fact you persist in measuring other people's intelligence by your own rather modest standards. 

Expecting them to be just as credulous,  gullible and  indiscriminate,  falling for the wacky unbelievable shite you have fallen for. 

People can see you refusing to acknowledge, much less attempt to answer the monumental problems that have transformed your so called evidence into a bad joke. 

Calling people trolls and retards doesn't equate to " outarguing " 

Don't you understand this? 

Do you seriously expect educated people,  experts even,  to simply forget the insurmountable discrepancies between Mrs Stanton and Prayerman? (Brian,  seriously do you have problems with your eyesight? Because  the images couldn't be more different. ) simply because you make an unproven assertion? 

As for your imaginary challenge? 

It's the epitome of circular reasoning,  as well as being downright dishonest. 

Aside from the fact Mrs Stanton said she went inside immediately after the shots,  Barto has identified a viable candidate. 

Do you expect people to believe the FBI faked Mrs Stanton's statement,  simply because you say so?

You're either an out and out charlatan, or else you don't understand the very basics. 

I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between,  cowering in the desolate wasteland separating your towering delusions from the deep chasm of reality

Brian,  it's a complete waste of time trying to hold any sort of rational discussion with you. 

You simply ignore whatever nullifies your fantastical narrative,  before soaring off into your alternate dimension. 

A petty lord ruling a kingdom of dust and delusion. You grant yourself  exclusive privileges  and dispensations,  the Prima Trolloctum right to make the rules, acting as prosecutor, judge and executioner. Having painted stars on the ceiling and fluffy white clouds on the walls and the permanently drawn curtains you simply pretend the world outside doesn't exist. 

You are in absolutely no position to make challenges,  no one is obliged to DISorove the theory you have repeatedly failed to prove. 

Or even begin to prove, or convince anyone there's actually a theory worth proving. 

You simply refuse to acknowledge,  much less accept and attempt to reconcile what us blindingly obvious to nigh on everyone else who has ever looked at the images in question. 

Mrs Stanton and the figure known as Prayerman couldn't look less alike. In weight,  shape, size, sex, hair colour,  hairline and clothes they are virtually the exact opposite. 

Your so called height argument is nothing but unscientific gobbledegook. Reminiscent of poor old Jack White and his trusty ruler. Yet again you simply refuse to acknowledge the unknown variables whilst displaying no understanding of the methodology involved when attempting to measure 3 dimensional objects in 2 dimensions. 

You just wave your hands,  waffle on for a bit before declaring yourself the winner. 

Your so called challenge scales the very heights of disingenuousness. Not to mention circular reasoning at it's worst. 

Never mind Mrs Stanton's own contemporaneous statement,  right? If Barto changed his mind,  more strength to him. Its called intellectual honesty Brian. You, of course,  oh highly skilled credible researcher have never changed yours 

The dark haired bespectacled Prayerwoman on your FB page must have been a mirage, right? Or more psychological warfare.

Like the earlier incarnation, the so called Weigmann Z257 " challenge " it's nothing but a clumsy diversionary tactic you try to wheel out when corned. 

Your one and only hope is to keep up the persistently shrill background noise of denial,  while attempting to bamboozle folk with blurry old photos,  claiming you and you alone possess unique preternatural gifts allowing you to decipher them. 

As for Davidson's almost mythical " women's faces "( plural ), not forgetting the latest addition to the cabinet of curiosities " scoop necked woman " ? Brian,  have you absolutely no sense of decency. Or respect for this case? 

Any fool can see they have been photoshopped and " enhanced ", have you even bothered checking the provenance?

Your interview was quite frankly shameful. Aside from the fact you hijacked Ms Zambaninis work and contaminated their memories,  making them completely useless as witnesses,  you didn't just break,  you absolutely shattered the basic interview protocols. 

The witness is supposed to describe their witnessing to the interviewer,  not the other way around. 

Brian, their alleged witnessing was nothing more than decades old 3nd or 3rd hand uncorroborated hearsay. You believe everything you need to believe,  automatically declaring it to be the Truth. 

All this is pure distraction anyway,  essentially meaningless trivia. 

Designed to divert attention away from the core issue: namely your hapless attempts to convince the JFK internet and the world beyond that black quite literally is white,  in the process making fat thin and thin fat( every thought about launching Prayerwoman diets? If I were you I'd flip flop on down to the closest US Patents Office and get your magic camera trademarked!! Think of it!! How many rich fat women would pay to have a camera dissolve a couple of hundred pounds? Whilst turning their grey hair back into the flowing chestnut locks of their youth) turning man into woman and woman into man.

Maybe Mrs Stanton was a Time Lord? Dr Who in Dallas,  caught in the doorway of the TSBD in the middle of degenerating..

I admit I've lost my cool and composure from time to time,  but can you really blame me? 

Brian will either ignore this message or mutilate it, snipping out a sentence,  or even a sentence fragment,  demanding that I answer his " challenge " 

More fool me. For wasting everyone's valuable time with this bizarre rigmarole. 

I have to confess ive never seen anything quite like it. Arguing Mrs Stanton was Prayerman,  despite the fact they couldn't look any different,  while refusing even to acknowledge the differences,  is pretty much the cyberequivakent of standing beneath the burning sun , high up in a brilliant blue cloudless sky,  arguing that its actually the middle of a particularly dark and moonless night. 

Or arguing the sun is the same as the moon because they are both round,and because the Man on the Moon wears the same scoop necked dress as the Empress of the Sun..

Incidentally Brian,  where can I find BWFs statements? About being " deepest in the shadows " and " staring at each other for the longest time "? Would you also be kind enough to post links to the Billy Lovelady statements you have referenced? And any evidence regarding the FBI faking Mrs Stanton's statement would be much appreciated too.

Thinking about it wouldn't the latter be sort of counterproductive? Faking it to make her say she went inside immediately makes it less likely she could have been Prayerman,  yes? Or was the apparent fakery motivated by deeper more subtle factors?

Perhaps something to do with her interactions with HARVEY? Maybe she saw through his intel spook disguise,  realising he wasn't just a fellow outcast,  but a serious international CIA spook. 

In retrospect it's lucky she didn't end up on Penn Jones' mysterious deaths list

If I waste any more time trying to decipher our Brian's elliptical musings I'll probably end up there...terminal rupture of the lesser Shatner's bassoon,  caused by a build up of excessive troll punkery.

According  to False Flag your way to Fitness ( edited by Jim Fetzer) a build up of excess troll punkery can be lethal...

Armstrong hab erbmann

Brian,  Brian,  Brian,  what are we going to do with you?

You don't seem to realise that with every ill tempered evidence free profanity laced adolescent tantrum you further ostracize yourself and expose your so called " correct evidence " for risible unscientific dishonest claptrap it undoubtedly is 

People aren't stupid. 

Your so called challenge is nothing but a clumsy attempt at shifting the burden of proof. No one is under any sort of obligation to DISprove the claims you have failed ( and failed quite catastrophically) to make. 

I'm not the one making any claims. YOU are. The onus is on YOU to provide properly accredited scientific/ photographic proof to support your claim 

Your uncorroborated assertions are not evidence. By trying to drag the subject down into the murky catacombs of charlatanism you not only do actual research into the case a great disservice,  you insult everyone's intelligence. 

Your sole proof is your jocular attempt at reasserting your previous spurious assertion.

You've offered zero evidence to support, what are,  in reality the worthless speculation of someone desperately trying to wriggle his way out of a terminal impasse. 

Likewise your claim that the FBI surreptitiously altered Mrs Stanton's statement ( for some unfathomable reason it seems) Neither your hapless appeals to some antiquated notion of CT Orthodoxy nor your unethical attempts to twist, what was, fundamentally , 2nd or 3rd hand hearsay,  negates Mrs Stanton's own statement. 

As it stands she had grey / white hair,  as opposed to Prayerman's dark visibly receding hair. 
And she made it clear she went inside " immediately " after the shots 

You have produced nothing but gaslighting and hot hair,  in the process doing absolutely nothing to support your unsubstantiated assumptions. 

However,  her hair colour and her contemporaneous statement are just the beginning of your problems. 

You still need to account for her clearly visible lack of cleavage,  her light coloured clothes and skin, her size, bodyshape and hairline. 

To date you have produced nothing,  except your various unsupported assumptions. Nothing. 

I'm afraid,  given your past record of unreliability and lack of honesty ( putting it incredibly politely) your sayso is , I'm afraid to say,  rather less than worthless. 

Until Greg told me about the situation as regards Forum motion, I was, initially at least,  all for letting you rejoin,  albeit on a strictly limited basis,  thinking it might be a salutary and instructive experience for you. 

But, after a couple of seconds I realised my mistake. You refuse to learn. Or behave like a reasonably intelligent adult. Once you believe something ito be true,  it becomes an unassailable inviolable truth. 

You expect people to believe your " evidence " merely because you say so.

I still have some lingering sympathy for your obvious plight,  but I have nothing but utter contempt for Gilbride. 

His almost cosmically inhuman remarks about substance abuse were beyond despicable. 

He reminds me of some lonely old delusional Eleanor Rigby like character. 

Busy writing the essays no one will read. 

Blind to the fact that nobody cares 

No one us even there.

Like you he's forced to construct elaborate fantasies: James Gordon- MI6 agent,  controlling a vast network,  designed to thwart the genius of Brian Doyle and his Dick 

To face the stark unpalatable truth: your " work" is ignored because it's worthless junk. And you're ostracized yourselves with your repellent behaviour. 

You have deceived yourself into believing you are above the chattering tumult,  immune to the rules which govern lesser mortals. You behave abominably,  like some ill bred toddler throwing a tantrum,  and yet you expect to suffer no negative consequences 

Believing you have some God given right to breeze into any forum that takes your fancy. 

Don't bother trying to post a semi articulate reply,  your vocabulary is as limited as your powers of perception and,  like your Dick you are quite simply an appalling writer. 

Don't waste your time repeating your " challenge ", unless you can rustle up some actual proof. Articles from a reputable scientific/ photographic journal,  describing the alleged phenomena in detail,  and,  crucially the opinion of at least a couple of accredited photo analysts/ experts explaining why and how it happened to occur on this particular occasion. 

Not forgetting a full description of the make, model,  film stock,  shutter speed etc of the cameras in question,  I'm done with this nonsensical charade 

You aren't funny any more Brian,  you're just pathetic and more than just a little creepy. 

Despite your deep  seated  issues I'm at a complete loss and can't even begin to understand why a man of your age behaves like this..

For God sake learn to  communicate like a  semi rational  human being and find yourself another fucking hobby.

Well Brian,  if it's such " common knowledge " , it should be an absolute gimme , especially for a researcher of your calibre,  to produce some verifiable technical data to back up your claim.

You have to rely on one of your revolving Greek chorus of little lies to back up your primadonna lie. Despite being asked repeatedly you have produced no evidence,  nada,  backing up your claims regarding BWF.

Surely  you can produce  SOMETHING,  even if it's just an article in a reputable scientific/ photographic journal describing this hitherto unknown but apparently commonplace phenomenon. And, here's the really important bit, evidence that proves how and why it occurs in this particular occasion. 

" Shade" cannot magically replicate someone's hairline,  following it exactly while leaving the skin clear. 
It's an utterly preposterous notion. " Shade" doesn't account for Prayerwomans lack of cleavage,  " her" faceshape,  size, body shape,  weight,  clothing and yes, her height. 

If you think anyone apart from your partner in desperation , the despicable hack Gilbride,  buys your amateurish " height argument " then I have a fake mom in Bradenton,  Florida to sell you

If you think respecting and following the  basic laws regarding the burden of proof,  a cornerstone of the scientific method,  is " for losers" and if you are labouring under the fundamental misapprehension that juvenile waffle and uncorroborated assertions would pass muster in academic peer review then it's perhaps not quite so difficult to understand why you are universally derided as a crank and a non researcher. 

" Top voice " indeed. 

Brian,  I have a sense of humour and an appreciation for the absurd. Unfortunately,  a lot of folks don't. 

Outside your narcissistic delirium you are a research non person. You have produced zero worthwhile work: books, articles,  appearances on podcasts or documentaries etc. Most folks don't even know who you are,  and as for those who have has the privilege of encountering your highly skilled credible research?

Your mere name is the kiss of death credibility wise,  there's a reason why you are regarded as the Typhoid Mary of the JFK internet,  despite your repulsive personal characteristics , it's because you are universally regarded as a joke. A crank. 

When you are cornered your only recourse is abusive waffle,  before fluttering off over the rainbow to your fantasy domain. Brian,  if you WERE such a skilled credible researcher your tedious boasting would be as unnecessary as it is moribund. 

The genuinely talented let their work do the talking 

As for your latest toy, Davidson's " Scoop necked dress ", shame on you for even attempting to foist such an bastardised image on the  JFK internet. 

While Chris Davidson may have some mathematical skills I'm afraid his photo work is somewhat less than underwhelming. Come on Brian,  cut out the bullshit and the outraged schoolmarm squealing, the image has obviously been enhanced. Plus,  youve made it blatantly clear you lack any sort of technical competence. 

I'm sorry Brian,  I really am,  but like the redoubtable John Iac I feel compelled to speak out, exposing what I believe is nothing short of the worst sort of charlatanism 

Your reliance upon infantile tantrums and childish boasting is cringeworthy in the extreme. You provide zero supporting evidence,  relying upon your own assertions to back up your assertions. 

Delude yourself all you want,  but the truth remains. You are regarded as a figure of derision 

The overwhelming majority of lurkers,  researchers and regular posters, if they even know who are ,  up around 99%, dismiss you as a boorish uncivilized crank and charlatan of the first order.

Go on Brian,  Mr Top Voice,  who has singlehandedly rewritten the laws of physics,  photography and anatomy,  prove me wrong. After all I'm just a simple creative trolling miscreant and you are a crackerjack researcher. 

Post away...

I believe Sarah Stanton's grey hair appears dark because 
1
2
3

I believe the FBI altered her statement, even though it made it almost impossible for her to be Prayerman because 
1
2
3

Your own unreliable unsubstantiated assumptions don't count. Neither do feeble appeals to outdated dogma. 

The burden of proof lies with the claimant. Ask Gilbride .

Yet again you reveal your hypocrisy and your infinite ability to speak out both sides of your mouth at the same time. 

You abuse Pat Speer,  while sending him " your material " I have little respect for Speer but I'm pretty sure he would never be so desperate or so disingenuous to rely on our chum Brian as a source. 

After everything you have written about this forum and individual members,  even going so far as attempting to claim " credit " for Greg's near fatal heart attack,  you expect to be allowed to come breezing back in, ponytail bristling triumphantly.

I have an image of you as some Strip Von Twinkle,  after swallowing an entire plate full of Owsleys notorious STP laced fairy cakes at a particularly far out Airplane gig at the Fillmore,  back in the halcyon days of 68, you fell asleep for 40 years,  waking up amidst your late father's rigorously categorized collection of Eva and Grerl Braun's lingerie,  in a basement,  down Sanibel way. 

It's the only way I can even begin rationalising your immature antics and adolescent posting style. 

Armstrong hab erbermann

Well  Brian,  how can a poor troll punk possibly respond to such an avalanche of highly detailed technical evidence. 

As ever your skill, perspicacity and most of all your grace and humility have left me well and truly skewered. 

In fact I feel just  like a Donner Kebab in Jabba Jim's greasy paws 

Seriously Brian I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if " Sarah Stanton's hair turned dark,  proving she is Prayerman " isn't carved proudly on a marble scroll,  held aloft  by two winged cherubim,  fluttering above the grand Ionic columns lined up on either side of the mighty portico of the Sanibel Institute of Linguistic Forensics and Applied Genius 

Built to commemorate your unprecedented 5th Nobel Prize 

No wonder all those dumb noodnicks and scoffolaws,  LN and CT alike,  are positively tripping over themselves and each other,  in a race to steal your evidence ....

I can see your skills aren't limited to the JFK internet,  apparently you're quite the Biblical scholar too...

Jim DiE is the Judas Priest of the research community you say?

Hmmm, personally I always thought he was more  thrash orientated ...more your Metallica or Megadeth 

I'm glad you have confirmed my long held suspicion,  Judas Iscariot was a booby mistranslation of Judas Priest 
What do you think about my theory regarding the Dead Sea Scrolls ?

That they were really just the rider to a Herodian era Heavy Bronze Age Metal Festival,  held at the Masada Fillmore?

I often scold myself: not only for wasting my time on such a self evident charade,  but for,  as Greg once put it,  joining in with those who persist with " punching down " on our poor unfortunate chum from Sanibel 

I try to justify my actions,  rationalising them by wrapping them up in noble intentions and high sounding rhetoric flourishes,  about " combatting charlatanism " and such like 

True, our chum habitually hurls around insults mixed with the most outrageous lies, like confetti at a fake mom's wedding,  but by climbing down into the gutter with him I only end up covered in shite. 

However,  that said,  I have nothing but respect for those who take the time to correct the record,  provide the actual facts and otherwise prevent the trickle of bullshit,  effluvia and outright lies from polluting the reservoir,  Armstrong knows theres already enough shit floating around there, bobbing up and down like a sentient mouse tumour at a Twist party on the strangely luminous phlegm green scum coated surface...

Forget about Sysyphus or even Prometheus,  or even the poor bastard who had to typeset Dick Gilbride's latest Magnum Opus ( last seen hovering outside an elevator factory brandishing a crossbow,  with a quiver full of fiery bolts slung over his shoulder ) attempting to deal,  even semi rationally with our Brian is without question the ultimate embodiment of futility. 

For some obscure and utterly unfathomable reason he has chosen to make the JFK internet,  and Prayerman in particular the cockpit of his vanity. An arena to play out his childish fantasies. 

Apart from boorish scuttlebutt,  insults, and the inevitable hollow declaration of victory ( kudos for shrivelled ball of out argued troll though, unexpectedly expressive and not without a certain ironic piquancy) your sole tangible contribution was repeating your initial assertion. 

The burden of proof ALWAYS lies with the claimant Brian,  did you not go to college? Scrub college any self respecting budding high school logician could tell you that. 

You made two claims: 1 Sarah Stanton's grey( white) hair was artificially darkened by cameras/ shade. 

2 Sarah Stanton's statement,  including the killer line( for the Rube Goldberg like Prayerwoman Frabjous Contraption of Professor Bri Bri and his hapless Dick) " I went inside immediately after the shots " was surreptitiously faked by the FBI ( did they do documents as well as photos in the magical mystery photo alteration truck?)

I simply asked,  not unreasonably , considering it's pretty much the fulcrum of your claim,  for any verifiable proof( an article,  a paper,  an abstract,  even a YouTube video,  anything) I can study and evaluate,  describing this phenomenon,  one you have described as being " common knowledge " 

And,  crucially,  how and why it occurred on this particular occasion. Manifesting itself in such an atypical manner the " shade" follows the hairline exactly leaving the skin light. Likewise the clothes. 

That's quite the claim Brian. One that was unilaterally dismissed,  on one occasion treated as a wind up,  by the actual camera/ photographic experts I contacted. If you want I could forward you the email exchange,  although I would not wish to be responsible for giving you their personal details/ addresses)

Unless you have specific proof the FBI altered Sarah Stanton's statement ( although it would seem to be a bizarrely self defeating form of fakery,  faking her statement to make it practically impossible for her to be Prayerman,  were they even aware of Prayerman? Or are we back in the realm of omnipotent Godlike sponsors,  on second thoughts why would they insist upon faking such an utterly banal statement) you are forced to rely upon the creaky outdated utterly  fallacious" CT" dogma:

" They faked one statement ergo they faked 'em all, specifically the ones that negate my treasured pet theory "

If you think merely claiming Sarah Stanton's grey hair was magically darkened,  before launching into a non sequitur strewn rant about Kinaski and James Gordon ( incidentally do you subscribe to your Dick's theory? Is James Gordon an intel spook? Tasked by MI6 to bribe Chris Davidson? Asking for a friend ") constitutes " skilled debating " then good luck to you. Fool that I am, yet again I tried. You epitomize the fundamentalist mindset,  simply ignoring any unwelcome intrusion into the fantasy reality you have meticulously ( and mendaciosly) constructed for yourself 

Talking about Lay brother and Iconographer in Chief..


Is Dick the John the Baptist to your Christ?  Just who gets to wear the gostskin ?

And if Jim DiE is the Judas Priest then who, pray tell, is the Frankie Lee? Wait a minute Frankie LEE,  does that mean there was a Frankie HARVEY?

Was the house across the road really the TSBD? 

If it makes you happy keep on declaring yourself the winner. Keep on filling the darkened arena with your empty cries. It makes absolutely no difference to me, or the world beyond. 

Please Brian,  for the sake of your own peace of mind let it go. You were wrong,  so what? If it turns out Prayerman was just some anonymous dude, then so be it. 

Tormenting yourself by endlessly refighting unwinnable battles: against the facrs, and,  I'm afraid,  against yourself and the demons you insist upon embracing and calling angels is a horribly unproductive,  not to mention,  destructive way to spend your time

He has made DPF a place of Prayer man bashing along with Glibride.

Who is actually bothering going there these days???

Absolutely,  just look at the fucking viewing stats. 

If anyone WAS actually paying attention both Doyle and his Dick would have been shown the door. 

Their entire " Prayerwoman " campaign can be summed up thusly- avoiding contributing anything remotely probative or meaningful,  sitting on the sidelines whining and sniping,  and here's the crux- avoiding dealing with the #1 major issue: namely the images couldn't be any more different,  by conjuring up a procession of mirage, be they lies, fantasy or a mixture of both  blaming everyone else for their incompetence and the complete indifference of the 99.99999999999% , while at the same time declaring victory. 

Brian's not remotely interested in " academic peer review ' indeed he hasn't got a clue what the actual process entails. James Gordon hasn't been anywhere near the 13 inch head forum for months...it doesn't matter it's his fault. What do you think would happen if Brian WAS allowed back on the Ed forum? And his " correct evidence " was met with exactly the same response? Indifference mingled with sardonic amusement? He would immediately start bleating about  " credible peer review " on the Pissarium,  and how it is all Macrae's fault he's not universally recognised and celebrated . Ultimately the people most responsible for destroying the whole slapdash quarter assed Prayerwoman fantasy are none other than Brian and Dick themselves. 

They've,  Brian in particular,  have squandered an entire fucking decade jousting with invisible tittie shaped windmills. 

Excuse following excuse as predictably as lie follows lie.

James Gordon  - MI6 agent,  bribing Chris Davidson to keep his " Scoop Necked Dress " creation under wraps,  may well be the exact moment Dick finally jumped the unicorn...

....in the process impaling himself on the horn.

Oh for a ringside seat in the Sanibel Infirmary A and E Department,  as a somewhat confused,  mildly agitated unicorn,  trying desperately to conceal his obvious arousal,  comes clip clopping in, with a paint huffing hack, resplendent in a piss drenched towelling dressing gown impaled on its front horn..

" Madame " Dick slurs , " it's really quite simply to explain my current predicament,  I was sliding down the banister, having just finished my latest mega essay I was in the mood for celebration,  when I tripped up and landed on the horn of this passing unicorn "

barto wrote:Who is actually bothering going there these days???

Nobody. Not even the mods there seem to be visiting their own forum. It is essentially a dead forum. They just have not buried it yet.

Vinny wrote:

barto wrote:Who is actually bothering going there these days???

Nobody. Not even the mods there seem to be visiting their own forum. It is essentially a dead forum. They just have not buried it yet.

A fitting place for them to spend their worthless time.

Brian is insane. Peer review of his shit will destroy him. Instead, he demands that we heel. Brian is insane...just laugh.

Unintentional comedy. That is what he is good for.