"Prayer Man" on the Education Forum

[ianlloyd]

First topic message reminder :

As I am not a member of the EF, I cannot post there but there is an interesting discussion going on there at the moment regarding a figure in the TSBD doorway generally referred to as "Prayer Man" due to the apparent position of his hands, seemingly clasped in front of his chest as if in prayer.
 
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20354
 
I recall this person being discussed somewhere many years ago and was referred to as "Prayer Man" pretty much from the outset but I cannot recall where it originated, maybe on Lancer?
 
Anyway, the reason for this post is that, upon looking closely at the various photographs and movie clips presented as part of the discussion, it struck me that his hands don't seem to move from the "prayer" position for what seems to be quite some time. Was he holding something, I wonder? If so, it seems an odd way to hold whatever it was.

[GuestGuest]

Not a single shot from the TSBD. Nada. Zero. That place was the dumping ground for shells and a  rifle to divert attention from possibly the Daltex building. If I were any of those dudes below the 6th floor window I'd leave a shit stain if I knew someone was shooting a floor above me. It is absurd to believe their fucking nonsense account. 150% agreement with Ed on this.

[Mick_Purdy]

Ed wrote: 


No bullet originated its flight from the TSBD snipers nest or any other window in the building.




100% agreed. Proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Next!

[Mick_Purdy]

Not a single shot from the TSBD. Nada. Zero. That place was the dumping ground for shells and a  rifle to divert attention from possibly the Daltex building. If I were any of those dudes below the 6th floor window I'd leave a shit stain if I knew someone was shooting a floor above me. It is absurd to believe their fucking nonsense account. 150% agreement with Ed on this.

Yep, could'nt agree more.

In my work I've filmed rifle fire both exterior and interior. Let me say that I would hazard a wild guess that had the rifle shots come from within the TSBD, then the three stooges would've been down to the first floor quicker than you could say "I've shit my pants"

IMO anyone inside the building including people on the first floor would've heard and smelled those shots if they really had originated from inside....just my opinion of course.

[Ed.Ledoux]

....

And it sounded-
it even shook the 
building, the side we 
were on cement fell 
on my head.


Ed stop it!


I can't take any more of this comedy.

I wish I could Mick.
Quoting BRW is like Quoting Mary Bledsoe

And thats no laugh.

Cheers
Ed

[Ed.Ledoux]

This guy wanted to visit Dallas and show Marina the PM image.Wonder if he did manage to do so.

http://www.city-data.com/forum/dallas/2636521-safe-affordable-living-arrangement-few-weeks-3.html

Can you grab the pic and post it Vin?
Thgx, Ed

[Ed.Ledoux]

Aloha,
I once in an other forum, many moons ago, I was asked how I knew the TSBD's self closing door was required by code.

This person didn't know me.
They sure didn't know my Dad.

Building managers like Truly do not waste money on expensive fire rated self closing doors unless they are required, not for sound. But by fire and safety, better known as The Building and Exit Code 1963.
I found an online version of the '64 book, almost exactly the same as 1963
But in '63 your fire escape routes into interior stairway through firewalls had to be of the Self or Automatic Closing devices or hinges.

Here for you ROKCers is the code that required Truly and Byrd etc to pay for that door so the building could get an occupancy permit.
Also when you will see photos inside the with exit signs, that is code enforced.
All these come with a FINE and MISDEMEANOR if you don't abide.
So spare me the noise concern.
If it was noise then they had already told people to not use the stairs so why waste time and money on a self closing door for what? No one on those rickety old stairs that probably ...didn't meet code ... and had to be updated for the building to keep its occupancy permit.
Or the old Byrd could have gotten a waiver or an allowance for some other measure like fire escapes etc.
And these were times when agencies and groups were jockeying for national standards which would become IBC or International Building Codes. I recall Dad having all the Oklahoma fire training manuals.
I have almost all the books of which is a 60's building code enforcement book, if I can find it I will also scan its relevant pages.
But this is just to show a internet warrior what real research can garner with dedication and tenacity.
Anyways here is the Building Exit Code 1964
Cheers, Ed

[Ed.Ledoux]

[Vinny]

This guy wanted to visit Dallas and show Marina the PM image.Wonder if he did manage to do so.

http://www.city-data.com/forum/dallas/2636521-safe-affordable-living-arrangement-few-weeks-3.html

Can you grab the pic and post it Vin?
Thgx, Ed

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1364-a-prayer-man-presentation-in-plain-sight

[Ed.Ledoux]

Whom was the BUILDING OFFICIAL for 411 Elm in 1963?

[Ed.Ledoux]

City of Dallas Building Inspector Record Books (MA 86.9)
1905 - March 1970. The volumes contain handwritten records of building permits issued.
Building permit records will give you a date of construction and any significant changes or
additions. They may also give you the name of the architect or contractor responsible for the
building. Permits were not required until 1925, but may have been issued earlier. You may
also wish to contact the City of Dallas, Building Inspection Division, Central Files--located
in the Oak Cliff Municipal Center. The telephone number is (214) 948-4318. They have
microfilm of some (but not all!) of the actual building permits

https://dallaslibrary2.org/dallashistory/docs/historicBuildingResearchGuidelines.pdf

[Ed.Ledoux]

Cheers, Ed

[Ed.Ledoux]

Chose

Elects

?

[Eastern Spotted Skunk]

Deleted for obvious reasons.
Doyle behave or fuck off.

[steely_dan]

Do you think your FOO ban might have anything to do with not using your real name on that forum, Mr Kangaroo?
I read your FB post were you listed the T&C's of the forum and you seem to have missed that one.

[Eastern Spotted Skunk]

Bart:


          The Darnell-Murray-Willis 8 images are sterile neutral photographic evidence. Totally objective, impartial, and taken from the generally accepted evidence. They are totally 'supported' in and of themselves. 



           Why can't we post them and let people see for themselves? 



           I saw ROKC post an invitation to this forum on the Education Forum where they said people were invited to come debate their Prayer Man evidence freely and would not be discriminated against or automatically disallowed. Greg invited me here from my Prayer Woman page. If we restrict this issue to just the Willis 8-Murray-Darnell juxtaposition why would that be automatically disallowed? What specifically is unsound or disallowable about 3 photographs?

[greg_parkerAdmin]

Bart:


          The Darnell-Murray-Willis 8 images are sterile neutral photographic evidence. Totally objective, impartial, and taken from the generally accepted evidence. They are totally 'supported' in and of themselves. 



           Why can't we post them and let people see for themselves? 



           I saw ROKC post an invitation to this forum on the Education Forum where they said people were invited to come debate their Prayer Man evidence freely and would not be discriminated against or automatically disallowed. Greg invited me here from my Prayer Woman page. If we restrict this issue to just the Willis 8-Murray-Darnell juxtaposition why would that be automatically disallowed? What specifically is unsound or disallowable about 3 photographs?

I never invited you Brian. You were ranting about being blocked from joining. I simply and truthfully told you that was not the case - that no one is rejected in the process of joining. I then offered to help with what was in reality a technical issue. That failed. You have since obviously used another email address as I recommended.

Joining and staying are two separate things.  Those looking to join are given fair warning at the top of the page:

Before joining, please consider if this is the place for you. We are looking for those who believe that the case should be reopened. That eliminates all who believe the case was closed with the issuance of the Warren Commission Report. Above and beyond that, we are looking for those with the capacity and willingness to think outside the box—not those who look no further than opportunities to spin wheels or score points. If this is you, welcome. If it is not, then your time here may be limited.

We all agree that the best opportunity to get the case reopened is by getting a clear scan from the Weigman or Darnell films. You are on record as stating that you don't believe there is any need to have the films released for such purposes. Is that still your opinion?

[greg_parkerAdmin]

PS The Kangaroo is on our coat of arms. You can not co-opt it or have it be made an object of ridicule. It is akin to flag burning. I have therefore changed your username to something native to Florida. I likewise have changed your avatar as it seemed to depict a drunken kangaroo shooter.

[Eastern Spotted Skunk]

Greg, your citation of site rules is too general and doesn't apply to me or the question you are using those misapplied rules to dodge. If you honestly look at those rules you cited they don't apply to the evidence I was talking about. Please show how the simple posting of the Darnell, Murray, or Willis 8 photos violates your assumed, self-serving, and unclear site rules? What are you afraid of?


           It is inherently unfair to pre-emptively delete a discussion of evidence and then ask the poster what he was saying. What I was saying was in the post that was deleted. Again, I don't think you are honestly answering how ROKC posted in the Education Forum to Bill Miller that he was invited to join this forum and he would be allowed to post his case. When I attempted to do so my post was instantly removed. Stan said he would have banned me instantly but wanted to wait to let you finish me off. I find your offering rather weak, not very honest towards the points, and accessing some kind of ROKC license that allows you to dodge the good evidence you are avoiding. You join the likes of James Gordon, L Johnson, and Jim DiEugenio. 


         The point stands. What is specifically rules-violating about posting the Willis 8, Darnell, and Murray images? ROKC members regularly post such images so it can't be against any rules. In fact I got the Willis 8 image from a pro-Murphy post (thanks for the evidence). Please answer the point. 


       Yes, the Davidson metadata proves the woman's face comes from the Wiegman film image. This scientifically means the Davidson enhancement does legitimately represent the "clear scan" you are calling for. The first credible photo analysis expert who applies modern photo technology to the Davidson enhancement and original film will 100% confirm what I am saying. However I am also the first person in the world who wants the original films released for examination because they will, without doubt, prove everything I am saying. The substantiation (or support) is actually on our side. I tried to call Stephen Fagin of the 6th Floor Museum to help get those films released but got a run around. I e-mailed Discovery Channel too. 
       


           Greg:   You were clearly inviting me to join. It is on my Prayer Woman Facebook page.

[greg_parkerAdmin]

Brian,

I have admins and mods who have carte blanch permission to administer and moderate as they see fit. This is not a kindergarten playground, nor a place where detractors can come and take a dump. 

Furthermore, I never invited you. You were making a false claim about being blocked from joining. Clearly since you did eventually manage to join, you should apologize for the false claims.

I don't think I can be clearer than to say that this place is dedicated to having the case reopened. We have identified what we believe to be the best way to do that - i.e. clear scans of one or both of the Weigman and Darnell films.

Your previous position was completely at odds with the above. I can only take your refusal to answer whether that is still your position as an indication that it is.

This is simply not the right forum for you. It is not a debate club. No one has the time or inclination to correct a figment of your imagination again and again and again, and nor do you even support our identified path to our stated goal.

You were given an opportunity to get on board. You didn't take it.

Your time here is up.

[Ed.Ledoux]

A fool studies the worst frame whilst ignoring the best evidence

[barto]

Important thread that deserves a bump.

[steely_dan]

Certainly the first 80 pages while Sean Murphy was presenting his work.

[barto]

I meant this thread , and yes I agree with what you said, until it got mullered by clowns like Doyle and Miller.

[steely_dan]

oops!

[Vinny]

Yes quite an important thread. Lots of excellent posts here.

[Sponsored content]