First - a quick review is in order. I've demonstrated that I will do
precisely what I say I will: to wit, I will match in length, detail,
and number of citations any scenario posted by a believer. I've done
so repeatedly, and invariably, believers then run away. I then
demonstrated that the Warren Commission refused to investigate prior assassination attempts that would have shed light on the conspiracy to
murder the President. I then showed that the Warren Commission had
their "conclusions" in written form before they interviewed a single
witness... and that the Commission clearly indicated a desire **NOT**
to hold a real investigation. I then demonstrated that the evidence
from just moments after the shooting strongly supported a shooter at
the Grassy Knoll. I went on to show that the original medical opinion
within hours was for a frontal shot striking JFK. I then demonstrated
that believers deny what the Commission stated about when Connally is
seen reacting to a shot in the film, yet refuse to *explain* that
reaction. I demonstrated that the Warren Commission provably lied
about which shot struck Connally. I then demonstrated that there's
*no* evidence for transit - which is necessary to an SBT. I then
demonstrated that the Edgewood Arsenal tests contradicted the Warren Commission's theory, and they simply ignored those facts. I then
covered evidence tending to show that the Autopsy Report isn't the
original one. I then demonstrated that CE-399 doesn't have any valid
chain of custody. In the last three posts, I showed how one of the
assassins was clearly identified by numerous witnesses as wearing a
white shirt, and was arrested - but wasn't Oswald. In the last two
posts, I've pointed out the evidence for fraudulent alteration of the
medical evidence. The last post showed provable alteration of an
original FBI signed & dated report, as well as the problems with the
alleged "paper bag."

In addition to the two previous examples of evidence alteration on the
record, we have the eyewitness accounts of dozens of medically trained witnesses, as well as THE AUTOPSY REPORT ITSELF which describes a
large wound in the *back* of JFK's head... in the occipital-parietal
area. Gary Aguilar has compiled a listing of the medical witnesses,
and listing them and their statements would double the size of this
scenario, so I'll refrain.

All of this evidence is contradicted by only *ONE* piece of physical
evidence, the BOH photo. I've challenged believers time and time again
to explain just what part of the occipital CANNOT be seen in the BOH
photo - and have never gotten an answer to that question. Even David
Von Pein, generally more willing than other believers to answer
questions, has absolutely refused to give a credible answer.

And Huckster Sienzant - who *KNOWS* the answer - refuses to respond.

This means that there are only **TWO** alternatives:

1. The BOH photo is correct, and the large wound devoid of scalp and
bone DID NOT extend into the occipital as the Autopsy Report stated.
This means that the Autopsy Report is provably wrong on a major point.
2. The dozens of medically trained eyewitnesses and the Autopsy Report
are accurate and correct. This means that the BOH photo is a forgery.
There is not enough scalp to pull up over the wound, as some have
suggested.

It's not possible that the BOH photo and the Autopsy Report are *both*
correct, as they conflict with each other... so there really are only
two choices... But either alternative isn't palatable to believers, so
they generally simply run from this issue, and refuse to debate the
topic.

Time and time again believers have attempted to refute eyewitnesses
with photos that have no chain of custody... (The sole exception being
the refutation of Zapruder & Nix films by just five eyewitnesses to a
meeting of Chaney & Chief Curry!)

Legally speaking, of course, eyewitnesses have precedence over
photography... the courts have long understood that photography can be
easily altered to present a false conception to the viewer. Indeed,
this is the basis of Hollywood.

Normal legal procedure here in the U.S. permits photographs and motion
pictures to be used as evidence in courts of law only when a
foundation for their introduction has been established by eyewitness
testimony. For example:

"The principle upon which photographs are most commonly admitted into
evidence is the same as that underlying the admission of illustrative
drawings, maps and diagrams. Under this theory, a photograph is
viewed merely as a graphic portrayal of oral testimony, and becomes
admissible only when a witness has testified that it is a correct and
accurate representation of the relevant facts personally observed by
the witness." McCormick on Evidence, 3rd Edition (1984), Section 214.
That JFK had small entry wounds in the front (throat, and less
certain, right temple) and a LARGE wound, generally expected to be an
exit wound in the back of his head argues strongly for conspiracy.
That believers try to refute this with a single photo shows their
fear.

So too does the fact that believers ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to answer the
simple question of where the larger bullet fragments are seen in the
side autopsy X-ray of JFK... toward the front or back of JFK?
Believers have been TERRIFIED of answering that question - because it
provides physical scientific PROOF of the direction of at least one
bullet striking JFK. And believers know that they can't argue the
physics of that trail of bullet fragments.

Scientific physical evidence that Huckster can only run from...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 07:26:23 -0800, Ben Holmes
<Admin@ConspiracyJFKForum.com> wrote:

First - a quick review is in order. I've demonstrated that I will do >precisely what I say I will: to wit, I will match in length, detail,
and number of citations any scenario posted by a believer. I've done
so repeatedly, and invariably, believers then run away. I then
demonstrated that the Warren Commission refused to investigate prior >assassination attempts that would have shed light on the conspiracy to
murder the President. I then showed that the Warren Commission had
their "conclusions" in written form before they interviewed a single >witness... and that the Commission clearly indicated a desire **NOT**
to hold a real investigation. I then demonstrated that the evidence
from just moments after the shooting strongly supported a shooter at
the Grassy Knoll. I went on to show that the original medical opinion
within hours was for a frontal shot striking JFK. I then demonstrated
that believers deny what the Commission stated about when Connally is
seen reacting to a shot in the film, yet refuse to *explain* that
reaction. I demonstrated that the Warren Commission provably lied
about which shot struck Connally. I then demonstrated that there's
*no* evidence for transit - which is necessary to an SBT. I then
demonstrated that the Edgewood Arsenal tests contradicted the Warren >Commission's theory, and they simply ignored those facts. I then
covered evidence tending to show that the Autopsy Report isn't the
original one. I then demonstrated that CE-399 doesn't have any valid
chain of custody. In the last three posts, I showed how one of the
assassins was clearly identified by numerous witnesses as wearing a
white shirt, and was arrested - but wasn't Oswald. In the last two
posts, I've pointed out the evidence for fraudulent alteration of the
medical evidence. The last post showed provable alteration of an
original FBI signed & dated report, as well as the problems with the
alleged "paper bag."

In addition to the two previous examples of evidence alteration on the >record, we have the eyewitness accounts of dozens of medically trained >witnesses, as well as THE AUTOPSY REPORT ITSELF which describes a
large wound in the *back* of JFK's head... in the occipital-parietal
area. Gary Aguilar has compiled a listing of the medical witnesses,
and listing them and their statements would double the size of this
scenario, so I'll refrain.

All of this evidence is contradicted by only *ONE* piece of physical >evidence, the BOH photo. I've challenged believers time and time again
to explain just what part of the occipital CANNOT be seen in the BOH
photo - and have never gotten an answer to that question. Even David
Von Pein, generally more willing than other believers to answer
questions, has absolutely refused to give a credible answer.

And Huckster Sienzant - who *KNOWS* the answer - refuses to respond.

This means that there are only **TWO** alternatives:

1. The BOH photo is correct, and the large wound devoid of scalp and
bone DID NOT extend into the occipital as the Autopsy Report stated.
This means that the Autopsy Report is provably wrong on a major point.
2. The dozens of medically trained eyewitnesses and the Autopsy Report
are accurate and correct. This means that the BOH photo is a forgery.
There is not enough scalp to pull up over the wound, as some have
suggested.

It's not possible that the BOH photo and the Autopsy Report are *both* >correct, as they conflict with each other... so there really are only
two choices... But either alternative isn't palatable to believers, so
they generally simply run from this issue, and refuse to debate the
topic.

Time and time again believers have attempted to refute eyewitnesses
with photos that have no chain of custody... (The sole exception being
the refutation of Zapruder & Nix films by just five eyewitnesses to a
meeting of Chaney & Chief Curry!)

Legally speaking, of course, eyewitnesses have precedence over
photography... the courts have long understood that photography can be
easily altered to present a false conception to the viewer. Indeed,
this is the basis of Hollywood.

Normal legal procedure here in the U.S. permits photographs and motion >pictures to be used as evidence in courts of law only when a
foundation for their introduction has been established by eyewitness >testimony. For example:

"The principle upon which photographs are most commonly admitted into >evidence is the same as that underlying the admission of illustrative >drawings, maps and diagrams. Under this theory, a photograph is
viewed merely as a graphic portrayal of oral testimony, and becomes >admissible only when a witness has testified that it is a correct and >accurate representation of the relevant facts personally observed by
the witness." McCormick on Evidence, 3rd Edition (1984), Section 214.
That JFK had small entry wounds in the front (throat, and less
certain, right temple) and a LARGE wound, generally expected to be an
exit wound in the back of his head argues strongly for conspiracy.
That believers try to refute this with a single photo shows their
fear.

So too does the fact that believers ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to answer the
simple question of where the larger bullet fragments are seen in the
side autopsy X-ray of JFK... toward the front or back of JFK?
Believers have been TERRIFIED of answering that question - because it >provides physical scientific PROOF of the direction of at least one
bullet striking JFK. And believers know that they can't argue the
physics of that trail of bullet fragments.

Scientific physical evidence that Huckster can only run from...

And surprising no-one, this is exactly what Huckster did...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)