[Ben Holmes]

(08-20-2016, 03:50 PM)Guest Wrote:  

(08-20-2016, 02:57 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  

Quote:"3. Although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Commission to determine just which shot hit Governor Connally, there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet which pierced the President's throat also caused Governor Connally's wounds." (WCR 19)

It is poorly worded, but there is no lie.

Then simply provide a citation to this "persuasive evidence".

But you cannot.

None exists...

Therefore, the Warren Commission was quite clearly lying. The actual testimony is quite different from how the Warren Commission portrayed it. You know it, I know it, and anyone who takes the time to read the Warren Commission testimony knows it.
 

(08-20-2016, 03:50 PM)Guest Wrote:  What they are saying is that it is not possible to say whether or not the bullet that almost certainly passed through both men was the first or second shot fired.

No, what they stated was "...there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet which pierced the President's throat also caused Governor Connally's wounds."

That's a lie.

If it were NOT a lie, then you'd have simply cited this "persuasive evidence". But you cannot... it doesn't exist.

(08-20-2016, 03:50 PM)Guest Wrote:  There is a remote possibility that JFK had a delayed reaction and JC was hit by a seprate bullet - I do not accept that happened - but that is what the WC are leaving open.

This is, of course, what the witnesses testified to... that Connally was hit by a separate bullet. It really doesn't matter what your opinion is...

(08-20-2016, 03:50 PM)Guest Wrote:  I have zero issue with the statement in terms of drawing conclusions and neither should anyone else IMO.

Yet you refuse to simply cite this "persuasive evidence"... which, of course, simply goes to show that you well understand just how weak your case is.