[Ben Holmes]

(03-30-2017, 08:55 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  If he said that, then he was lying.

The outline for the Warren Commission shows very clearly that the conclusions were there from the beginning, and ABSOLUTELY NO investigation was considered for determining if there had been a conspiracy...

Interestingly, you had absolutely nothing to say to this.
 

(03-31-2017, 03:09 PM)Hollywood Wrote:  

(03-30-2017, 08:55 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  Indeed, the very first bombshell for the Commission - and one quite revealing as far as how they were going to operate, is what they did when they discovered evidence that Oswald was an FBI informant.

The claim that there's nothing "credible" to indicate conspiracy is quite a dishonest statement... since you've NEVER (and will never) give a credible reason why James Chaney wasn't ever asked A SINGLE SOLITARY QUESTION for the Warren Commission - you know that the Commission was INTENTIONALLY dodging any evidence of conspiracy.

And yet MANY witnesses were called and testified  to things contrary to the WC's official conclusion - shots from the bushes, smoke on the GK, people in windows other than the snipr's nest - this belies the Chaney claim.

No - it doesn't. The most CREDIBLE witnesses simply weren't called. It would be silly to ask you to produce a case where a police officer was PHOTOGRAPHED watching the crime occur from less than a dozen feet away, then never asked a single question during the ensuing investigation of that crime.

It would be silly because there's a very good chance Hell will freeze over before such a thing ever happens... with the sole exception of Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.

But rather than try to actually answer my question, you answer a similar, related question that I never asked. I didn't ask you if the Warren Commission took testimony from witnesses who's statements contradicted the Warren Commission's theory.

I asked you to give a credible reason why James Chaney was never even asked a single question for the Warren Commission's investigation.

You didn't answer that question... and indeed, I predict that you won't come back and try...

Another excellent witness that you cannot give a credible reason for the refusal of the Warren Commission to have testify would have been Kennedy's personal physician - the only doctor present at both Parkland and Bethesda, and the one who signed the Death Certificate. But no, once again the Warren Commission didn't want to hear anything from him.
 

(03-31-2017, 03:09 PM)Hollywood Wrote:  Many of the staff hired by the WC saw this as their chance to make a name for themselves if they uncovered the conspiracy - they found nothing and lost their chance at fame - to a creep like Oswald - sorry.

Simply not true.

Indeed, I gave a perfect example above - when the Commission learned of evidence that Oswald was an FBI informant. That would have "made the name" of anyone brave enough to leak such information to the press.