The following warnings occurred:
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 499 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 499 errorHandler->error
/global.php 459 my_date
/showthread.php 24 require_once
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 499 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 499 errorHandler->error
/global.php 460 my_date
/showthread.php 24 require_once
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 394 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 394 errorHandler->error
/global.php 466 my_date
/showthread.php 24 require_once
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 395 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 395 errorHandler->error
/global.php 466 my_date
/showthread.php 24 require_once
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 396 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 396 errorHandler->error
/global.php 466 my_date
/showthread.php 24 require_once
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 474 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 474 errorHandler->error
/global.php 466 my_date
/showthread.php 24 require_once
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 499 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 499 errorHandler->error
/global.php 818 my_date
/showthread.php 24 require_once
Warning [2] count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable - Line: 864 - File: showthread.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/showthread.php 864 errorHandler->error
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 394 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 394 errorHandler->error
/inc/functions_post.php 163 my_date
/showthread.php 873 build_postbit
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 395 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 395 errorHandler->error
/inc/functions_post.php 163 my_date
/showthread.php 873 build_postbit
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 396 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 396 errorHandler->error
/inc/functions_post.php 163 my_date
/showthread.php 873 build_postbit
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 474 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 474 errorHandler->error
/inc/functions_post.php 163 my_date
/showthread.php 873 build_postbit
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 499 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/functions.php 499 errorHandler->error
/inc/functions_post.php 365 my_date
/showthread.php 873 build_postbit



Hello There, Guest!
View New Posts   View Today's Posts
Henry Sienzant Questions The Frontal Bullet...

  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average


07-08-2016, 03:17 PM #1
Ben Holmes
Administrator
*******
Posts: 955 Threads:276 Joined: May 2016 Reputation: 35 Stance Critic

Henry Sienzant Questions The Frontal Bullet...
Henry Sienzant Wrote:1) what happened to the bullet that struck JFK in the throat? It wasn't found in his body (full body x-rays were done in Bethesda) and it wasn't the bullet found in Parkland, so where'd it go?

Simple - Drs' Humes & Boswell took it out in the pre-autopsy autopsy conducted between 1840 to 2000. You are, of course, free to tell us what was being done between those times... (As of yet, no believer has EVER addressed what was happening to the body between these times... why is that?)

Henry Sienzant Wrote:2) Why didn't it exit out the back of JFK's neck? You supposedly have a hunting round that's designed to kill animals by mushrooming, and leaving the animal with a massive wound, but instead JFK supposedly suffers, in your theory, only a small entry wound and nothing else to write home about ... and then the bullet vanishes. You're got atypical hunting round #1 here.

Again you're speculating. You have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA WHATSOEVER based on evidence that it's a "hunting round" - yet you assert it. You have no idea at all what the weapon was, or the bullet velocity - yet you're willing to argue the trajectory of that bullet.

Henry Sienzant Wrote:3) That still leaves the second bullet without an explanation. Since one bullet struck JFK and is unaccounted for, the second bullet can't be linked to any wound involved in the assassination unless you're going to argue this bullet caused one or more (or all) of Connally's wounds, and did so without mushrooming. This gets you closer to a solution, because you can then argue that's why this bullet was found near or on Connally's stretcher in that hallway one floor removed from the operating rooms. But conspiracy theorists uniformly reject that notion that the bullet came from Connally's stretcher, so I don't know if you want to go against the conspiracy theorist gameplan.

There's no evidence that the bullet found at Parkland had anything at all to do with the assassination. In a hospital that virtually daily admitted shooting victims - it wouldn't be particularly amazing to find a bullet on any particular day. It's an entirely reasonable supposition that the FBI realized it would be easier to swap in a bullet that could be provably shown to have been fired from CE399 - than to explain a coincidence that many people might feel was evidence for a conspiracy..

Henry Sienzant Wrote:4) If we reject that, then I think we're left with the theory that this extra bullet was planted in Parkland by a conspirator who dropped it on the stretcher on the wrong floor, nowhere near the President or Governor, or it was a bullet that fell out of another shooting victim on 11/22/63. There's no evidence of another shooting victim being admitted to the hospital on 11/22/63 near the time of the assassination, and you still be left with the atypical hunting round issue to explain - where the bullet somehow falls out of this other victim and still has a pointed tip somehow.

Again with the "planted" argument!!!

Time and time again, critics have schooled believers on this topic - THERE IS NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER THAT A BULLET WAS PLANTED. There is, however; evidence for a swapped bullet.

But it's certainly true that before much of this evidence came out, critics presumed a planted bullet... critics, however; are willing to follow the evidence - believers seem stuck in 1964.

Henry again presumes that there was no shooting victim admitted on 11/22/63 - yet cannot present the name of ANYONE other than JFK & Connally who were admitted on 11/22/63. He is, in other words, merely speculating as to the evidence he needs.

Desperate to avoid any possibility of a bullet swap...

Henry Sienzant Wrote:5) If we go back to point 3 (the bullet caused one or more of Connally's wounds), now you've got additional issues, like dumb-dumb conspirators hoping to frame a supposed lone-nut shooting only from behind with military surplus ammo (designed NOT to mushroom), but shooting JFK from both the front and back with hunting rounds. If the goal is to kill the President and frame Oswald, why would conspirators have a plan to shoot JFK with the wrong ammo, and why would they plan to shoot him from two directions? Doesn't that plan make it harder to frame Oswald?

No critic has EVER made the argument that the bullet found at Parkland was necessarily involved in the wounding of Gov. Connally to the best of my knowledge. This is merely a strawman argument.

And a logical fallacy such as this coming from Henry Sienzant is not really surprising... for someone who likes to point out logical fallacies, he uses a great number of them himself.

Henry argues that in shooting the President from multiple directions, the conspirators make it difficult to frame a single patsy.

Yet clearly, that's simply untrue. Newspaper reports from 11/22 talk about a wound in the temple - the earliest reports from Parkland speak of a bullet striking JFK FROM THE FRONT... yet these PROVABLE incidents didn't stop the Warren Commission from pinning the crime on Oswald... so why would Henry argue against something that can be proven to be wrong?

Henry Sienzant Wrote:6) You ignored this point the last time I asked it, so I'll remind you of this question: You separately conjectured a poison dart (flechette) struck JFK in the throat. So which of these is your actual theory, the bullet, the dart, or is it your theory that both struck JFK?

This is a rather silly conjecture on the part of some critics... with absolutely ZERO evidence behind it. But unlike believers, who rarely if ever contradict other believers - critics are more than happy to correct other critics if they are speculating without evidence.

The EVIDENCE shows that (as shown elsewhere in this forum) JFK was struck from the front by an assassin hidden in the 'grassy knoll' on the other side of Elm. The trajectory can be shown by simply drawing a line connecting JFK's throat wound with the hole in the windshield.






Messages In This Thread


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)