Defend the Warren Commission Report Findings? The 45 questions

[David G. Healy]

Defend the Warren Commission Report Findings? The 45 questions

Question #19 Take 2

Back by popular demand - the 45 Questions that terrify those who try to defend

the Warren Commission Report. In the past, there have been only two

semi-serious attempts to answer them, one by John McAdams, and one by 'Bud' (the

xxxxx listed below) - Both responses were basically denials of the facts in most

of the 'answers'.

*reposted with authors permission -- author: Ben Holmes...*

But first, an important note:

**********************************************************************

Important Note for Lurkers - there are many trolls on this forum (alt.conspiracy.jfk) who's

only purpose is to obstruct debate, deny the evidence, and attempt to change message

threads from discussing the evidence, to personal insults and attacks.

These trolls include (but are not limited to):

**22 trolls who post regularly to alt.conspiracy.jfk** names removed -dgh

Please beware when seeing their responses, and note that they will simply

deny the facts I mention, demand citations that I've provided before, or

simply run with insults. These trolls are only good material for the kill

files.

source: alt.conspiracy.jfk

**********************************************************************

I've decided to repost this one - since no-one has even tried to answer it. If

those who believe the Warren Commission Report want to defend it - they *MUST*

answer these questions... running away from them, or claiming that they are

"dead on arrival" or have "already been answered" simply won't do the trick.

If there are any honest LNT'ers out there - I won't hold you to trying to

justify McAdams lies about this - just answer the first question below.

19. Why have photographs and X-rays disappeared out of the inventory? Only the

government had control of them... John McAdams has denied that any photo or

X-ray have disappeared, but to do so; he must call the eyewitnesses liars - and

beg ordinary people to suspend common sense. The prosectors described only

*TWO* injuries inside the body - one to the trachea, which they were prevented

from removing, and one to the tip of the lung - WHICH THEY STATE THAT THEY

PHOTOGRAPHED. A photograph that has never been seen. (Interestingly, this also

happened in the RFK case, missing photographs... although the controlling agency

in this case was the LAPD)

This is reposted just for amusement's sake. It's funny to note that the very

photos that would *PROVE* the SBT beyond any doubt are missing. Of course,

these same photos would far more likely prove that there could *NOT* have been

an SBT - for they almost certainly proved that there was *NO* transit of the

body by the bullet that struck the back, or the bullet that struck the neck.

If these photos had supported the official theory - they certainly wouldn't have

gone "missing" - and LNT'ers know this. Hence, the complete lack of any

response to this bit of factual history.

For no non-conspiratorial explanation that would be believable to the average

person can be concocted - and the converse is readily understood.

eof