Defend the Warren Commission Report Findings? The 45 questions

[David G. Healy]

Defend the Warren Commission Report Findings? The 45 questions

Question #27

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.

27. Why does Altgens show Chaney in a position that he's *never* seen in the

extant Z-film?

Simple denial seems to be the most frequent response from the trolls & LNT'er

camp - yet with over 40 years to do so, no LNT'er has ever used a telephoto

lense from Altgen's reported position to duplicate the photo with Chaney in the

same position as Hargis (on the other side of the followup limo)

Nor has any xxxxx or LNT'er explained the shadow from Chaney's motorcycle that

is seen. So many of the photos/X-rays in this case simply don't match up - and

there appears to be deafening silence from the "photos/videos/X-rays are

authentic" crowd.

eof

[Paul Rigby]

27. Why does Altgens show Chaney in a position that he's *never* seen in the

extant Z-film?

David,

A crucial question that goes to the heart of the entire debate concerning alteration of the assassination films.

Altgens' photo is in essence genuine: It was circulated before alteration was undertaken; and was a cause of the alteration.

Chaney had to be removed from the Z film because his account of going ahead of the limo, as confirmed by witnesses in the car he drove to, lent overwhelming force to the claims of eyewitnesses that the limo stopped during the assassination.

And how would the Secret Service and its apologists explain that one?

Paul

PS A straight comparison of the Altgens' photo concerned with the alleged Z-frame match - is it 245 or 255, I can never remember? - would be of assistance, particularly to those unfamiliar with the subject. If my technical competence with computers exceeded the act of typing, I would of course attempt it myself.