Oh, I'm going to regret this . . . .
There are a couple of debates on youtube with Mark Lane
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=l0mSVjzKE0s
I don't care. Mark Lane is not the one presenting evidence here, and if he were, I wouldn't care what he'd said elsewhere. All I care about is what is presented here and now.
The primary tactic that is used by the WC members and supporters is personal attacks on Mark Lane. They avoid any debate on the 'evidence' presented by Lane.
It just gets laughable and embarrassing for the few supporters there are for the WC report.
Well, when you're too ignorant to know the legal definition of "hearsay," how equipped are you to evaluate any evidence at all?
When incongruities are found within the WC report, its termed nitpicking.
When deception and lies are uncovered it generates personal attacks.
Deception and lies? How about the lie that Jim Garrison convinced a jury that a conspiracy killed JFK? How about the incongruity that it's said, "Well, he convinced them that it was
a conspiracy, just not the one he presented, so that means the one he presented is worth listening to"? No. You are only interested in incongruities, deception, and lies from one side. You won't even present a clear story of what happened to
be examined.
That's all you got!
Nitpicking and personal attacks.
Oh, and the testimony of literally thousands of experts in all sorts of relevant fields. Answer this, please. When ballistics experts are conspiracy theorists, it's always "Well, the ballistics works, so the evidence of a conspiracy must be in another field." Or doctors who actually looked at the autopsy reports. Or photographic experts. Any expert says it must be some other field which proves a conspiracy. Why is that?
I know it to be a conspiracy because of the mountain of evidence showing the assassination of JFK to be a coup at the highest levels topped with the absurdity, lies and deceptions that can be found within the WC report.
No, what you have is supposition. You have not presented
anything which meets any reasonable burden of proof.
Ballistics!!! - two words for you 'magic bullet'
You believe in the magic bullet, logic won't help you, it's trapped you!
Crackpot actually applies to believers in the 'magic bullet'.
Wrong. You have been told,
repeatedly, that the exact same shot has been duplicated. On film. By independent tests that have nothing to do with the US government. At least one of the tests I know of was carried out
in Australia. And yet every time someone tells you that, you just ignore it. Was it a lucky shot? Well, yes, in a lot of ways. But lucky shots happen, and the head shot was hardly lucky at all. Just what Oswald's Marine colleagues knew him to be capable of.
Forensics!!! - Police paraffin test shows Oswald did not fire a rifle on November 22 - HSCA performed neutron activation analysis of the paraffin casts and could not find any residue of gun powder on the Oswald's side of the casts. There is no evidence he fired a gun on November 22. But lets not let facts cloud your reasoning.
Well, no evidence except multiple eyewitnesses to the Tippit shooting, of course. Oh, and at least one eyewitness to the Kennedy shooting. And the fact that he was arrested while in possession of the gun that killed Tippit. And let's not leave aside the fact that the tests were unreliable and known to be unreliable even in 1963.
Also lets just pretend the police did not find a Mauser 7.65 rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD, it is impossible to explain away.
Except for the explanation that they didn't, and that someone misidentified what kind of rifle it was. All the photographic evidence shows that it was a Mannlicher-Carcanno. But yeah, aside from that, it's impossible to explain away.
Or that palm prints magically appeared on the Carcano.
What's magical about it? Explain, in your own words, exactly what's surprising.
Or the ammunition manufactured in 1947 supposedly fired by Oswad was tested and found to be mainly unusable.
Wrong.
Or the fact that the world greatest markman in 1963 said Oswald's assassination feat was impossible. As well as other expert marksman. Not even considering the first shot was almost through the tree blocking the view from the TSBD.
Yeah, that tree blocks it
now. Because trees grow. It didn't in 1963. And, again, the shot has
been duplicated. Repeatedly. Check out
Unsolved History on The Discovery Channel, where they duplicate it several times. And give me a citation. Who determines who the greatest marksman in the world is?
Or the fact that the carcano advertised for mail order was not the same as the one found on the 6th floor.
So you've never gotten something that wasn't quite what you ordered? Also, cite?
Autopsy - Back wound never probed for bullet path. Existence of Neck wound unknown at autopsy, which was an entrance wound per Parkland doctors.
The Parkland doctors weren't forensics experts. They were very good at being emergency room doctors; it wasn't their fault that Kennedy was beyond saving. But it is well established that emergency room doctors are lousy at knowing if a wound is an entry wound or an exit wound.
Back wound was at 3rd thoracic vertebra, yet artist (who was not allowed to see autopsy photos) produced WC exhibit showing back wound now to be a 'high back wound' that was in reality high on the neck and almost a foot higher so that the 'magic bullet' theory could be contrived to work.
Well, except that you're wrong in almost every particular on that. Do you read
anything which isn't conspiracist sites and books?
Head wound, hit in the temple from the front, blowing out the back right side of JFK's head, the only dissenting view is from Humes (who destroyed evidence, his notes and the first draft of the autopsy) and his 2 cronies. Witnesses at the scene and at Parkand and Bethesda adamantly deny Humes position of the head wound.
Witnesses at the scene? You mean Dealey Plaza? Where a vast majority of witnesses agreed that the shots were form behind and to the right? Honestly, can't you even be a little internally consistent?
Humes was not even allowed to do the autopsy without a general telling him what he could do and what he was not allowed to do. Besides the FACT he wasn't a qualified forensic pathologist.
"In charge was James J. Humes, M.D., at that time Commander, Medical Corps, United States Navy, and Director of Laboratories, Naval Medical School. He was certified in 1955 by the American Board of Pathology in Anatomic and Clinical Pathology." Which is totally the same thing.
FBI sends a warning of potential assassination attempt to all offices a few days prior to Dallas, well we know about the FBI by now.
Yes. They were dramatically understaffed to keep track of all the crazies in Texas and weren't really the ones in charge of Presidential security anyway. Did you have another point? Maybe one you could make with evidence instead of innuendo?
Despite cancelling the Miami motorcade because of credible evidence of an assassination attempt, the SS does little to nothing to protect the President in Dallas, despite treason leaflets and a full page ad against JFK. An army security support group is told to stand down down as well as extra law enforcement officers.
Not true, and besides, the full-page ad against JFK wasn't actually the same thing as credible evidence of an assassination attempt. Have you looked around lately? And yet Obama goes out to places where he's theoretically in danger all the time, because a President has to do that. Especially when he's trying to sway public opinion toward him for an upcoming election campaign.
The SS agent in charge calls off agents that would normally ride on the rear of JFK's limo
Demonstrably not true by watching the Zapruder film.
They move JFK's limo to the front the motorcade behind the lead car.
The motorcycle escorts are told to stay back, away from the limo
During the shooting Greer slows or stops the limo.
The SS agents do notning but watch JFK get assassinated.
Seriously, have you ever looked at the Zapruder film at all? And what do you suggest they do, given how little reaction time they had?
There was no apparent reason for the Dallas Police to to be looking for Oswald, yet that is exactly the direction they immediately proceed.
I already gave you reasons; you rejected them, because they don't fit your chosen narrative.
What was it 30 cop cars surround a theatre because of a person sneaking in to the movies.
Oh, and shooting a police officer. And meeting the description of the person believed to have killed the President and possibly fatally wounded the governor. But yeah, that's the same thing.
JFK body was forcibly and illegally removed from the hospital by the SS.
At the insistence of Jackie Kennedy, who wouldn't go back to Washington without him. What she did that day was wrong but understandable if you know anything about human nature.
The limo, which was evidence in the murder was taken by the SS and sanitized before it could be examined for any evidence.
Wrong.
Dallas Police allowed Ruby access to kill Oswald. Despite warnings to the FBI (yea why bother) and Police that Oswald would be killed.
Look into what actually happened that day. It's hardly as simple as you're claiming.
Ruby claims that he was forced to kill Oswald and stated that there was a conspiracy from the highest levels, but he is ignored.
Cite?
You got nothin but WC lies and deceit to defend.
Well, and every qualified expert who's ever looked into the subject. Some of your misinformation is so easy to prove wrong that I would be embarrassed, if I were you. But you aren't going to be, because you don't think it's true unless it supports your chosen narrative.
Which, of course, you haven't supplied. Who were the shooters? Where were they? How did they produce the wounds in both Kennedy and Connally?
