Posts: 25
Threads: 2
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2016
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:[quote=Thomas Neal][quote=Bob Prudhomme][quote=Thomas Neal]
What I believe is irrelevant to the truth.
You may want to rephrase that statement...or in this case I might just agree with you.
What you think determines my response which makes it relevant to me.
Why so defensive, Bob? Don't like the answer you'd have to give?
It's a simple question, yet you duck it by asking a question I've answered for you multiple times.
Why do you expect me to once more answer the same question for you, when you refuse to answer mine?
Posts: 17,303
Threads: 3,464
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 2
Joined: Sep 2008
Thomas Neal Wrote:Magda Hassan Wrote:Hi Neal, it might be of interest to others though. And just to have it on the record to refer to.
The info Bob is requesting was posted by me at a different site, and he has read that document.
But it is not here and not every one reads or participates in the other forums. For the flow of understanding your points and Bob's points it is better to have it all together to refer to.
Thomas Neal Wrote:I do believe it's common knowledge, but since you've asked, when I have the time to find the document I will post it.
Tom
Thanks Tom, much appreciated.
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.
“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
Posts: 875
Threads: 45
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Nov 2011
Thomas Neal Wrote:[quote=Bob Prudhomme][quote=Thomas Neal][quote=Bob Prudhomme]
You may want to rephrase that statement...or in this case I might just agree with you.
What you think determines my response which makes it relevant to me.
Why so defensive, Bob? Don't like the answer you'd have to give?
It's a simple question, yet you duck it by asking a question I've answered for you multiple times.
Why do you expect me to once more answer the same question for you, when you refuse to answer mine?
To be quite honest with you, Tom, this really is the first time I've heard you mention the FBI referring to the so called "blood stain" as a "lead smear", and I am very interested in seeing how the FBI deals with this.
Perhaps I just did not see this in your posts, or I do not recall seeing it. I'm not trying to be coy or defensive with you; I honestly would like to see what you have on this matter.
To answer your question, I don't know if the "nick" was caused by a projectile, or was the result of the FBI removing a sample of the tie for analysis. I have opinions on the matter but, due to insufficient data, I really can't say I actually believe I know anything for certain.
THAT is what we are here to find out.
Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.
Warren Commission testimony of Secret Service Agent Clinton J. Hill, 1964
Posts: 875
Threads: 45
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Nov 2011
Have you found it yet, Tom?
Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.
Warren Commission testimony of Secret Service Agent Clinton J. Hill, 1964
