:Actually, I said: "If you have any evidence to prove this assertion..." Proof requires conclusive evidence, and so once again my position hasn't changed. Your comments about the requirement of any evidence are therefore a straw-man argument and irrelevant. As for the TRC's evidence, it is maddeningly vague, and much of it is second-hand reporting, such as Graca Machel claiming about a plot discussed in Malawi to kill Samora Machel, when she could not have attended said meeting, and Abdul Minty reporting on what SAAF members said, without there being direct testimony from whichever SAAF members it was. And neither Graca Machel nor Minty could be said to be objective relayers of information in this matter.  
 :That said, I have never said outright that SA did not kill Machel, I have merely stated from the beginning that there is absolutely no conclusive evidence to prove that it did, and therefore to claim outright that he was murdered by the Apartheid regime is an inaccurate statement that is unsupported to what available evidence exists. So why not add a sentence to the article which states that it is widely suspected that SA killed Machel, but that there is no conclusive evidence? — ''''