• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

Status
Not open for further replies.
CORed said:
It reminds me of a 9/11 no-planer who liked to refer to the clear image in a video of the plane that hit one of the towers as a "shadow thingy".
Click to expand...

I think the red spot on the BOH photographs is probably a wound of some kind, but not the entry wound. That's what Dr. Boswell said.
 
While CTers aren't at all interested in facts, I'll just add that "Dr Pepper" does not have a period after the Dr, according to their trademark and the AP style guide.

I think that JayUtah mentioned it in one of these threads, but the CT fixation on the ghoulish drawings, films and photos is another weird tic of this genre. There was a guy who I used to report all the time for not hiding these images behind NSFW tags - 6sevens or something like that. Very disturbing.
 
Last edited:
7forever. His particular idiocy (one of them) was to get pictures of the limo windshield as out of focus as possible and then claim it showed a bullet hole. Then he would post pictures of his mom's 1997 Chevy Lumina with a hole in the windshield. They all have their favorite vector into CT religion. When they get tired of standing in the basement of the outhouse with reality taking a daily dump on their head, they go nuclear to get banned.
 
MicahJava said:
I think the red spot on the BOH photographs is probably a wound of some kind, but not the entry wound. That's what Dr. Boswell said.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the CT site you visit to get disinformation failed to pick up on this item in the NYT

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/05/20/us/doctors-affirm-kennedy-autopsy-report.html?pagewanted=all

And four of five other doctors who attended the President in the emergency room of a Dallas hospital said they observed nothing while treating him that contradicts the pathologists' findings. They also criticized another doctor in the emergency room that day, one whose new book asserts a conspiracy to cover up evidence that the President was shot from the front, not the back.
Click to expand...

The lone dissenter was
'J.F.K. Conspiracy of Silence" (Signet, 1992), by Dr. Charles A. Crenshaw, who was a junior member of the medical team that tried to save Kennedy's life at Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963.
Click to expand...

Dr. Boswell had the opportunity to disagree with the findings, but didn't.

"We documented our findings in spades," Dr. Boswell said. "It's all there in the records," which include X-rays from head to toe and 52 photographs.
Click to expand...

The pathologists said the first bullet entered the back of Kennedy's neck and left through the front of his throat. The second bullet entered the back of his head and exploded the right side of it, destroying a major portion of the brain.
Click to expand...

Conclusion, no cover-up, no alteration of the body.
Two bullets, one in the back one in the head, both fired from beind, slightly to the right and above the President.
 
carlitos said:
I think that JayUtah mentioned it in one of these threads, but the CT fixation on the ghoulish drawings, films and photos is another weird tic of this genre.
Click to expand...

Yes, that morbid fascination got a real boost back in the early 90s when Groden and Livingstone's book High Treason became a paperback seller, complete with glossy photos of the autopsy, ghoulishly tagged "stare of death photo" and the like. They were peddling prurience as much as pitching woo.
 
bknight, that New York Times article is just re-reporting an interview the autopsy doctors did with the Journal of the American Medical Association. Link to article. Without explaining the significance of this statement, the article states:

"The fatal wound was blatantly obvious," Humes recalls. "The entrance wound was elliptical, 15 millimeters long and 6 millimeters wide, and located 2.5 centimeters to the right and slightly above the external occipital protuberance. The inside of the skull displayed the characteristic beveled appearance."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
MicahJava said:
bknight, that New York Times article is just re-reporting an interview the autopsy doctors did with the Journal of the American Medical Association. Link to article. Without explaining the significance of this statement, the article states:
Click to expand...

Is the article in error when it states that "And four of five other doctors who attended the President in the emergency room of a Dallas hospital said they observed nothing while treating him that contradicts the pathologists' findings."

Quit stumbling along with your inferences. The article does not indicate Dr. Boswell had any problems with the autopsy at that time. Now he may have changed his story as he grew older and the memory banks became more clouded.
 
MicahJava said:
Really? You have a picture of an entrance wound in the back of Kennedy's skull? Show it to me.
Click to expand...

When it is finally released will your stop your second gun-shot to the head BS? or will your rank continue in the fashion to which we have been accustomed?

BTW I asked many pages ago, do you believe in any more CT's or is this the only one? Why do you believe in such nonsense?
Oh I forgot you are a "truth seeker".
 
bknight said:
Is the article in error when it states that "And four of five other doctors who attended the President in the emergency room of a Dallas hospital said they observed nothing while treating him that contradicts the pathologists' findings."

Quit stumbling along with your inferences. The article does not indicate Dr. Boswell had any problems with the autopsy at that time. Now he may have changed his story as he grew older and the memory banks became more clouded.
Click to expand...

bknight, I'd appreciate it if you would stop referring to your personal theory as "the autopsy". Dr. Boswell has never agreed with your theory. If your personal theory has evidence in the form of a dozen or so experts who think the depressed cowlick fracture on the X-rays is an entry wound, argue that and be proud of it.
 
bknight said:
When it is finally released will your stop your second gun-shot to the head BS? or will your rank continue in the fashion to which we have been accustomed?
Click to expand...

Is that your passive-aggressive way of claiming that the full set of official skull photographs would prove the cowlick entry theory? Because a lot of experts think the skull photographs don't show what you think they show. The three original leading autopsy doctors thought the skull photographs show the occipital-parietal area, not the frontal area. Even if they did show the frontal area, that doesn't mean they show the depressed cowlick fracture.

And have you forgotten how I pointed out that the area of skull with the depressed cowlick fracture would've just naturally separated because of how brittle the area around the original large defect was? And how you couldn't remove the brain without first removing that area of the skull?

BTW I asked many pages ago, do you believe in any more CT's or is this the only one? Why do you believe in such nonsense?
Oh I forgot you are a "truth seeker".
Click to expand...

The three main assassinations of the 60's fascinate me. I also made a wikia for the Oklahoma City Bombing to record my ongoing fact-seeking of the case. Ever hear of Officer Terrance Yeakey? It was reported that the weapon found at his body's location was not his police-issued gun. And I recently talked to one of his family members over Facebook who told me that he owned no personal gun. Strange, huh? Well, It's an ongoing project.

On this forum I've also argued my questions about the foreknowledge of WTC 7's collapse.
 
MicahJava said:
bknight, I'd appreciate it if you would stop referring to your personal theory as "the autopsy". Dr. Boswell has never agreed with your theory. If your personal theory has evidence in the form of a dozen or so experts who think the depressed cowlick fracture on the X-rays is an entry wound, argue that and be proud of it.
Click to expand...

I don't have a "theory" as you do, all I have are the facts that I read. I don't see where Dr. Boswell has disagreed with the autopsy, you keep referring that he did, where are his words, not some interpretation of his words that he disagrees with the autopsy.

Do the pathologists agree with one head shot or more? Link some information not your personal beliefs.
 
Last edited:
MicahJava said:
bknight, I'd appreciate it if you would stop referring to your personal theory as "the autopsy".
Click to expand...

The autopsy is not a theory, personal or otherwise. It is a medical assessment for the cause of death. In this case it is the murder of JFK, and it is comprehensive, it was photographed, and extensively x-rayed, and it stands on its own merits.

The autopsy shows a single bullet entrance wound to the upper back which exited through the throat, and a SINGLE GSW to the back of the head.

The autopsy does not reveal who pulled the trigger or why that person pulled the trigger.

That's where the rest of the investigation comes in.

The entry wound is visible on the Zapruder Film.
 
MicahJava said:
Is that your passive-aggressive way of claiming that the full set of official skull photographs would prove the cowlick entry theory? Because a lot of experts think the skull photographs don't show what you think they show. The three original leading autopsy doctors thought the skull photographs show the occipital-parietal area, not the frontal area. Even if they did show the frontal area, that doesn't mean they show the depressed cowlick fracture.
Click to expand...
I am not an expert in head shot wounds, so I don't "think" anything about them other than more experts agree that they show the entry wound, than experts "think the skull photographs don't show what you think they show", have you got that straight? Not being a doctor, it seems hard for me to believe that anyone looking at a frontal area would be hard pressed to call any wound an entry wound since about a third of the skull is held by skin tissue alone and I believe crumbly was the term that was used.
And have you forgotten how I pointed out that the area of skull with the depressed cowlick fracture would've just naturally separated because of how brittle the area around the original large defect was?
Click to expand...
You talk in circles and it is difficult to find any meaning in your ramblings, you have a tendency to answer questions with questions(as in this post)never stating anything concrete. Is there a subliminal reason for this type behavior?
And how you couldn't remove the brain without first removing that area of the skull?
Click to expand...
Again from what I read, the was wrapped with bandages when the coffin arrived, once they were removed what remained was attached with skin and easily was open for the removal of what was left of the brain. From the NYT article. "Dr. Humes said his team did not need to use a saw to remove the top of the skull, as is usual in autopsies, because the bullet that killed the President had blown out about 5 inches of skull, bone and skin. When Dr. Humes peeled the scalp back, he said, the skull bone "crumbled in my hands from the fracture lines, which went off in all directions." So it seems that what you state is in complete disagreement with what actually happened at the autopsy.

"After examining the inside of the rear of the skull bone and piecing together what they could of the remaining brain, the pathologists said, there was no question where the bullet had come from: rear to front."
Notice a couple of aspects of this statement, singular bullet, not any more, and rear to front.
The three main assassinations of the 60's fascinate me. I also made a wikia for the Oklahoma City Bombing to record my ongoing fact-seeking of the case. Ever hear of Officer Terrance Yeakey? It was reported that the weapon found at his body's location was not his police-issued gun. And I recently talked to one of his family members over Facebook who told me that he owned no personal gun. Strange, huh? Well, It's an ongoing project.

On this forum I've also argued my questions about the foreknowledge of WTC 7's collapse.
Click to expand...
One CT in this thread start another if you wish, but you have answered my question, thank you.
 
MicahJava said:
You know the ineptitude is getting bad when you wish Hank was back.
Click to expand...

You are increasingly resorting to insult, which is not permitted by the forum rules. You refer to our "ineptitude." May I ask, then, what your particular qualifications are for the medical and forensic analyses you attempt here? Educational level? Degrees received? Subjects studied? Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
bknight said:
I am not an expert in head shot wounds, so I don't "think" anything about them other than more experts agree that they show the entry wound, than experts "think the skull photographs don't show what you think they show", have you got that straight? Not being a doctor, it seems hard for me to believe that anyone looking at a frontal area would be hard pressed to call any wound an entry wound since about a third of the skull is held by skin tissue alone and I believe crumbly was the term that was used.
Click to expand...

Do you think the area circled in red is the entry wound while the area circled in blue is the exit wound?

5vDC60O.jpg


Since this photograph was taken after the brain had already been removed, that would mean they somehow took out his entire brain through a skull cavity not much bigger than this:

XGu6qby.jpg


How did they do that?

You talk in circles and it is difficult to find any meaning in your ramblings, you have a tendency to answer questions with questions(as in this post)never stating anything concrete. Is there a subliminal reason for this type behavior?
Click to expand...

If you can't understand simple concepts being explained to you, that's your problem.

Again from what I read, the was wrapped with bandages when the coffin arrived, once they were removed what remained was attached with skin and easily was open for the removal of what was left of the brain. From the NYT article. "Dr. Humes said his team did not need to use a saw to remove the top of the skull, as is usual in autopsies, because the bullet that killed the President had blown out about 5 inches of skull, bone and skin. When Dr. Humes peeled the scalp back, he said, the skull bone "crumbled in my hands from the fracture lines, which went off in all directions." So it seems that what you state is in complete disagreement with what actually happened at the autopsy.
Click to expand...

So are you saying they removed his whole brain out of a 5-inch hole? No. Read closely to that passage. The areas of the skull around the original large head wound were so brittle, they easily separated into fragments. You also have to have a big enough skull cavity to facilitate the removal of the brain. So how does Dr. Finck walk in late after the brain had already been removed and still examine the entry hole that he always said was still sitting there preserved in the intact skull? The depressed cowlick fracture on the X-rays was in the parietal bone right beside the large head wound, while the original EOP location would give enough space between the small and large wounds to stay unmolested.

"After examining the inside of the rear of the skull bone and piecing together what they could of the remaining brain, the pathologists said, there was no question where the bullet had come from: rear to front."
Notice a couple of aspects of this statement, singular bullet, not any more, and rear to front.
Click to expand...

According to the official story, the brain was not properly sectioned. Kennedy's personal physician Dr. Burkley expressed many times that he either believed or suspected that there were two head shots. The mystery, according to him, may have been solved if the brain had been properly sectioned.

Would you care to explain to the jury why a brain is sectioned in a case of gunshot wounds to the head?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom