Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting
- Thread starter bknight
- Start date
- Status
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
HSienzant
Philosopher
Yes, you do a lot of tap-dancing around the points, but never respond to them. Your post above is a perfect illustration of that.
The sad thing is, a month from now, you'll still be pretending Burkley thought there were two shots to the head, despite the fact that you can't support that with any evidence whatsoever. And despite the fact that Burkley said the exact opposite several times and despite the fact that you were kind enough to quote those denials to us.
You wrote: "Dr. Burkley, Kennedy's personal physician who witnessed the autopsy, said several times that he either suspected or believed that more than one bullet entered the head."
Burkley said: "...but as far as the cause of death the immediate cause was unquestionably the bullet which shattered the brain and the calvariurm." [not 'the bullets'].
Burkley said: "Had the Warren Commission deemed to call me, I would have stated why I retained the brain and the possibility of two bullets having wounded President John F. Kennedy's brain would have been eliminated." [If Burkley had testified, he could have eliminated two shots to the head].
Burkley said: "DR. BURKLEY thinks there was one but concedes of the possibility of there having been two." [Burkley's opinion was one shot struck the head].
And no matter how many times you insist your interpretation is true, or how many gifs you post to ignore the points, your claim will still be false.
Hank
Last edited:
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
Posting gifs is a sign of how badly you're losing.
It's a real difficult dance when you do it in two threads simultaneously.
As bad a spanking as the CTist in question is taking I surprised they can where pants, let alone tap dance.
MicahJava
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 3,039
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
Yes, it does. And we do. And your truck of fail continues.
Axxman300
Philosopher
To recap:
MJ has doubled down on his second bullet to the head theory using only cherry-picked quotes from unqualified sources, sited reference material he has not seen, alleged that source material is missing or stolen using the "everyone knows" crutch.
What MJ has not done is lay out what he thinks actually happened in Dealey Plaza, and who or what organization could do things like alter autopsy evidence that nobody will see for another century.
He also has to explain why Kennedy was killed, why this shadow group needed him dead. Plus, why this shadow group that can make autopsy evidence vanish, intimidate witnesses, get the entire world press to go along with the story, and somehow maintain pure secrecy didn't simply poison JFK instead.
Why kill a president who had yet to pass a single bill from his agenda, how is that guy a threat?
Then the big question: How does this super-efficient shadow group decide the best plan to kill JFK in Dealey Plaza using X-number of shooters, and then frame a guy whose only weapon is a surplus Italian rifle with a bullet caliber that is proprietary to that gun, but not leave enough definitive evidence to prove his guilt beyond all doubt? (You know, a diary, a manifesto, maybe have one of the hit team bring a 8mm camera and just happen to film Oswald shooting, then give that film to the feds).
Cosmic Yak
Philosopher
What on earth is quote mining with the full context?
As I remember, you showed your total lack of understanding of that term in another thread.
Do please explain how the full context of what Dr. Burkley said, in which he says several times that there was only one bulet, shows how he thought there were two.
HSienzant
Philosopher
No quote mining by me. You yourself posted those quotes. Those quotes don't come close to establishing your claim that "Dr. Burkley, Kennedy's personal physician who witnessed the autopsy, said several times that he either suspected or believed that more than one bullet entered the head."
Three separate times, in the quotes you kindly provided, and contrary to your claim above, Burkley referenced one bullet to the head, or specifically excluded more than one bullet to the head.
Can you count to three?
ONE (1): Burkley said: "...but as far as the cause of death the immediate cause was unquestionably the bullet which shattered the brain and the calvarium." [not 'the bullets'].
TWO (2): Burkley said: "DR. BURKLEY thinks there was one but concedes of the possibility of there having been two." [Burkley's opinion was one shot struck the head].
THREE (3): Burkley said: "Had the Warren Commission deemed to call me, I would have stated why I retained the brain and the possibility of two bullets having wounded President John F. Kennedy's brain would have been eliminated." [If Burkley had testified, he could have eliminated two shots to the head].
So stop the nonsense about Burkley thinking otherwise.
You leave a trail of nonsense in your wake.
From arguing that the autopsy doctors got it wrong about the large exit wound:
From being ignorant of the ballistics proving Oswald's weapon was used during the assassination:
You argued the Rydberg drawings were accurate then turned around to argue they inaccurately placed the back wound.
You will say anything to further a conspiracy agenda regardless of the truth of the matter.
Hank
Last edited:
Axxman300
Philosopher
24 days until the final records are released by the National Archives.
ps:
Today we once again see what one man with a rifle (or 10) can do.
I understand why CTists prefer to live in a fantasy world as they do where everything is under the control of "They/Them". The real word is a scary place on days like today.
ps:
Today we once again see what one man with a rifle (or 10) can do.
I understand why CTists prefer to live in a fantasy world as they do where everything is under the control of "They/Them". The real word is a scary place on days like today.
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
Using CTist first report logic, it was firecrackers.
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
To quote your nemesis, Hoo Boy.
MicahJava
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 3,039
I've said this before: If you're smart enough to distort quotes like that, you're smart enough to know what Dr. Burkley was really always saying in plain English: 1. He suspected or believed that there was more than one gunshot to Kennedy's head. 2. He noted that the brain was not properly sectioned. 3. He said that if the brain had been properly sectioned, the mystery of one or more gunshots to the head could be resolved.
If you want to suggest a way that a bullet could've entered near the EOP and exited the top-right side of the head, be my guest.
If you insist that the official fragments had to be a match to the rifle in evidence, then that does not discount a conspiracy. If it was not planted, one could say the fragments are legit and still successfully argue conspiracy. The fact that particles of human skin was identified on one of the fragments is alone evidence that this projectile could have struck the top of the head tangentially.
At that time, it was not widely known how the Warren Commission-endorsed EOP wound causes some huge problems for the official story.
Doesn't it bother you that by your agenda, the autopsy doctors were pushing evidence for conspiracy? This is regardless of whether or not they claimed to believe the head wounds were caused by a single shot from behind. The fact that their public position was a single shot from behind can not be used as evidence that the entry wound was really higher than they always insisted.
MicahJava
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 3,039
Using CTist first report logic, the autopsy report accurately describes the entry wound, and the autopsy face sheet accurately illustrates the location of the entry wound. The fact that every autopsy doctor, and six autopsy participants who claimed to see an entry wound that day also corroborated the lower EOP location helps. The fact that none of the official evidence can exclude this location for the entry wound also helps.
Axxman300
Philosopher
I'm a writer, I'm familiar with English. Burkley always felt there were two shooters, not that two bullets struck the skull. In the quotes you've posted he never says he thinks two bullets struck the head when given the chance.
More to point, the man was not qualified to make a pathological statement any more than the Parklamd ER docs were. That's why they have pathologists. Burkley's opinion holds as much water as an orderly. This was his first and only GSW.
.
A 6.5x52mm, 160 grain round traveling at 2,300 feet per second did the job.
If the bullets were fired from the Carcano, and the Carcano belonged to Oswald, it slams the door on conspiracy (at least as far as a 2nd gunman goes)
No, it would point to proof of the paranormal, if the fragments didn't arrive in the car via the bullet fired from the 6th floor then what we're dealing with is either demons or poltergeists.
But through forensic examination we know that the skin on the fragment came from the LONE round as it exited the skull.
Translation: I hadn't been sucked into a hack CT yet.
No, because they weren't. Just because you fail to understand something doesn't make it real.
No, it's kind of the crux of the central truth of the assassination. Two 6.5x52mm bullets strike JFK, one in the back exiting his neck, and the other in the head.
.
All that matters is what they signed to on the final Autopsy. The Autopsy was just one piece of a wide investigation that concluded that Oswald fired the two shots that killed JFK. Wherever the bullet actually struck, higher or lower, does not rule out the 6.5x52mm round that we know killed Kennedy as the damage shown by the autopsy and Zapruder Film are almost exclusive to the Carcano round alone, certainly well within the known parameters of the round's tendencies upon impact.
Before you can rule a second bullet in you have to rule the 6.5x52mm out, and you can't.
Last edited:
Axxman300
Philosopher
You have yet to reconcile your pet theory with the position of the head at the time of impact, and how a lower entry point definitively rules out a shot from the 6th floor, because every other human who have seen this footage sees JFK's head bent forward exposing the external occipital protuberance. How do you not see this?
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2010
- Messages
- 8,607
Why is it, that none of your "problems" vanish, if we stop listening to your interpretation of "the EOP" wound?
Why is it, that is we take the whole of the WC evidence, and place the wound where it appears in the autopsy photos (regardless of if you think it is a splotch or not), all those "problems" make sense and fit the larger breadth of evidence?
bknight
Master Poster
...
All that matters is what they signed to on the final Autopsy. The Autopsy was just one piece of a wide investigation that concluded that Oswald fired the two shots that killed JFK. Wherever the bullet actually struck, higher or lower, does not rule out the 6.5x52mm round that we know killed Kennedy as the damage shown by the autopsy and Zapruder Film are almost exclusive to the Carcano round alone, certainly well within the known parameters of the round's tendencies upon impact.
Before you can rule a second bullet in you have to rule the 6.5x52mm out, and you can't.
I have asked MJ, on several occasions why a difference really matters as well as why he believes a difference indicates a conspiracy.
MicahJava
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2016
- Messages
- 3,039
Because it is almost certainly impossible for a shot to have entered the EOP and exited the top-right side of the head while corroborating the official evidence. The official X-rays show no fragments on the back of the brain. The official brain photographs show a virtually intact cerebellum. The trajectory at z312 is a sharp 80 degree angle upwards turn.
To be compatible with the official evidence, a shot entering the EOP could be the first of more than one head shot. And then it would probably have to travel downwards to exit the throat because the x-rays show no whole bullet. Cyril Wecht identified a possible tiny bullet fragment in the upper neck area, but no whole bullet unless you want to listen to Jerrol Custer's testimony of a missing x-ray showing fragments in the middle neck area. Besides that possibility, the only other options are either high-tech ammunition that leaves no large particles of a bullet after penetration, or some kind of removal of a bullet lodged in the base of the head before the X-rays were taken. There is that FBI memo from the early time of the autopsy mentioning a "bullet lodged behind the President's ear".
Last edited:
- Status