JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Allan Fritzke on January 01, 2024, 07:14:26 AM
Title: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Allan Fritzke on January 01, 2024, 07:14:26 AM
Did any of you watch the documentary movie "JFK what the doctors saw"? It is really a game changer for anyone who believes in the SBT (magic bullet) and that LHO acted alone. The doctors at the Parkland Hospital who first examined Kennedy discussed what they saw recently. It was noted the autopsy was not done by a forensic pathologist but conducted by 2 military physicians - no specialists! Who do they answer to? To the contrary, the Parkland doctors were surgeon specialists who were physical witnesses and in fact expert witnesses who treated lots of gunshot wounds and accidents. Their information should be considered more than reliable.
One of the major issues brought out in the documentary was the time difference between the common military casket and the empty fancy coffin getting to the autopsy location. With that, it was also noted that the brain fell out of the skull on the Bethesda autopsy table - severed from the brain stem. The brain appeared to have been removed beforehand perhaps to tamper with the evidence. Aside note, brain has gone missing and never found since. The 2 military doctors covered this up by asking whether or not surgery was done at Parkland Hospital! Did they phone or consult Parklands? The documentary assumed that these doctors had enough time before 8:00 PM to make the LNer narrative stick. They never even examined the throat wound and assumed it was a tracheotomy only. They were very thorough it would appear!!! Was this a common street thug or the POTUS?
In summary, the doctors at Parkland agreed on several things:
1) They quickly agreed and determined when JFK arrived that the bullet in the neck just above the shirt, came from the front. 2) The bullet that killed JFK knocked a lot of his brain matter onto the trunk coming from the RHS of his brain. Jacqueline climbed out, retrieved a large part and then gave it to a doctor at the hospital after climbing back in. She was not fleeing the car. They said she was very calm and composed and exchanged her rings with JFK after he died and accepted his death as a consequence. 3) The doctors noted a large hole blown out at the back of JFK's skull which was absent at the autopsy scene. They looked at the classic autopsy photo of someone holding the hair back in place over the hole with forceps. That wasn't the way they saw it. 4) The doctors at Parkland Hospital have no reason to want to have a conspiracy theory, peg the murder on any one person, try to cover it up, hide or conceal what they saw from the public. They did their best to save their Democrat President's life as they never expected to see this happen on their watch. Did they have skin in the game? No!
These doctors in my opinion were very honest. My thought is the first bullet struck JFK in the neck and lodged in the upholstery behind him and to his right. There had to be at least 3 shots when you consider how much damage John Connally took. Chest, hand, hip. Certainly not one magic bullet that pierced through many different spots, hardly marked and found with a small dent inside the car. Everything in the autopsy was a sham.
I still believe the neck shot came from one of the two mystery men across from the sign, driver's side. Who are they? For some reason, One person's hands goes behind his back as the car passes which is weird. Maybe swatting a mosquito? Scenario would likely be an umbrella man attracting everyone's attention from the other direction - a magician's trick while the real play of hand is on the other side! Kennedy does look back towards Jacqueline for help or was it an instinctive reaction to where the bullet approached from?
If doctors at Parkland are correct, the Zapruder film of JFK is heavily edited. There is a reason why his hair is always shown on the back of his head in the Zapruder frames. Doctors claimed there was a wide open hole at the Parkland hospital on the table. They are very sure of that. If there was a hole there, it would be glaringly evidence against LHO, LNer theory and should be visible on the Zapruder frames. Are the doctors at Parkland wrong or was there a need to close this case quickly and then kill LHO so there were no loose ends? I don't know how many people were involved but the cover-up and shooting involved many parties. Defector LHO story is just too good! Returns from Russia and at the right place and at the right time! John Wicks and a spy novel played out in reality!
I always thought JFK sensed something amiss and raised his hand in a defensive stance. Just after that hand raise, Jacqueline climbs to the trunk and retrieves part of his brain. The SS on passenger side ducks to the inside during these frames - maybe instinct and lets hope coincidence. Light aberration from shattered glass! Certainly aberration on windshield from the sun at the very least. And just after that, a postal man rolling in the grass! Yep its a CT's dream!
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Marjan Rynkiewicz on January 01, 2024, 08:39:58 AM
There are so many pieces of the jigsaw puzzle. Some are faux pieces & form a faux pix. Some are true pieces & form the true pix. It took me only about 12 months to assemble the true pix. I must have a good BS meter. I used a number of tricks. Its best to work backwards. U form a hypothesis based on your favorite ( hopefully true) pieces, & then u look for more (true) pieces that fit. In the end this method will be quickest. Good luck.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Marjan Rynkiewicz on January 01, 2024, 08:46:57 AM
Ok lets look at the piece that says that there is/was a big hole in the back of the head. At Parklands this hole would have been laying flat against the gurney sheet. The hole would have been invizible. At Bethesda this hole would have had the head support rest pushing up into the hole & lifting the brain. So, there was no hole in the back of the head. So, this piece is a faux piece & can be thrown away. So, now we are getting somewhere.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: John Mytton on January 01, 2024, 09:02:04 AM
Did any of you watch the documentary movie "JFK what the doctors saw"? It is really a game changer for anyone who believes in the SBT (magic bullet) and that LHO acted alone. The doctors at the Parkland Hospital who first examined Kennedy discussed what they saw recently. It was noted the autopsy was not done by a forensic pathologist but conducted by 2 military physicians - no specialists! Who do they answer to? To the contrary, the Parkland doctors were surgeon specialists who were physical witnesses and in fact expert witnesses who treated lots of gunshot wounds and accidents. Their information should be considered more than reliable.
One of the major issues brought out in the documentary was the time difference between the common military casket and the empty fancy coffin getting to the autopsy location. With that, it was also noted that the brain fell out of the skull on the Bethesda autopsy table - severed from the brain stem. The brain appeared to have been removed beforehand perhaps to tamper with the evidence. Aside note, brain has gone missing and never found since. The 2 military doctors covered this up by asking whether or not surgery was done at Parkland Hospital! Did they phone or consult Parklands? The documentary assumed that these doctors had enough time before 8:00 PM to make the LNer narrative stick. They never even examined the throat wound and assumed it was a tracheotomy only. They were very thorough it would appear!!! Was this a common street thug or the POTUS?
In summary, the doctors at Parkland agreed on several things:
1) They quickly agreed and determined when JFK arrived that the bullet in the neck just above the shirt, came from the front. 2) The bullet that killed JFK knocked a lot of his brain matter onto the trunk coming from the RHS of his brain. Jacqueline climbed out, retrieved a large part and then gave it to a doctor at the hospital after climbing back in. She was not fleeing the car. They said she was very calm and composed and exchanged her rings with JFK after he died and accepted his death as a consequence. 3) The doctors noted a large hole blown out at the back of JFK's skull which was absent at the autopsy scene. They looked at the classic autopsy photo of someone holding the hair back in place over the hole with forceps. That wasn't the way they saw it. 4) The doctors at Parkland Hospital have no reason to want to have a conspiracy theory, peg the murder on any one person, try to cover it up, hide or conceal what they saw from the public. They did their best to save their Democrat President's life as they never expected to see this happen on their watch. Did they have skin in the game? No!
These doctors in my opinion were very honest. My thought is the first bullet struck JFK in the neck and lodged in the upholstery behind him and to his right. There had to be at least 3 shots when you consider how much damage John Connally took. Chest, hand, hip. Certainly not one magic bullet that pierced through many different spots, hardly marked and found with a small dent inside the car. Everything in the autopsy was a sham.
I still believe the neck shot came from one of the two mystery men across from the sign, driver's side. Who are they? For some reason, One person's hands goes behind his back as the car passes which is weird. Maybe swatting a mosquito? Scenario would likely be an umbrella man attracting everyone's attention from the other direction - a magician's trick while the real play of hand is on the other side! Kennedy does look back towards Jacqueline for help or was it an instinctive reaction to where the bullet approached from?
If doctors at Parkland are correct, the Zapruder film of JFK is heavily edited. There is a reason why his hair is always shown on the back of his head in the Zapruder frames. Doctors claimed there was a wide open hole at the Parkland hospital on the table. They are very sure of that. If there was a hole there, it would be glaringly evidence against LHO, LNer theory and should be visible on the Zapruder frames. Are the doctors at Parkland wrong or was there a need to close this case quickly and then kill LHO so there were no loose ends? I don't know how many people were involved but the cover-up and shooting involved many parties. Defector LHO story is just too good! Returns from Russia and at the right place and at the right time! John Wicks and a spy novel played out in reality!
I always thought JFK sensed something amiss and raised his hand in a defensive stance. Just after that hand raise, Jacqueline climbs to the trunk and retrieves part of his brain. The SS on passenger side ducks to the inside during these frames - maybe instinct and lets hope coincidence. Light aberration from shattered glass! Certainly aberration on windshield from the sun at the very least. And just after that, a postal man rolling in the grass! Yep its a CT's dream!
Quote
These doctors in my opinion were very honest.
Do you think McClelland was "honest"? Was the wound behind the ear, above the ear, where? If McClelland's drawing is what he saw then how the heck does he look down into Kennedy's wound while standing above him but if what he saw was the actual authenticated wound then his testimony under oath makes much more sense.
If doctors at Parkland are correct, the Zapruder film of JFK is heavily edited.
And if the thoroughly authenticated Zapruder Film, Nix Film, Muchmore Film, Autopsy photos and X-rays are correct, then what does that say about some Parkland Doctors?
JohnM
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Allan Fritzke on January 01, 2024, 11:42:32 AM
Well we can make all sorts of inferences. Not sure John where your Mcclelland quote comes from or if it was done years later. Here are some excerpts which Mcclelland made under oath in WC book 6. I do think he was as honest as could be when his career is on the line and could be ended by the powers that be. Nobody wants to lose their jobs -right or wrong so people tend to be mindful of the rules. He describes well the massive amount of brain tissue missing and the size of the throat wound as described by Mr. Perry. It appeared to be less than 1/4 inch in diameter and about the same size as the one the autopsy found in the back. My conjecture .22 or .25 calibre and that is the magic bullet!
Quote
Mr. SPECTER. What did you observe as to President Kennedy’s condition at that time? Dr. MCCLELLAND. Well, on initially coming into the room and inspecting him from a distance of only 2 or 3 feet as I put on a pair of surgical gloves, it was obvious that he had sustained a probably mortal head injury, and that his face was extremely swollen and suffused with blood appeared cyanotic--- Mr. SPECTER “Cyanotic’‘-may I interrupt-just what do you mean by that in lay terms? Dr. MCCLELLAND. This mean bluish discoloration, bluish-black discoloration of the tissue. The eyes were somewhat protuberant, which is usually seen after massive head injuries denoting increased intracranial pressure, and it seemed that he perhaps was not making, at the time at least, spontaneous respiratory movements, but was receiving artificial respiration from a machine, an anesthesia machine. Mr. SPECTER. Who was operating that machine? Dr. MCCLELLAND. The machine-there was a changeover, just as I came in, one of the doctors in the room, I don’t recall which one, had been operating what we call an intermittent positive pressure breathing machine. Mr. SPECTER. Had that machine been utilized prior to your arrival? Dr. MCCLELLAND. It was in use as I arrived, yes, and about the same time I arrived -- this would be one other doctor who came in the room that I forgot about --Dr. Jenkins, M. T. Jenkins, professor of anesthesiology, came into the room with a larger anesthesia machine, which is a better type machine with which to maintain control of respiration, and this was then attached to the tube in the President’s tracheotomy; anyway, respiratory movements were being made for him with these two machines, which were in the process of being changed when I came in. Then, as I took my post to help with the tracheotomy, I was standing at the end of the stretcher on which the President was lying, immediately at his head, for purposes of holding a tracheotom, or a retractory in the neck line. Mr. SPECTER. What did you observe, if anything, as to the status of the neck wound when you first arrived? Dr. MCCLELLAND. The neck wound, when I first arrived, was at this time converted into a tracheotomy incision. The skin incision had been made by Dr. Perry, and he told me-although I did not see that-that he had made the incision through a very small, perhaps less than one quarter inch in diameter wound in the neck. Mr. SPECTER. Do you recall whether he described it any more precisely than that? Dr. MCCLELLAND. He did not at that time. Mr. SPECTER. Has he ever described it any more precisely for you? Dr. MCCLELLAND. He has since that time. Mr. SPECTER. And what description has he given of it since that time? Dr. MCCLELLAND. As well as I can recall, the description that he gave was essentially as I have just described, that it was a very small injury, with clear cut, although somewhat irregular margins of less than a quarter inch in diameter, with minimal tissue damage surrounding it on the skin. Mr. SPECTER. Sow, was there anything left for you to observe of that bullet wound, or had the incision obliterated it? Dr. MCCLELLAND. The incision had obliterated it, essentially, the skin portion, that is. Mr. SPECTER. Before proceeding to describe what you did in connection with the tracheostomy, will you more fully describe your observation with clear cut, although somewhat irregular margins of less than a quarter inch in diameter, with minimal tissue damage surrounding it on the skin. Mr. SPECTER. So, was there anything left for you to observe of that bullet wound, or had the incision obliterated it? Dr. MCCLELLAND. The incision had obliterated it, essentially, the skin portion, that is. Mr. SPECTER. Before proceeding to describe what you did in connection with the tracheostomy, will you more fully describe your observation with respect to the head wound? Dr. MCCLELLAND. As I took the position at the head of the table that I have already described to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral half, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out. There was a large amount of bleeding which was occurring mainly from the large venous channels in the skull which had been blasted open.
During their assessment initially they had adopted a SBT. The bullet came in at the neck and went out at the back of the head. After hearing autopsy information, they changed their minds with the additional information. He is purely honest about his conjecture.
Quote
Mr. SPECTER. What were your initial impressions? Dr. MCCLELLAND. The initial impression that we had was that perhaps the wound in the neck, the anterior part of the neck. was an entrance wound and that it had perhaps taken a trajectory off the anterior vertebral body and again into the skull itself, exiting out the back, to produce the massive injury in the head. However, this required some straining of the imagination to imagine that this would happen, and it was much easier to explain the apparent trajectory by means of two bullets, which we later found out apparently had been fired, than by just one then, on which basis we were originally taking to explain it. Mr. SPECTER. Through the use of the pronoun “we” in your last answer, to whom do you mean by “we”? Dr. MCCLELLAND. Essentially all of the doctors that have previously been mentioned here...
Further in his testimony, he accidentally mentioned his thoughts about the tracheotomy actually being an entrance hole. So he had to rephrase to please his interrogator! Again seems to me he meant no harm. He was trying to tell the truth and yet someone seemingly was using pointed interrogation techniques to extract what was required to keep the solution pointing to only one gunman.
Quote
Mr. SPECTER. Now, had you actually observed the wound prior to the time the tracheotomy was performed on that neck wound? Dr. MCCLELLAND. No ; my knowledge of the entrance wound, as I stated, in my former deposition, was merely from what Dr. Perry told me when I entered the room and began putting on a pair of surgical gloves to assist in the tracheotomy. Dr. Perry looked up briefly and said that they had made an incision and there in the process of making an incision in the neck, which extended through the middle of the wound in question in the front of the neck. Mr. SPECTER. Now, you have just characterized it in that last answer as an entrance wound. Dr. MCCLELLASD. Well. perhaps I shouldn’t say the wound anyway, not the entrance wound -- that might be a slip of the tongue. Mr. SPECTER. Do you have a firm opinion at this time as to whether it is an entrance wound or exit wound or whatever? Dr. MCCLELLAND. Of course, my opinion now would be colored by everything that I’ve heard about it and seen since, but I’ll say this, if I mere simply looking at the wound again and had seen the wound in its unchanged state, and which I did not, and of course, as I say, it had already been opened up by the tracheotomy incision when I saw the wound - but if I saw the wound in its state in which Dr. Perry described it to me, I would probably initially think this were an entrance wound knowing nothing about the circumstances as I did at the time, but I really couldn’t say -- that’s the whole point. This would merely be a calculated guess, and that’s all, not knowing anything more than just seeing the wound itself. Mr. SPECTER. But did you, in fact, see the wound prior to the time the incision was made? Dr. MCCLELLAND. No. Mr. SPECTER. So that any preliminary thought you had even, would be based upon what you had been told by Dr. Perry? Dr. MCCLELLAND. That’s right.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: John Mytton on January 01, 2024, 04:48:26 PM
Not sure John where your Mcclelland quote comes from or if it was done years later.
MR. GUNN: Dr. McClelland, where were you standing, first of all? DR. McCLELLAND: I was standing at the head of -- Dr. Perry, as he said, I arrived and I walked to the left side of the cart and walked around to the head and was standing at the right of Dr. Jenkins. And I got an Army/Navy, which is a particular name you apply to a commonly used retractor, and leaned over President's head to help retract while Dr. Baxter and Dr. Perry were finishing up the tracheostomy. So I was standing where I was looking down intently in the wound and really had nothing to do but that because I -- it didn't take much attention to pull the retractor, And so I could clearly see what the wound looked like over a good period of time. https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/arrbpark.htm
JohnM
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on January 01, 2024, 07:25:31 PM
I'll defer to the experts - even the internet variety - but I don't see how McClelland could see any cerebellum from the head wound he sketched out below. The wound is far too high to damage/expose cerebellum. I think this is also mostly true to various degrees with the other doctors on this issue, i.e., wound they described was too high to expose cerebellum.
McClelland also testified - as did Dr. Perry - that he saw the neck/throat wound AFTER an incision had been performed on it. He couldn't have seen the small entry wound he also sketched out below. It had been altered by Perry's tracheotomy surgery. McClelland came across as a honest man but I think his accounts about the wounds were/are basically worthless (and I won't even start to mention what he said earlier about the locations of the head wound).
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Allan Fritzke on January 01, 2024, 07:43:23 PM
Thanks for clarification. So the original quote in your first post was (paraphrased from 1964) in the 1998 inquiry and testimony and was "inferenced" as a BS argument from McClelland's statements. Nothing of that quote in the image posted even remotely matches his 1964 testimony. Clearly misleading terms and meant as misinformation and rabbit hole material to diffuse and deflect his original testimony and add confusion with the statement he made 34 years later.
What I quoted from was the original Warren Commission report where McClelland is clearly assisting with the tracheostomy and using a retractor instrument with that neck wound. That was released within 11 months and should be considered fresh firsthand expert testimony from a surgeon. In 1998 statement, he added "with the knowledge gained after viewing of the Zapruder film" , it DID NOT change his opinion of the size of the wound being an exit and not an entrance hole and that it is still consistent as an exit wound. Head, body goes back, arms go up in a defensive posture and explodes with the frontal assault. Brain matter goes back onto trunk. Skull blows out, not in. There is no reason to dispute his original observations made even before he saw the Zapruder film. He makes a very good observation initially of the outward thrust of the skull bone in his description without ever seeing the Zapruder film. Mere observation. I assume he was not allowed to see the film in 1964. That was government confidential secret material.
Quote
Dr. MCCLELLAND. As I took the position at the head of the table that I have already described to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral half, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out. There was a large amount of bleeding which was occurring mainly from the large venous channels in the skull which had been blasted open.
Why would someone want to discredit McClelland's observations, cherry pick and or enter in false statements like done with the image posted? Is that not a normal reaction when you want to obfuscate evidence? Let the facts speak for themselves I say.
Someone is clearly trying to apply "retraction" to assume that he was somehow involved with the large gaping head wound at the right exterior of the skull. His discussion was of the neck wound.
During 1998 inquiry, there was also launched an argument that there was a spinal cord/brainstem injury which caused the presidents head to fly back and arch and even included the neck wound several seconds earlier as the reason. It was involuntary and similar to what happens when you "pith a frog or any animal" at the base of the head. They avoid discussing of the arms going up in a defensive stance - all involuntary (opisthotonos). Again, information introduced in order to justify what was seen in the Zapruder film and only has one conclusion - a single gunman acting alone and no head thrust back! Keep it simple stupid - don't question the argument of multiple gunmen. "We have already built the case to make the evidence fit a lone nut and so it goes. There was only one, acted alone, a nutcase and we have compiled all evidence to say that and only that. Shut up and accept that as fact. We have
Quote
6 ways from Sunday of getting back at you.
if you question our authority."
Why was this necessary? Anything besides that argument would point fingers at the non-elected institutions being somehow responsible in a framing operation. In essence this is protecting themselves from exposition. Not possible! Questioning is an existential threat to democracy and how the people perceive government operations occur in a Republic. In a real democracy, the people make decisions to go to war, who they vote for and how their tax dollars get spent. Thankfully this is how it works. (I hope you sense my intended sarcasm!)
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: John Mytton on January 01, 2024, 08:33:45 PM
Thanks for clarification. So the original quote in your first post was (paraphrased from 1964) in the 1998 inquiry and testimony and was "inferenced" as a BS argument from McClelland's statements. Nothing of that quote in the image posted even remotely matches his 1964 testimony. Clearly misleading terms and meant as misinformation and rabbit hole material to diffuse and deflect his original testimony and add confusion with the statement he made 34 years later.
What I quoted from was the original Warren Commission report where McClelland is clearly assisting with the tracheostomy and using a retractor instrument with that neck wound. That was released within 11 months and should be considered fresh firsthand expert testimony from a surgeon. In 1998 statement, he added "with the knowledge gained after viewing of the Zapruder film" , it DID NOT change his opinion of the size of the wound being an exit and not an entrance hole and that it is still consistent as an exit wound. Head, body goes back, arms go up in a defensive posture and explodes with the frontal assault. Brain matter goes back onto trunk. Skull blows out, not in. There is no reason to dispute his original observations made even before he saw the Zapruder film. He makes a very good observation initially of the outward thrust of the skull bone in his description without ever seeing the Zapruder film. Mere observation. I assume he was not allowed to see the film in 1964. That was government confidential secret material.
Why would someone want to discredit McClelland's observations, cherry pick and or enter in false statements like done with the image posted? Is that not a normal reaction when you want to obfuscate evidence? Let the facts speak for themselves I say.
Someone is clearly trying to apply "retraction" to assume that he was somehow involved with the large gaping head wound at the right exterior of the skull. His discussion was of the neck wound.
During 1998 inquiry, there was also launched an argument that there was a spinal cord/brainstem injury which caused the presidents head to fly back and arch and even included the neck wound several seconds earlier as the reason. It was involuntary and similar to what happens when you "pith a frog or any animal" at the base of the head. They avoid discussing of the arms going up in a defensive stance - all involuntary (opisthotonos). Again, information introduced in order to justify what was seen in the Zapruder film and only has one conclusion - a single gunman acting alone and no head thrust back! Keep it simple stupid - don't question the argument of multiple gunmen. "We have already built the case to make the evidence fit a lone nut and so it goes. There was only one, acted alone, a nutcase and we have compiled all evidence to say that and only that. Shut up and accept that as fact. We have if you question our authority."
Why was this necessary? Anything besides that argument would point fingers at the non-elected institutions being somehow responsible in a framing operation. In essence this is protecting themselves from exposition. Not possible! Questioning is an existential threat to democracy and how the people perceive government operations occur in a Republic. In a real democracy, the people make decisions to go to war, who they vote for and how their tax dollars get spent. Thankfully this is how it works. (I hope you sense my intended sarcasm!)
What the heck are you babbling about, I didn't paraphrase, cherry pick or falsely state a single word, I simply quoted McClelland verbatim, the fact that your eyewitness in your opinion is inconsistent and unreliable is your problem.
JohnM
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Allan Fritzke on January 03, 2024, 01:49:41 AM
Sorry John. I did not intend to burst your bubble or "babble" about you! I was making an objective observation on the graphics within the composite image that was embedded in your post. How often images can be put together, a choice quote and the word "BS" all combined with a randomly assorted set of images to form an opinion. This then can be used to mislead or sway public opinion. It contains just one chosen picture of JFK's head? The rest are added for flavor. Whoever put it together certainly would not have used an initial statement Surgeon McClelland offered in 1964 in the WC report if the goal wasn't to discredit him and call him a fraud. He doesn't have a lot of skin in the game or does he! But then again, who does? To me, he presented an honest, nonpolitical statement and tried to voice it.
I apologize as I did not to intend to evoke negative feelings or criticism against you. As one can see, one picture is like a thousand words. In my opinion, McClelland's original observation made within the WC report has more weight than words, pictures and diagrams added or introduced 20 or even 50 years later. If we look at how many witnesses changed statements over the course of years or altered their opinions, it is disheartening and yet it is reality as memories fade. A good example is interviews of Nellie Connally who eventually in interviews saved her husband by closing off the sucking wound in her husband's chest so he could breathe. Moorman and Hill were certainly good for rabbit holes and trails as well and no more reliable witnesses as time passed.
McClelland's observations in the original WC report published within a year were prima facie and about as reliable and expert as you could get at the time without further evidence. His observations were made of the POTUS and was done in a matter of 30 minutes and was from the point of view of trying to do everything he could to save this man's life. Doctors are trained quickly to observe, assess and certainly do everything they can quickly to achieve that. He never changed his opinion and this first impression lasted for his entire life more than 50 years later! He did admit that the neck entrance hole was incorrectly assumed to lead to the blowout hole in the skull. He admitted that he and his team of doctors did not know about the hole between the shoulder blade and neck region at the back. To me that is honesty and comes from a man of integrity who can admit when he is wrong. He never suggested any hypothesis or misleading evidence during his questioning at that time either.
In contrast, someone like Jacqueline Kennedy was never interviewed or even asked what her opinion was for the WC report. It likely would not have fit their narrative either. She certainly could have told you where the shot came from. McClelland certainly felt the pressure from his interrogator and you could sense that in his responses during the questioning in the WC report. Read it and see for yourself. Are you investigating and seeking answers or are you making sure questions lead to the answers you want and required for closure? Look at his testimony from page 30 and on and you can feel the sense of where the questioning is leading in his statements! The man questioning was a lawyer, McClelland was an expert and surgeon and was being coerced - not a mere family physician either! I sense that tone and I am sure you can too, when you read it!
The lawyers were not questioning to seek information but rather questioning to make sure their shot from behind narrative was being supported. You can even see how they discredited his testimony to ask if he turned the body over to look for other wounds as if he was doing an autopsy first and not trying to save his life. Certainly tried to minimize him. The brain was blown out he said and he could see that from the top side! All in the hairline or back! Where did the bullet end up or fragments go to?
"...the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half." It didn't seem you had to flip a body over to see that wound! McClelland gave a very descriptive picture of what he saw at the time. It was very fresh in his memory and his opinion of exit or entrance never changed 50 years later. Large wounds are exit wounds, small wounds are entrance wounds. That was his professional educated opinion and he stuck with it. If you watch the documentary movie, you will also see that someone from within the autopsy group in the room at Bethseda had suggested that there was another entrance hole coinciding to the large hole at the back that was overlooked and went unreported. Of course once the brain disappeared and the autopsy done and released by military doctors, the fix was pretty well in. Forensic pathologists and experts these military doctors in charge were not. They didn't even trace the bullet from the back shoulder area to the throat. They took x-rays and found no bullet and so assumed the path leading to the throat went straight out and through Connally's chest, wrist and thigh. Were they perplexed when they couldn't push a rod through to the throat from his back? Forensic experts they were!
I suggest watching the movie and, if you didn't watch it yet, maybe it isn't necessary as your opinion has already been formed and won't be changed anyway! One thing I did learn was that Jacqueline climbed onto the back to pick up a large piece of brain material and then retreated back to the car. I always thought she was fleeing the scene to protect herself. A bullet from behind would have pushed all that brain matter onto Connally and the front seat in a forward manner. Instead, it went back and some even onto the motorcycle policeman at the rear driver's side......Jacqueline had brain matter on her dress as well! She gave the retrieved part to one of the doctors. Which way was the wind blowing?!
Oh well! We all have our opinions of shot origin and whether it involved one lone nut or multiple shooters (front, back or both) which is the big question to answer!
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: John Mytton on January 03, 2024, 09:11:02 AM
Sorry John. I did not intend to burst your bubble or "babble" about you! I was making an objective observation on the graphics within the composite image that was embedded in your post. How often images can be put together, a choice quote and the word "BS" all combined with a randomly assorted set of images to form an opinion. This then can be used to mislead or sway public opinion. It contains just one chosen picture of JFK's head? The rest are added for flavor. Whoever put it together certainly would not have used an initial statement Surgeon McClelland offered in 1964 in the WC report if the goal wasn't to discredit him and call him a fraud. He doesn't have a lot of skin in the game or does he! But then again, who does? To me, he presented an honest, nonpolitical statement and tried to voice it.
I apologize as I did not to intend to evoke negative feelings or criticism against you. As one can see, one picture is like a thousand words. In my opinion, McClelland's original observation made within the WC report has more weight than words, pictures and diagrams added or introduced 20 or even 50 years later. If we look at how many witnesses changed statements over the course of years or altered their opinions, it is disheartening and yet it is reality as memories fade. A good example is interviews of Nellie Connally who eventually in interviews saved her husband by closing off the sucking wound in her husband's chest so he could breathe. Moorman and Hill were certainly good for rabbit holes and trails as well and no more reliable witnesses as time passed.
McClelland's observations in the original WC report published within a year were prima facie and about as reliable and expert as you could get at the time without further evidence. His observations were made of the POTUS and was done in a matter of 30 minutes and was from the point of view of trying to do everything he could to save this man's life. Doctors are trained quickly to observe, assess and certainly do everything they can quickly to achieve that. He never changed his opinion and this first impression lasted for his entire life more than 50 years later! He did admit that the neck entrance hole was incorrectly assumed to lead to the blowout hole in the skull. He admitted that he and his team of doctors did not know about the hole between the shoulder blade and neck region at the back. To me that is honesty and comes from a man of integrity who can admit when he is wrong. He never suggested any hypothesis or misleading evidence during his questioning at that time either.
In contrast, someone like Jacqueline Kennedy was never interviewed or even asked what her opinion was for the WC report. It likely would not have fit their narrative either. She certainly could have told you where the shot came from. McClelland certainly felt the pressure from his interrogator and you could sense that in his responses during the questioning in the WC report. Read it and see for yourself. Are you investigating and seeking answers or are you making sure questions lead to the answers you want and required for closure? Look at his testimony from page 30 and on and you can feel the sense of where the questioning is leading in his statements! The man questioning was a lawyer, McClelland was an expert and surgeon and was being coerced - not a mere family physician either! I sense that tone and I am sure you can too, when you read it!
The lawyers were not questioning to seek information but rather questioning to make sure their shot from behind narrative was being supported. You can even see how they discredited his testimony to ask if he turned the body over to look for other wounds as if he was doing an autopsy first and not trying to save his life. Certainly tried to minimize him. The brain was blown out he said and he could see that from the top side! All in the hairline or back! Where did the bullet end up or fragments go to?
"...the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half." It didn't seem you had to flip a body over to see that wound! McClelland gave a very descriptive picture of what he saw at the time. It was very fresh in his memory and his opinion of exit or entrance never changed 50 years later. Large wounds are exit wounds, small wounds are entrance wounds. That was his professional educated opinion and he stuck with it. If you watch the documentary movie, you will also see that someone from within the autopsy group in the room at Bethseda had suggested that there was another entrance hole coinciding to the large hole at the back that was overlooked and went unreported. Of course once the brain disappeared and the autopsy done and released by military doctors, the fix was pretty well in. Forensic pathologists and experts these military doctors in charge were not. They didn't even trace the bullet from the back shoulder area to the throat. They took x-rays and found no bullet and so assumed the path leading to the throat went straight out and through Connally's chest, wrist and thigh. Were they perplexed when they couldn't push a rod through to the throat from his back? Forensic experts they were!
I suggest watching the movie and, if you didn't watch it yet, maybe it isn't necessary as your opinion has already been formed and won't be changed anyway! One thing I did learn was that Jacqueline climbed onto the back to pick up a large piece of brain material and then retreated back to the car. I always thought she was fleeing the scene to protect herself. A bullet from behind would have pushed all that brain matter onto Connally and the front seat in a forward manner. Instead, it went back and some even onto the motorcycle policeman at the rear driver's side......Jacqueline had brain matter on her dress as well! She gave the retrieved part to one of the doctors. Which way was the wind blowing?!
Oh well! We all have our opinions of shot origin and whether it involved one lone nut or multiple shooters (front, back or both) which is the big question to answer!
Hi Allan, I believe the head wound only happened 1 way, no eyewitnesses on either side said there was more than 1 exit wound and the evidence of film and photographs prove that the initial Autopsy Report was a fairly accurate representation of what happened. The Autopsy was conducted with a cleaned up body and took hours whereas the Parkland Doctors were working with a messy blood soaked body for mere minutes.
You said "As one can see, one picture is like a thousand words.", so let's see where that takes us.
There can be no doubt that Kennedy was struck in the head from behind which accounts for an entrance wound on the back and an exit wound over the ear.
The first ordinary unbiased civilians from Dealey Plaza to be interviewed within an hour or two, just reported what they saw and they all perfectly describe what's seen in the Zapruder Film.
Some of the more important Autopsy photos were taken in stereo pairs and these stereoscopic photos can now be recombined with the power of computers using technology only dreamt of at the time and thus ensures that these photos are genuine.
(https://i.postimg.cc/vZy7skNV/BOH-JFK.gif)
Another consideration that is vital, is after a close examination of the back of head eyewitnesses, how many describe the same neat hole next to the ear as seen in McClelland's drawing? And be honest, because even McClelland himself, as seen in my BS collage above, has trouble pointing to the same spot. This was an event that these people will remember till the day they die, so why the inconsistency?
(https://i.postimg.cc/GmjFhKWS/bohwitnesses.gif)
You mentioned Jackie reaching back onto the trunk, but a close examination reveals nothing on the trunk and Jackie doesn't grab anything.
(https://i.postimg.cc/7LsSS6Y3/jackieontrunk.gif)
So in closing, are the above photos and film footage worth a thousand words, or will you stick to only some of the eyewitnesses who can't even seem to recall a precise consistent location.
JohnM
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Tom Scully on January 05, 2024, 08:02:21 AM
Hi Allan, I believe the head wound only happened 1 way, no eyewitnesses on either side said there was more than 1 exit wound and the evidence of film and photographs prove that the initial Autopsy Report was a fairly accurate representation of what happened. The Autopsy was conducted with a cleaned up body and took hours whereas the Parkland Doctors were working with a messy blood soaked body for mere minutes.
You said "As one can see, one picture is like a thousand words.", so let's see where that takes us.
There can be no doubt that Kennedy was struck in the head from behind which accounts for an entrance wound on the back and an exit wound over the ear.
The first ordinary unbiased civilians from Dealey Plaza to be interviewed within an hour or two, just reported what they saw and they all perfectly describe what's seen in the Zapruder Film.
Some of the more important Autopsy photos were taken in stereo pairs and these stereoscopic photos can now be recombined with the power of computers using technology only dreamt of at the time and thus ensures that these photos are genuine.
(https://i.postimg.cc/vZy7skNV/BOH-JFK.gif)
Another consideration that is vital, is after a close examination of the back of head eyewitnesses, how many describe the same neat hole next to the ear as seen in McClelland's drawing? And be honest, because even McClelland himself, as seen in my BS collage above, has trouble pointing to the same spot. This was an event that these people will remember till the day they die, so why the inconsistency?
(https://i.postimg.cc/GmjFhKWS/bohwitnesses.gif)
You mentioned Jackie reaching back onto the trunk, but a close examination reveals nothing on the trunk and Jackie doesn't grab anything.
(https://i.postimg.cc/7LsSS6Y3/jackieontrunk.gif)
So in closing, are the above photos and film footage worth a thousand words, or will you stick to only some of the eyewitnesses who can't even seem to recall a precise consistent location.
JohnM
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/agent-who-jumped-on-jfks-limo-recounts-fateful-moments/ By Scott Pelley Updated on: October 26, 2017
"...SCOTT PELLEY: What did you see?
CLINT HILL:
Brain matter, blood, bone fragments all come out of the wound … Then Mrs. Kennedy came up on the trunk. She was trying to grab some of that material and pull it back with her. … I got a hold of her and I put her in the backseat. … And when I did that, his body fell to its left into her lap. His face-- his head was in her lap. The right side of his face was up. I could see his eyes were fixed. I could see an area through the skull that there was no brain matter in that area at all. So I assumed it was a fatal wound. I turned and gave a thumbs-down to the follow-up car crew. Wanted to make sure they knew. And then I screamed at the driver to get us to a hospital.
SCOTT PELLEY: Thumbs down meant what?
CLINT HILL:
That it was-- very grave situation. I assumed it was fatal and that's what I really meant.
SCOTT PELLEY: Did you attempt to speak to the president?
CLINT HILL: No, I didn't try to talk to him at all. And Mrs. Kennedy-- she only said a couple things when I was there. She said, "Oh, I have his brains in my hand." And, "Oh Jack, oh Jack, what have they done? I love you, Jack." That's all I heard her say. There was nothing else said in the car at all..."
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: John Mytton on January 09, 2024, 10:30:24 PM
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/agent-who-jumped-on-jfks-limo-recounts-fateful-moments/ By Scott Pelley Updated on: October 26, 2017
"...SCOTT PELLEY: What did you see?
CLINT HILL:
Brain matter, blood, bone fragments all come out of the wound … Then Mrs. Kennedy came up on the trunk. She was trying to grab some of that material and pull it back with her. … I got a hold of her and I put her in the backseat. … And when I did that, his body fell to its left into her lap. His face-- his head was in her lap. The right side of his face was up. I could see his eyes were fixed. I could see an area through the skull that there was no brain matter in that area at all. So I assumed it was a fatal wound. I turned and gave a thumbs-down to the follow-up car crew. Wanted to make sure they knew. And then I screamed at the driver to get us to a hospital.
SCOTT PELLEY: Thumbs down meant what?
CLINT HILL:
That it was-- very grave situation. I assumed it was fatal and that's what I really meant.
SCOTT PELLEY: Did you attempt to speak to the president?
CLINT HILL: No, I didn't try to talk to him at all. And Mrs. Kennedy-- she only said a couple things when I was there. She said, "Oh, I have his brains in my hand." And, "Oh Jack, oh Jack, what have they done? I love you, Jack." That's all I heard her say. There was nothing else said in the car at all..."
Thanks Tom, I have no doubt that there the resulting spray deposited a fine coating on to the trunk of the Limo but there wasn't anything of any any size that can be seen in Zapruder and I also have no doubt that bits of brain were falling out of Kennedy all the way to Parkland and later this continued falling of matter from an open wound is what the Parkland doctors saw underneath Kennedy in Emergency and this is what Jackie held in her hand as she says she was trying to hold the top of Jack's head down.
The inside of Kennedy's Limo was covered with bits of Brain.
I'll defer to the experts - even the internet variety - but I don't see how McClelland could see any cerebellum from the head wound he sketched out below. The wound is far too high to damage/expose cerebellum. I think this is also mostly true to various degrees with the other doctors on this issue, i.e., wound they described was too high to expose cerebellum.
McClelland also testified - as did Dr. Perry - that he saw the neck/throat wound AFTER an incision had been performed on it. He couldn't have seen the small entry wound he also sketched out below. It had been altered by Perry's tracheotomy surgery. McClelland came across as a honest man but I think his accounts about the wounds were/are basically worthless (and I won't even start to mention what he said earlier about the locations of the head wound).
I was looking at McClleland's diagram (2016) and I certainly could see where he was in good company with the analysis by Dr. Michael Chesser, a neurologist who attended the 50th anniversary conference of the Warren Commission in 2014. He became interested and actually went and looked at the x-rays and had an interesting story to tell. He may have conferred or McClleland saw his work? He said there were artifacts on the x-rays which may have included a procedure called "double exposure" in order to obscure the wound at the back of the head which appears lighter. An interesting discussion to read. https://assassinationofjfk.net/a-review-of-the-jfk-cranial-x-rays-and-photographs/ (https://assassinationofjfk.net/a-review-of-the-jfk-cranial-x-rays-and-photographs/)
Certainly if you watch the testimony of the Parkland Hospital Doctors which has now been released in this 2023 documentary, you can see the neurologist Dr. Michael Chesser's investigative work supporting their argument. The Parkland doctors discussed what they saw at length in 2013. In those interviews, all of them said there was a hole in the back of the head without a doubt. Obviously they also made a comment that someone was holding the scalp in place as is evident in the autopsy pictures by John. You don't find any picture without the fingers present. They said the scalp was tore away and left a gaping wound through the parietal bone. Their opinion was that the autopsy was at odds to what they saw and it looked like a cover up to prove an LNer was responsible for the entire event. They felt the cover up was obvious in their opinions. They also mentioned that no one ever solicited any of their opinions on the autopsy report at the Warren Commission hearings.
(https://i.postimg.cc/vZy7skNV/BOH-JFK.gif)
(https://postimg.cc/SXpS48qg)
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Allan Fritzke on January 11, 2024, 04:06:35 AM
Thanks Tom, I have no doubt that there the resulting spray deposited a fine coating on to the trunk of the Limo but there wasn't anything of any any size that can be seen in Zapruder and I also have no doubt that bits of brain were falling out of Kennedy all the way to Parkland and later this continued falling of matter from an open wound is what the Parkland doctors saw underneath Kennedy in Emergency and this is what Jackie held in her hand as she says she was trying to hold the top of Jack's head down.
The inside of Kennedy's Limo was covered with bits of Brain.
One thing that may be noted is the direction of the bullet path and the fine mist spray as pointed out with your gel block analogous recreation. The mist comes out of the entrance hole - not the exit hole with a small calibre round (.25ish). That you could see. I speculate that with blood pressure and skull cap surrounding, that it would be greatly enhanced before breaking apart. Or was that a shaped type charge picture? I see an explosion luminescence in the picture at the center of the gel mass! you can clearly see the bullet "tumbling" out!
The Parkland Dr. McClleland that Mrs. Kennedy gave him a large portion of the cerebrum He then commented a couple of minutes later in the film that another portion of the brain he called the cerebellum fell out on the table. Certainly in the Zapruder film with Kennedy's head dropped forward, liquified brain matter was dropping to the front on some of the frames. Watching that tells me the brain was totally a disintegrated gel block and was no longer held intact. There mustn't have been much left on the right side.
The doctors also noted that there was no damage to the face and yet on x-rays it appears to be a gaping hole in the orbital region. There assessment was that all damage was at the back (hairline and beyond) with no major trauma to the nose and frontal occipital/eye regions visually. Again, autopsy x-rays didn't match their visual observations! It appears in the x-ray that even the nose bone was broken!
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 05, 2024, 06:42:41 PM
These Bethesda notes also mention the area of the skull damaged:
"There is a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions. In this region there is an actual absence of scalp and bone producing a defect which measures approximately 13 cm. in greatest diameter."
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on February 06, 2024, 03:52:46 PM
Steve: I think this is your link/file? This is, it seems to me, what Altgens was referring to when he said: "What made me almost certain that the shot came from behind was because at the time I was looking at the President, just as he was struck, it caused him to move a bit forward." Here we can clearly see that movement. Or I can.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 06, 2024, 03:55:09 PM
Don't overthink things. Just permit your eyes to absorb the movements of Jackie and JFK. JFK's head is bobbing a tad forward due to Jackie Pulling DOWN on his arm.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 06, 2024, 04:02:17 PM
Steve: I think this is your link/file? This is, it seems to me, what Altgens was referring to when he said: "What made me almost certain that the shot came from behind was because at the time I was looking at the President, just as he was struck, it caused him to move a bit forward." Here we can clearly see that movement. Or I can.
Hi Steve,
Yessir, that is the link I was trying to publish. I couldn't get the board to accept it.
The Nix film clearly shows the head moving forward and down with the bullet strike.
Thank you so much for posting this.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 06, 2024, 04:04:57 PM
Don't overthink things. Just permit your eyes to absorb the movements of Jackie and JFK. JFK's head is bobbing a tad forward due to Jackie Pulling DOWN on his arm.
Look who's talking about overthinking.
Yes, Mrs. Kennedy is slightly moving JFK as she leans forward to look at something, but in order for her to cause such a sudden movement of JFK's head as we see in the films, we would see her violently tug on his arm in order to cause the type of movement we are are seeing of the head. Your idea is absurd.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 06, 2024, 07:34:21 PM
Look who's talking about overthinking. You're pathetic, Storing.
Yes, Mrs. Kennedy is slightly moving JFK as she leans forward to look at something, but in order for her to cause such a sudden movement of JFK's head as we see in the films, we would see her violently tug on his arm in order to cause the type of movement we are are seeing of the head. Your idea is absurd.
All you need to do is give an objective look at the Assassination Images. The neck wound caused JFK's Arm/Hand to clutch at his throat/chest level. Jackie, TUGGING DOWNWARD on this Arm/Hand would easily tilt JFK's head downward. This forward head movement is minimal. I understand the head movement that is required to support the LN BS:. It just ain't there. Never has been. And now there is the Knott Labs Laser 360 SCIENCE declaring the, "SBT IS IMPOSSIBLE". After 60 yrs, the LN BS: is all crashing down.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 07, 2024, 12:48:45 PM
Nope. There is clearly a sudden forward jerk of Kennedy' head, which has nothing whatsoever to do with Jackie's hold on him.
JFK is clutching at his throat/chest. Jackie is Pulling DOWNWARD on his arm/wrist to try and reveal whatever his hand is Covering/Not permitting her to see. This sort of thing goes on daily with assorted injuries. We see it on athletic fields around the world on almost a daily basis. This extended "discussion" of the obvious is indicative of the dire straits that LN's now find themselves in after the Knott Labs Laser 360 SCIENCE declared the, "SBT IS IMPOSSIBLE". It's ALL suddenly crashing down!
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 07, 2024, 03:44:40 PM
JFK is clutching at his throat/chest. Jackie is Pulling DOWNWARD on his arm/wrist to try and reveal whatever his hand is Covering/Not permitting her to see.
No, give it up, Jackie would've had to slap the back of his head in order to create such a sharp forward movement.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 07, 2024, 04:03:11 PM
So "sharp" that you have to watch it in slo-mo to catch it? Just watch the Assassination Images. Plain as day.
The head shot clip from the Nix film (posted on the previous page) is very clear. His head is very suddenly knocked forward. A shot from the rear for sure. Whether it was fired by Oswald or not, is another thing.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 07, 2024, 08:34:06 PM
The head shot clip from the Nix film (posted on the previous page) is very clear. His head is very suddenly knocked forward. A shot from the rear for sure. Whether it was fired by Oswald or not, is another thing.
Go over to You Tube and search, "All Copies Of The Orville Nix Film of the JFK Motorcade" by The JFK Theorist. He has posted several copies of the NIX FILM on that piece. 2 of the copies belong to Bob Groden. It runs 7:40 total. Then, let's discuss what you deem, "....suddenly knocked forward". Also take a look at the 6:23 mark. CLEARLY, we can see the White Shirt Man moving Up-The-Steps. None of the 3 guys that were filmed standing at the bottom of The Steps was wearing a WHITE SHIRT. NONE. This validates the Lee Bowers WC Testimony of a White Shirt Man standing "in line" with the Triple Underpass. This posting over on You Tube is an excellent multiple NIX FILM Source.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 08, 2024, 02:52:38 AM
JFK is clutching at his throat/chest. Jackie is Pulling DOWNWARD on his arm/wrist to try and reveal whatever his hand is Covering/Not permitting her to see. This sort of thing goes on daily with assorted injuries. We see it on athletic fields around the world on almost a daily basis. This extended "discussion" of the obvious is indicative of the dire straits that LN's now find themselves in after the Knott Labs Laser 360 SCIENCE declared the, "SBT IS IMPOSSIBLE". It's ALL suddenly crashing down!
In this Zapruder frame, where are JFK's hand located? JFK is "clutching" Nothing! He never clutched his throat, Storing,
(https://i.imgur.com/ErU9UiE.png)
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 08, 2024, 07:59:13 AM
Go over to You Tube and search, "All Copies Of The Orville Nix Film of the JFK Motorcade" by The JFK Theorist. He has posted several copies of the NIX FILM on that piece. 2 of the copies belong to Bob Groden. It runs 7:40 total. Then, let's discuss what you deem, "....suddenly knocked forward".
All those are too blurry. Again, the Nix head-shot zoom on the previous page, clearly shows that his head suddenly snapped forward before moving backwards (nerve reflex for the latter). His head movements had nothing to do with Jackie. That forward snap (the bullet impact) is clearly visible at Zapruder 312/313 also:
These are the actual observations of some of the doctors at Parkland Memorial Hospital on 22 November 1963, as interviewed by Gerald Posner in 1992 for his book Case Closed. It will clear up any misguided conceptions of the preposterously outlandish claim of a large wound in the rear of the President's head.
All that is interesting and perplexing as so many others saw a gaping wound in the side-to-rear of his head, from Clint Hill right up to the embalmer!
SSA Clint 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.
DP witness Phil Willis:It took the back of his head off
DP witness Marilyn Willis: Matter was coming out the back of his head
Nurse Diana Bowron: There was a gaping wound in the back of his head. It was gone. Gone. There was nothing there. Just a big gaping hole. There might have been little clumps of scalp, but most of the bone over the hole, there was no bone there. There was no damage to the front of his face, only wound in the back of his head and the entry wound in his throat. The wound was so large I could almost put my whole fist into it[/i]
Nurse Doris Nelson: There wasn’t even hair back there. It was blown away. All that area was blown out (when shown the rear of head autopsy photo)
Nurse Pat Hutton: A doctor asked me to place a pressure dressing on the head wound. This was of no use, however, because of the massive opening on the back of the head.
Dr Malcolm Perry: there was blood noted on the carriage and a large avulsive wound on the right posterior cranium.
Dr Robert McClelland: I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted… we did not lift his head up since it was so greatly damaged. We attempted to avoid moving him any more than it was absolutely necessary, but I could see, of course, all the extent of the wound.
Dr Ronald Jones: There was large defect in the back side of the head as the President lay on the cart with what appeared to be some brain hanging out of this wound with multiple pieces of skull noted next with the brain and with a tremendous amount of clot and blood.
Dr Paul Peters: I noticed the head wound, and as I remember--I noticed that there was a large defect in the occiput. It seemed to me that in the right occipitalparietal area that there was a large defect. There appeared to be bone loss and brain loss in the area…we speculated as to whether he had been shot once or twice because we saw the wound of entry in the throat and noted the large occipital wound
Dr Kemp Clark: I then examined the wound in the back of the President's head. This was a large, gaping wound in the right posterior part, with cerebral and cerebellar tissue being damaged and exposed.
Nurse Audrey Bell: Dr Perry turned the President's head slightly to the President's anatomical left so that she could see a right posterior head wound, which she described as occipital
Nurse Margaret Hinchcliff: the President had a gaping wound in the back of his head and an entrance wound in his throat.
Dr. Charles Crenshaw: The wound was the size of a baseball(photo depicts Crenshaw indicating right rear)
Dr. Kenneth Salyer: This wound extended into the parietal area(photo depicts Salyer indicating right rear)
Dr. Charles Carrico: There was a large, quite large, defect about here(photo depicts Carrico indicating right rear)
Aubrey Rike(Oneal Funeral Home, Dallas):You could feel the sharp edges of the bone at the edge of the hole in the back of the head
Bethesda photographer Floyd Riebe: ...a big gaping hole in the back of the head
FBI SA Frank O’Neill: ...a massive wound in the right rear
Petty Officer Saundra Spencer: They had one(autopsy photo) showing the back of the head with the wound at the back of the head. It was just a ragged hole.
Mortician Thomas Robinson: ...about the size of a small orange…Circular…ragged… directly behind the back of his head…they brought a piece of heavy duty rubber, again to fill this area in the back of the head…it had to be all dried out, packed, and the rubber placed in the hair and the skin pulled back over…and stitched into that piece of rubber.
FBI SA James Sibert: it was a good size, in the back part of the head there. Well, I think about 3 1/2 inches one way then quite a bit the other...they showed the pictures at that deposition that were neat in appearance, and boy, I don't remember anything like that ...but my recollection of the way the head looked is nothing that would appear as this photograph shows. This photograph is too neat. Right back here is where you would have had that massive wound, right in here, and you see that's neat. My thought was that that was probably taken after reconstruction was done... there was a big cavity there. I mean that you could look in to. The skull wasn’t intact, the bones weren’t in place…there definitely was a large cavity. It was just that apparent that there was so much skull missing
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 08, 2024, 04:36:17 PM
All those are too blurry. Again, the Nix head-shot zoom on the previous page, clearly shows that his head suddenly snapped forward before moving backwards (nerve reflex for the latter). His head movements had nothing to do with Jackie. That forward snap (the bullet impact) is clearly visible at Zapruder 312/313 also:
These are the actual observations of some of the doctors at Parkland Memorial Hospital on 22 November 1963, as interviewed by Gerald Posner in 1992 for his book Case Closed. It will clear up any misguided conceptions of the preposterously outlandish claim of a large wound in the rear of the President's head.
Gerald Posner's interview with Dr Bill Midgett, 16 April 1992:
Gerald Posner's interview with Dr Charles James Carrico, 8 March 1992:
Gerald Posner's interview with Dr Adolph Hartung Giesecke, 5 March 1992:
Gerald Posner's interview with Dr Paul Conrad Peters, 10 March 1992:
Gerald Posner's interview with Marion Thomas Jenkins, 3 March 1992:
Gerald Posner's interview with Dr Malcolm Perry, 2 April 1992:
Gerald Posner's interview with Dr Charles Rufus Baxter, 12 March 1992:
Let's also remember that the Connallys and Kellerman said they were splatteredd/hit with blood/brain/matter after the 313/head shot. And that the limo was found to have blood/matter on the inside of the windshield, the front seats and the hood.
How could a blowout of the back/rear of JFK's head as the limo went forward and into a headwind lead to this blood/brain/flesh/matter landing in *front* of where he was seated? The exit wound is, for me, where we see it in the film. The top/side of the head. The eyewitnesses who said rear were mistaken. It happens. And the claims that it was blacked out are, frankly, made up by conspiracy believers whose only answer to evidence they don't like is to claim it's part of their conspiracy. Endless conspiracies for decades involving multiple generations of people many of whom weren't alive at the time of the assassination. When does it stop?
Added: The examination of the limo also found blood/brain/matter on the trunk of the limo, behind where JFK was sitting. And a motorcycle officer (Hargis) said he was hit with blood/matter as he rode behind the limo. But in both cases it seems obvious that the limo/Hargis drove *through* the matter as it came down. How this matter landed in front of where JFK was sitting *if* a bullet blew out the *back* of his head seems one that the "rear exit proponents" don't wish to answer.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 08, 2024, 06:23:27 PM
To say, "ALL those are too blurry" is Not true. You brought up the NIX FILM and NOW are retreating to the Z Film. The reason is obvious.
Both films reveal that his head snapped forward then reflexed backwards. I don't really see what there is to discuss about that (unless you feel that both films have been tampered with).
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 08, 2024, 07:11:12 PM
Both films reveal that his head snapped forward then reflexed backwards. I don't really see what there is to discuss about that (unless you feel that both films have been tampered with).
Tampering issue(s) aside, it comes down to how far Forward YOU believe JFK's head traveled. I do Not see this massive "Snapped Forward" movement you do. I see JFK's head tipping Down due to Jackie PULLING DOWNWARD on his Arm. Like the SBT, this "head snapped forward" stuff is nothing more than another "theory" that is required to support the, "1 Shooter from behind", hokum.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 08, 2024, 07:20:25 PM
Tampering issue(s) aside, it comes down to how far Forward YOU believe JFK's head traveled. I do Not see this massive "Snapped Forward" movement you do. I see JFK's head tipping Down due to Jackie PULLING DOWNWARD on his Arm. Like the SBT, this "head snapped forward" stuff is nothing more than another "theory" that is required to support the, "1 Shooter from behind", hokum.
Nobody mentioned a "massive" forward snap. Again, Jackie would've had to smack his head hard to create a sudden forward snap like that. No, it's perfectly clear that his head snaps forward in the space of two frames of the Zapruder footage (and Jackie's arms don't move in those two frames). That said, I'm still open for theories of a second gunman. It's just evident that a bullet hit him from behind at that instant.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 08, 2024, 08:11:59 PM
Yes, isn't it weird how so many people saw things differently. There is no way to confirm one or the other (beyond exhuming the body).
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 08, 2024, 08:53:19 PM
Hypothetically speaking, even if that did occur, conspiracy advocates will always futilely attempt to assert that shadowy forces have altered all the evidence in a fruitless endeavour to deceive easily misguided souls.
That is debatable (as this forum proves).
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 08, 2024, 09:19:05 PM
The NIX FILM remains a damming piece of Conspiracy Evidence. NOBODY to this day can explain the White Shirt Man we see moving UP-The-Steps on the NIX Film. None of the other assassination images show any of the 3 Men standing on The Steps to be wearing a White Shirt. This discrepancy begs 2 questions: (1) Where did the White Shirt Man on the NIX Film come from? and (2) Where is the Original NIX Film?
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 08, 2024, 11:33:35 PM
JFK is clutching at his throat/chest. Jackie is Pulling DOWNWARD on his arm/wrist to try and reveal whatever his hand is Covering/Not permitting her to see. This sort of thing goes on daily with assorted injuries. We see it on athletic fields around the world on almost a daily basis. This extended "discussion" of the obvious is indicative of the dire straits that LN's now find themselves in after the Knott Labs Laser 360 SCIENCE declared the, "SBT IS IMPOSSIBLE". It's ALL suddenly crashing down!
In this Zapruder frame, where are JFK's hand located? JFK is "clutching" Nothing! He never clutched his throat, Storing,
(https://i.imgur.com/ErU9UiE.png)
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: John Mytton on February 09, 2024, 12:29:16 AM
The single bullet theory of the Warren Commission Report places a bullet wound at the sixth cervical vertebra (C6) of the vertebral column, which is consistent with 5.5 inches (14 cm) below the ear. The Warren Report itself does not conclude bullet entry at the sixth cervical vertebra, but this conclusion was made in a 1979 report on the assassination by the HSCA, which noted a defect in the C6 vertebra in the Bethesda X-rays, which the Bethesda autopsy physicians had missed and did not note. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopsy_of_John_F._Kennedy
The single bullet theory of the Warren Commission Report places a bullet wound at the sixth cervical vertebra (C6) of the vertebral column, which is consistent with 5.5 inches (14 cm) below the ear. The Warren Report itself does not conclude bullet entry at the sixth cervical vertebra, but this conclusion was made in a 1979 report on the assassination by the HSCA, which noted a defect in the C6 vertebra in the Bethesda X-rays, which the Bethesda autopsy physicians had missed and did not note. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopsy_of_John_F._Kennedy
I've tried and tried to figure out how anyone could believe that JFK was "Clutching his throat" with his arms splayed outward on both sides like they were. It makes no sense at all. People just don't do that. I'm glad to hear that you've tried doing that with your own arms and hands. I have too, and it's just not possible nor necessary.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: John Mytton on February 09, 2024, 01:49:30 AM
NOBODY to this day can explain the White Shirt Man we see moving UP-The-Steps on the NIX Film.
You're right, "NOBODY to this day can explain the White Shirt Man we see moving UP-The-Steps on the NIX Film" because the man running up the step was wearing a light BROWN cardigan! Thumb1:
(https://i.postimg.cc/prxgLpfj/0246.jpg)
JohnM
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 09, 2024, 03:40:14 AM
You're right, "NOBODY to this day can explain the White Shirt Man we see moving UP-The-Steps on the NIX Film" because the man running up the step was wearing a light BROWN cardigan! Thumb1:
(https://i.postimg.cc/prxgLpfj/0246.jpg)
JohnM
Thumb1: Thumb1: Agreed, John.
In this photo is the man (who was photographed by Mary Ann Moorman Krahmer, and Marie Muchmore, who was filming the the motorcade) standing on the stairs next to Emmett Hudson, during the assassination. This is the same man whom, following the fatal shot, turns and runs up the stairs, as captured in the Orville Nix film. Royell Storing is claiming that the man who runs up the stairs in the Nix film is wearing a "white shirt". Nothing could be further from the truth, and the fact is, the man in the Nix film running up the stairs is the same man who appears in the Moorman Krahmer photo, Muchmore and Nix films. Proof? The attached is a still from the Darnell film, showing the black man and his wife. Please note the white reflection of the sun on shoulder and upper arm of the man's cadigan. This gives the appearance that the section of the cardigan is "white" when in reality, it's just the noon day sun reflecting on the man's cardigan. (https://i.imgur.com/stZJAub.png)
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 09, 2024, 04:55:25 PM
Dr. McCLELLAND - ... I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered,...
Great, he confirmed that it was posterior - behind the ears. That settles it.
Of course other doctors confirmed that the big hole was in the back of the head. Some mention that the head was turned, to get a better look.
Others had a good look at the hole in the back of the head before during and after that, and even felt it (here we go again):
SSA Clint Hill: The right rear portion of his head was missing...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.
FBI SA James Sibert: it was a good size, in the back part of the head there. ... ...but my recollection of the way the head looked is nothing that would appear as this photograph shows. This photograph is too neat. Right back here is where you would have had that massive wound, right in here, and you see that's neat. My thought was that that was probably taken after reconstruction was done... there was a big cavity there.
Nurse Diana Bowron: ). I saw that there was a massive amount of blood on the back seat and in order to find the cause I lifted his head and my fingers went into a large wound in the back of his head; I turned his head and seeing the size of the wound realized that I could not stop the bleeding. I turned his head back and saw an entry wound in the front of the throat, I could feel no pulse at the jugular and having seen the extent of the injury to the back of the head I assumed that he was dead.
There was a gaping wound in the back of his head. It was gone. Gone. There was nothing there. Just a big gaping hole. There might have been little clumps of scalp, but most of the bone over the hole, there was no bone there. There was no damage to the front of his face, only wound in the back of his head and the entry wound in his throat. The wound was so large I could almost put my whole fist into it....Dr Perry turned the President's head slightly to the President's anatomical left so that she could see a right posterior head wound, which she described as occipital
RICHARD BROOKS DULANEY, MD: Dulaney told journalist Ben Bradlee, Jr., "...Somebody lifted up his head and showed me the back of his head. We couldn't see much until they picked up his head. I was standing beside him. The wound was on the back of his head. On the back side" They lifted up the head and "the whole back-side was gone." (Groden R., Livingston, H., High Treason. 1989 New York, Berkley Books, p.460.)
FOUAD BASHOUR, MD: an associate professor of medicine, cardiology, at Parkland at the time of the assassination. Groden and Livingstone reported, "He was most insistent that the official picture was not representative of the wounds, and he continually laid his hand both on the back of Livingstone's head and his own to show where the large hole was. 'Why do they cover it up?' he repeated numerous times. 'This is not the way it was!' he kept repeating, shaking his head no." (Groden & Livingston, H., High Treason. 1989 New York, Berkley Books, p.45)
Nurse Doris Nelson: There wasn’t even hair back there. It was blown away. All that area was blown out(when shown the rear of head autopsy photo)
Nurse Pat Hutton: A doctor asked me to place a pressure dressing on the head wound. This was of no use, however, because of the massive opening on the back of the head.
Nurse Margaret Hinchcliff: the President had a gaping wound in the back of his head and an entrance wound in his throat.
Aubrey Rike(Oneal Funeral Home, Dallas):You could feel the sharp edges of the bone at the edge of the hole in the back of the head
Bethesda photographer Floyd Riebe: a big gaping hole in the back of the head
Mortician Thomas Robinson: about the size of a small orange…Circular…ragged… directly behind the back of his head…they brought a piece of heavy duty rubber, again to fill this area in the back of the head….
More here: http://www.assassinationweb.com/ag6.htm
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 09, 2024, 09:13:12 PM
You're right, "NOBODY to this day can explain the White Shirt Man we see moving UP-The-Steps on the NIX Film" because the man running up the step was wearing a light BROWN cardigan! Thumb1:
(https://i.postimg.cc/prxgLpfj/0246.jpg)
JohnM
Unless you have monitor and/or vision issues, denying the obvious must be the only LN avenue at your disposal. Not only is that guy moving Up The Steps wearing a White Shirt, it is also Short Sleeved. This White Shirt Man also has a body type/figure that does Not fit the LN accepted 60 yr old narrative. The Lee Bowers WC Testimony included his detailing seeing a White Shirt Man "in line" with The Triple Underpass. This White Shirt Man on the NIX FILM now corroborates that Lee Bowers WC Testimony. There is currently ongoing NIX Film research regarding a JFK skull fragment being visibly thrown in the Newman's direction. (FRONTAL Shot). This fragment is only visible on very select copies of the NIX Film. Of course, the ORIGINAL NIX FILM has been missing for decades. The White Shirt Man and possibly this JFK Skull Fragment make it obvious why.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Martin Weidmann on February 10, 2024, 02:28:23 AM
Eyewitness testimony can be highly unreliable, even from trained professionals in stressful situations. Therefore, the best evidence in this case is undoubtedly the autopsy photos authenticated by the HSCA photographic experts, thus unequivocally proving beyond all reasonable doubt that the photo depicting no significant large wound in the rear of the President's head is genuine. Case closed.
Eyewitness testimony can be highly unreliable, even from trained professionals in stressful situations.
Except of course when they are asked to indentify a man in a line up who most of them had only seen briefly in a highly chaotic situation. Then eyewitness testimony suddenly becomes highly reliable, right?
Therefore, the best evidence in this case is undoubtedly the autopsy photos authenticated by the HSCA photographic experts, thus unequivocally proving beyond all reasonable doubt that the photo depicting no significant large wound in the rear of the President's head is genuine. Case closed.
Strange... I suddenly get the feeling I'm reading one of John Mytton's post....
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 10, 2024, 08:48:54 AM
Eyewitness testimony can be highly unreliable, even from trained professionals in stressful situations. Therefore, the best evidence in this case is undoubtedly the autopsy photos authenticated by the HSCA photographic experts, thus unequivocally proving beyond all reasonable doubt that the photo depicting no significant large wound in the rear of the President's head is genuine. Case closed.
The eyewitness testimonies give us a very clear description of the wounds (the embalmer for one, wasn't in a stressful situation). The autopsy photos were so well faked that they even fooled the HSCA photography experts. Dozens of photos were taken, so where are they? Obviously, that level of complex fakery couldn't be applied to a multitude of frames.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 10, 2024, 01:37:54 PM
The eyewitness testimonies give us a very clear description of the wounds (the embalmer for one, wasn't in a stressful situation). The autopsy photos were so well faked that they even fooled the HSCA photography experts. Dozens of photos were taken, so where are they? Obviously, that level of complex fakery couldn't be applied to a multitude of frames.
While on the subject of autopsy "images", why is it that the JFK autopsy itself was Not filmed or recorded? Or was it? Lt. Commander Bruce Pitzer said it was. Also, at the time of the JFK Autopsy, Bethesda had just installed cutting edge audio-visual equipment inside the Bethesda Morgue. This same equipment was frequently used to telecast classes from inside the morgue to other medical facilities. Recording that autopsy would have been duck soup.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Sean Kneringer on February 10, 2024, 04:58:41 PM
The docs had very little time with the President's body and didn't even flip him over, making me wonder how they saw a huge hole in the back of his head. Their input is next to worthless.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 10, 2024, 05:22:30 PM
The docs had very little time with the President's body and didn't even flip him over, making me wonder how they saw a huge hole in the back of his head. Their input is next to worthless.
See the quotes above - his head was turned to the side in the trauma room, order to view the damage to the back of the head.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on February 10, 2024, 05:23:15 PM
The docs had very little time with the President's body and didn't even flip him over, making me wonder how they saw a huge hole in the back of his head. Their input is next to worthless.
Yes, but the "back of the head" proponents also cite other witnesses such as those at the autopsy, the nurses who "cleaned up" JFK for the casket, et cetera. If we didn't have the physical evidence - the x-rays and photos, the films (plural: notice the Nix film?), the blood/brain matter landing in front of where JFK was - the "back of the head" side would have a very strong case. But that requires ignoring all of this other evidence. Or making the usual conspiracy response: it's all fake. Which, as we know, they do.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 10, 2024, 05:32:41 PM
The docs had very little time with the President's body and didn't even flip him over, making me wonder how they saw a huge hole in the back of his head. Their input is next to worthless.
External cardiac massage was applied to JFK at Parkland Hospital. With every compression of his chest, blood and brain matter was then expelled from the Hole in the Back of JFK's head. This expulsion landed on the gurney and much of it then dripped down onto the trauma room floor. ALL of this made the Large Hole in the Back of JFK's head apparent.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 10, 2024, 06:21:08 PM
Yes, but the "back of the head" proponents also cite other witnesses such as those at the autopsy, the nurses who "cleaned up" JFK for the casket, et cetera. If we didn't have the physical evidence - the x-rays and photos, the films (plural: notice the Nix film?), the blood/brain matter landing in front of where JFK was - the "back of the head" side would have a very strong case. But that requires ignoring all of this other evidence. Or making the usual conspiracy response: it's all fake. Which, as we know, they do.
It is puzzling. This has probably been theorized before but the following could be an explanation for the differences in observation. In the Zapruder film, we can see that the top of his head just opened up. The autopsy top of head photos show that damage. The rear-head photos show that triangular flap of cranium hanging off at the side. In the lateral x-ray photo, we can see that the rear-top of the skull is detached (put into place for the x-ray). We can also see severe lines of fracture extending down towards the occipital region. It could be that that rear portion was also loose and it flapped open as Kennedy sank down in the limo and also on arrival at Parkland. Thus explaining what Clint Hill and the nurses saw. In the trauma room, with Kennedy on his back, the rear flap wasn't as easy to see. It had perhaps been pushed closed (by chance or on purpose). However, the damage to the rear was observed in that room. For the lateral X-ray, and rear-head photos, the flap was pushed back into place (to dispel any suspicions that it might be an exit hole of a shot from the front).
It is puzzling. This has probably been theorized before but the following could be an explanation for the differences in observation. In the Zapruder film, we can see that the top of his head just opened up. The autopsy top of head photos show that damage. The rear-head photos show that triangular flap of cranium hanging off at the side. In the lateral x-ray photo, we can see that the rear-top of the skull is detached (put into place for the x-ray). We can also see severe lines of fracture extending down towards the occipital region. It could be that that rear portion was also loose and it flapped open as Kennedy sank down in the limo and also on arrival at Parkland. Thus explaining what Clint Hill and the nurses saw. In the trauma room, with Kennedy on his back, the rear flap wasn't as easy to see. It had perhaps been pushed closed (by chance or on purpose). However, the damage to the rear was observed in that room. For the lateral X-ray, and rear-head photos, the flap was pushed back into place (to dispel any suspicions that it might be an exit hole of a shot from the front).
"put into place for the X-Ray" Really ?? It's difficult to have confidence in the X-Rays and Autopsy Photos when the body has been Altered. Who knows what else may have been, "put into place"?
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 10, 2024, 07:06:38 PM
"put into place for the X-Ray" Really ?? It's difficult to have confidence in the X-Rays and Autopsy Photos when the body has been Altered. Who knows what else may have been, "put into place"?
Maybe what I'm suggesting was (literally) a cover-up lite. ;D
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 10, 2024, 07:49:54 PM
The Zapruder Film was locked up by Time-Life for 12yrs before Geraldo showed Groden's copy on national TV. CIA Image Expert Dino Brugioni went on record as to there being differences between the Current Z Film and the Z Film he examined on 11/23/63. Brugioni is unique in that he had both the bona fides and the opportunity to make this comparison.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 11, 2024, 08:26:30 AM
That image is a close-up of JFK and Jackie, cropped from z337. It provides a deceptive appearance as if Mrs Kennedy's pink dress shows where the front half of Mr Kennedy's head is due to a change in the colour tone of the cropped image.
Have a close look at z337. As one can see, the outline and darker area of the front half of the President's head are visible:
Sorry, the image I posted earlier is over-exposed. This montage gives a clearer picture:
In the frame on the left, his head is tilted away from us, yet the upper cranium appears intact. In the frame on the right, his head is more to profile and less tilted away from us. We should see the upper cranium there but it's gone. I discussed this years ago here and it was suggested that what we see here is the result of two practically simultaneous shots to the head.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on February 11, 2024, 02:13:04 PM
Forensic pathologist Peter Cummings examined the original x-rays and photos (he says the clarity of the originals are far superior). He says the fractures in JFK's skull indicate a single shot from behind, low in the head (and not as the Clark Panel said near the cowlick). One shot, entering from behind, causing fracture lines to radiate from it. I would think a second shot would also cause fracture lines to radiate from it as well as with this one? But there apparently are none, none that Cummings indicates.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 11, 2024, 02:49:21 PM
One shot, entering from behind, causing fracture lines to radiate from it. I would suggest a second shot would cause fracture lines to radiate from it. But there apparently are none.
The point of the Zapruder head profile images I posted earlier was to demonstrate how the film shows his upper cranium was still intact after the first shot to the head. So the bullet had already entered at the occipital region and exited towards the front, creating that skull flap at the right temple (which we see hanging out). After that, we see in Z315/316/317 that the upper cranium is still intact.
I suggest that it was another shot (from wherever) right after the occipital entry shot, that exploded the upper cranium.
It remains possible however that the shot that entered at the occipital bone did blow he upper cranium out/off and what we see in the Zapruder film (at Z315-317) is in fact a retoucher's error.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 11, 2024, 03:32:35 PM
Sorry, the image I posted earlier is over-exposed. This montage gives a clearer picture:
In the frame on the left, his head is tilted away from us, yet the upper cranium appears intact. In the frame on the right, his head is more to profile and less tilted away from us. We should see the upper cranium there but it's gone. I discussed this years ago here and it was suggested that what we see here is the result of two practically simultaneous shots to the head.
LN's rely on the Assassination Images until said image(s) become inconvenient to their scripted narrative. Then they come up with Excuses. "Perspective" is their primary parachute and then comes their "on the fly" backup BS: which almost always flies in the face of what we are actually seeing on an Image(s). What we are seeing above is a 1963 Version of "Terminator 2". The above being the parts where the Bad Terminator slowly morphs into another person/shape. The technology of 1963 limited what they could do with images which rendered that Mess above. Sometimes, LN's just flat-out lie as to what we are seeing. They claim 3 guys are standing on The Steps in Willis 5, (Clearly there is only 2 guys), and now on the Nix Film they are claiming the White Shirt Man moving Up The Steps is instead wearing a Brown Shirt. Fortunately, the Knott Labs 360 Laser SCIENCE and their finding that the "SBT IS IMPOSSIBLE" has literally cut their foundation out from under them. They are now in total free fall.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 11, 2024, 05:19:04 PM
Skull fragment found by Sam Kinney, that landed under the seat occupied "By Connally". The red arrows are pointing to the skull fragment as it was captured in the Z film. The first image of the skull fragment is Z 314.
http://(https://i.imgur.com/zuTtLe8.gif)
Here's the same gif at near regular speed:
(https://i.imgur.com/w3haVKQ.gif)
Here's a GIF (I believe was made by John Mytton) clearly showing the top of the skull missing, and the enormous extent of the exit wound:
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on February 11, 2024, 05:39:51 PM
And again, the Nix film. There's no blowout of the back of the head. We can see "spray" going out the top of JFK's head. Nothing from the back. Notice the passengers sitting in front ducking down as this material hit them? So is this faked too?
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 11, 2024, 05:51:43 PM
Skull fragments that were found in Dealey Plaza--two on 11/22/63 , and a third, the "Harper fragment", found on 11/23/63--all were located to the FRONT of where the limousine was in the street at the time of the fatal shot. One was found by a David Burros in the grass, not far from the manhole on the south side of Elm Street, one was turned over to Seymour Weitzman, which was found in the street near the gutter on the south side of Elm Street, and the Harper Fragment, which was found in the grass, 25 feet south west.
(https://i.imgur.com/iTVrzub.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/pTS6Cqt.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/mG91qB1.jpg[/i
[img])(https://i.imgur.com/EX7OVpA.jpg)
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Hawthorn on February 11, 2024, 05:56:14 PM
And again, the Nix film. There's no blowout of the back of the head. We can see "spray" going out the top of JFK's head. Nothing from the back. Notice the passengers sitting in front ducking down as this material hit them? So is this faked too?
No, the definition is so low that the finer details are impossible to see.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 11, 2024, 06:25:28 PM
Skull fragment found by Sam Kinney, that landed under the seat occupied "By Connally". The red arrows are pointing to the skull fragment as it was captured in the Z film. The first image of the skull fragment is Z 314.
http://(https://i.imgur.com/zuTtLe8.gif)
Here's the same gif at near regular speed:
(https://i.imgur.com/w3haVKQ.gif)
Here's a GIF (I believe was made by John Mytton) clearly showing the top of the skull missing, and the enormous extent of the exit wound:
Steve - Thanks for posting this. SA Kinney did Not mention retrieving a bone fragment of any kind in his "Original Report". Also, (1) Why is SA Kinney combing through the JFK Limo as it is in midair?, and (2) Is he qualified to be doing this CSI work? That macabre cartoon needs to be 86'd.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 11, 2024, 06:28:26 PM
And again, the Nix film. There's no blowout of the back of the head. We can see "spray" going out the top of JFK's head. Nothing from the back. Notice the passengers sitting in front ducking down as this material hit them? So is this faked too?
As usual, this often displayed NIX Snippet STOPS short of revealing the White Shirt Man moving Up-The Steps. And, the Original NIX FILM has been MIA for decades. No coincidence.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 11, 2024, 06:41:07 PM
As usual, this often displayed NIX Snippet STOPS short of revealing the White Shirt Man moving Up-The Steps. And, the Original NIX FILM has been MIA for decades. No coincidence.
This is a gif that I made specifically concentrating on the forward head movement of JFK. it is shortened to repeat the head movement. Why is it that you always criticize the work someone does before knowing all the facts about the work that was done, Storing? I've never seen a person take things so personally as you do. This has NOTHING to do with your ludicrous "White Shirt Man"! You are so self centered it's nauseating.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 11, 2024, 06:51:40 PM
This is a gif that I made specifically concentrating on the forward head movement of JFK. it is shortened to repeat the head movement. Why is it that you always criticize the work someone does before knowing all the facts about the work that was done, Storing? I've never seen a person take things so personally as you do. This has NOTHING to do with your ludicrous "White Shirt Man"! You are so self centered it's nauseating.
Here I actually "thank" you for something and you immediately pull out the Long Knives. I have seen this same "GIF" many, many times. I thought you were merely posting such to buttress your skull fragment discussion. With a case 60 yrs old, it is difficult to find/do anything that has Not been done many times previous. Sorry I burst your bubble, but you're only reinventing the wheel here.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 11, 2024, 07:01:17 PM
Here I actually "thank" you for something and you immediately pull out the Long Knives. I have seen this same "GIF" many, many times. I thought you were merely posting such to buttress your skull fragment discussion. With a case 60 yrs old, it is difficult to find/do anything that has Not been done many times previous. Sorry I burst your bubble, but you're only reinventing the wheel here.
You didn't "burst my bubble"!
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 11, 2024, 10:00:24 PM
(1) Where is the Trap Door wound in the (R) temple area? (2) What happened to the bullet? Is this the one where the bullet ended up penetrating the dashboard?
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 11, 2024, 10:21:59 PM
(1) Where is the Trap Door wound in the (R) temple area? (2) What happened to the bullet? Is this the one where the bullet ended up penetrating the dashboard?
You're a scream, Royell Storing. You actually believe that a gunshot wound can be exactly duplicated?!!! Think again, because it cannot.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 11, 2024, 10:48:14 PM
Don't blame me, blame SCIENCE. Science requires Duplication Verification. Which leads us to the Now DISPROVED SBT.
I do indeed blame you! You're the one who asked the silly question about the "Trap Door" over the temple area during the reconstruction. "Science" is in the eye of the behollder, Storing. Science also tries to tell us that God doesn't exist, when yes He does. The only people who accept that are atheists.
It isn't humanly possible to duplicate a bullet wound exactly as it happened anymore than it is to duplicate how a bullet will act when leaving the rifle barrel . And as for your ludicrous support of the guys whom you claim disproved the SBT through "Duplication Verification, your guys have Connally so misplaced in that sloppy mess that you support that a child could see their errors. But you go on ahead and believe their slop. The loss of credibility is your own. If these guys would have been correct it would have been all over the news. It wasn't and it will never be because they proved nothing except that they failed at attempting to disprove the SBF.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 11, 2024, 11:51:23 PM
I do indeed blame you! You're the one who asked the silly question about the "Trap Door" over the temple area during the reconstruction. "Science" is in the eye of the behollder, Storing. Science also tries to tell us that God doesn't exist, when yes He does. The only people who accept that are atheists.
It isn't humanly possible to duplicate a bullet wound exactly as it happened anymore than it is to duplicate how a bullet will act when leaving the rifle barrel . And as for your ludicrous support of the guys whom you claim disproved the SBT through "Duplication Verification, your guys have Connally so misplaced in that sloppy mess that you support that a child could see their errors. But you go on ahead and believe their slop. The loss of credibility is your own. If these guys would have been correct it would have been all over the news. It wasn't and it will never be because they proved nothing except that they failed at attempting to disprove the SBT.
(1) "SCIENCE is in the Eye of the beholder"?? Not true. But this does DQ you from asking for anyone to ever PROVE anything. And know that I will remind of your laughable dictum whenever required. (2) Religion is FAITH Based. Enough said. (3) The Knott Labs Laser 360 SCIENCE finding that the, "SBT IS IMPOSSIBLE" was "....all over the news". Widen your horizons.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 12, 2024, 01:32:29 AM
(1) "SCIENCE is in the Eye of the beholder"?? Not true. But this does DQ you from asking for anyone to ever PROVE anything. And know that I will remind of your laughable dictum whenever required. (2) Religion is FAITH Based. Enough said. (3) The Knott Labs Laser 360 SCIENCE finding that the, "SBT IS IMPOSSIBLE" was "....all over the news". Widen your horizons.
"Not true". Yes, it is true. My personal opinion on the acoustics, for example. I don't care how many scientists said there were gunshots on the Dictabelt. Same ith your guys and the SBF.
"[T]his does DQ you from asking for anyone to ever PROVE anything. And know that I will remind of your laughable dictum whenever required."
Don't flatter yourself,Storing. You forget that I disproved a bunch of scientists who said that there are gunshots on the Dictabelt recording when there are none. And I didn't need a scientific panel to prove that the crosstalk I discovered disproved the scientists at BBN and Weiss and Aschkenasy. I knew what it was going to do to the conclusions of the scientists hired by the HSCA the moment I heard the crosstalk.
" The Knott Labs Laser 360 SCIENCE finding that the, "SBT IS IMPOSSIBLE" was "....all over the news". Widen your horizons."
How about some sources? Furthermore, there has yet to be any further news on the Knotts conclusions, and whether or not they're valid conclusions. As long as they leave Governor Connally seated the way their model shows it, it will never be valid.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 12, 2024, 08:08:56 PM
"Not true". Yes, it is true. My personal opinion on the acoustics, for example. I don't care how many scientists said there were gunshots on the Dictabelt. Same ith your guys and the SBF.
"[T]his does DQ you from asking for anyone to ever PROVE anything. And know that I will remind of your laughable dictum whenever required."
Don't flatter yourself,Storing. You forget that I disproved a bunch of scientists who said that there are gunshots on the Dictabelt recording when there are none. And I didn't need a scientific panel to prove that the crosstalk I discovered disproved the scientists at BBN and Weiss and Aschkenasy. I knew what it was going to do to the conclusions of the scientists hired by the HSCA the moment I heard the crosstalk.
" The Knott Labs Laser 360 SCIENCE finding that the, "SBT IS IMPOSSIBLE" was "....all over the news". Widen your horizons."
How about some sources? Furthermore, there has yet to be any further news on the Knotts conclusions, and whether or not they're valid conclusions. As long as they leave Governor Connally seated the way their model shows it, it will never be valid.
Permit me to help you out with the still ongoing dictabelt issue. Sitzman during her Entire interview by Josiah Thompson, talked about numerous things simultaneously. She's tough to follow, so the listener needs to pay very close attention. At one point, Thompson was asking her about possibly hearing shots from close by. Thompson had been told by some other JFK Assassination researcher that Sitzman had previously detailed hearing shot(s) and their hurting her ears. (something along these lines). Sitzman told Thompson this was Not true and that she never said anything like that. She then said, "the loudest thing I heard that afternoon was the siren, and that was..............", at this point Thompson CUT HER OFF. I think he did this because Sitzman was Not giving answers that supported his theories. I believe that Sitzman was about to say the loudest thing she heard that day was the SIREN on the Queen Mary and maybe the JFK Limo. SA Kinney/"Queen Mary" Driver, detailed in his "Original Report" that he hit that cars' SIREN immediately after seeing JFK, "fell to the seat to the left". Kinney also noted that SA Greer did likewise at the same time with the JFK Limo SIREN. This mandates: (1) Find out exactly which model Sirens were used on the Queen Mary and the JFK Limo, (2) Obtain those same model Siren(s), (3) get an "acoustic footprint" on one/both sirens, (might be identical Sirens), (4) Search for the SIREN(s) Acoustic Footprint appearing on the dictabelt. That "footprint" should SUDDENLY Appear at the same point in time that SA Kinney hit it. That Siren "footprint" should appear a few seconds after the Kill Shot Acoustic Footprint If there is No Trace of the Siren(s) Acoustic Footprint, then that DPD motorcycle recording was Not done inside Dealey Plaza at the time of the shooting. The HSCA did acoustic footprint matchups with shots fired from different locations inside Dealey Plaza vs the dictabelt recording. Doing this same procedure with the AUTO SIREN(S) should also be employed. Any possible DPD Cop Car sirens and possible motorcycle sirens would have been a generally common sound to the ear of Sitzman. I believe the Siren(s) used by the Queen Mary and the JFK Limo would have sounded Different/Louder to the ear of Sitzman. This Siren(s) sound "difference" made them stand out to Sitzman. The Siren(s) sound being so great/different that it warranted her mentioning it to Thompson.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 13, 2024, 05:38:35 PM
Permit me to help you out with the still ongoing dictabelt issue. Sitzman during her Entire interview by Josiah Thompson, talked about numerous things simultaneously. She's tough to follow, so the listener needs to pay very close attention. At one point, Thompson was asking her about possibly hearing shots from close by. Thompson had been told by some other JFK Assassination researcher that Sitzman had previously detailed hearing shot(s) and their hurting her ears. (something along these lines). Sitzman told Thompson this was Not true and that she never said anything like that. She then said, "the loudest thing I heard that afternoon was the siren, and that was..............", at this point Thompson CUT HER OFF. I think he did this because Sitzman was Not giving answers that supported his theories. I believe that Sitzman was about to say the loudest thing she heard that day was the SIREN on the Queen Mary and maybe the JFK Limo. SA Kinney/"Queen Mary" Driver, detailed in his "Original Report" that he hit that cars' SIREN immediately after seeing JFK, "fell to the seat to the left". Kinney also noted that SA Greer did likewise at the same time with the JFK Limo SIREN. This mandates: (1) Find out exactly which model Sirens were used on the Queen Mary and the JFK Limo, (2) Obtain those same model Siren(s), (3) get an "acoustic footprint" on one/both sirens, (might be identical Sirens), (4) Search for the SIREN(s) Acoustic Footprint appearing on the dictabelt. That "footprint" should SUDDENLY Appear at the same point in time that SA Kinney hit it. That Siren "footprint" should appear a few seconds after the Kill Shot Acoustic Footprint If there is No Trace of the Siren(s) Acoustic Footprint, then that DPD motorcycle recording was Not done inside Dealey Plaza at the time of the shooting. The HSCA did acoustic footprint matchups with shots fired from different locations inside Dealey Plaza vs the dictabelt recording. Doing this same procedure with the AUTO SIREN(S) should also be employed. Any possible DPD Cop Car sirens and possible motorcycle sirens would have been a generally common sound to the ear of Sitzman. I believe the Siren(s) used by the Queen Mary and the JFK Limo would have sounded Different/Louder to the ear of Sitzman. This Siren(s) sound "difference" made them stand out to Sitzman. The Siren(s) sound being so great/different that it warranted her mentioning it to Thompson.
Nice dodge, Mr. Storing!
Firstly, I'm not interested in your "help" re: the acoustics. It's over and done with.
Secondly-and lastly- Marilyn Sitzman did, in fact, tell Tink Thompson during that interview with her that the loudest thing she heard was the siren. Yes, Thompson "cut her off", but she told him anyway, that the siren was the loudest thing she heard.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 13, 2024, 05:42:48 PM
Firstly, I'm not interested in your "help" re: the acoustics. It's over and done with.
Secondly-and lastly- Marilyn Sitzman did, in fact, tell Tink Thompson during that interview with her that the loudest thing she heard was the siren. Yes, Thompson "cut her off", but she told him anyway, that the siren was the loudest thing she heard.
You might like this to be done with, but Thompson differs with you. My siren solution would put it to bed one way or the other. This is EXACTLY why these unresolved issues continue to dog this case. People with skin in the game actually want it to drag on. You're Welcome!
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 13, 2024, 06:16:57 PM
You might like this to be done with, but Thompson differs with you. My siren solution would put it to bed one way or the other. This is EXACTLY why these unresolved issues continue to dog this case. People with skin in the game actually want it to drag on. You're Welcome!
No, I know it is over with. I know Thompson differs with me, and I know why/how. He's a believer in the BS that Don Thomas has in his book, and this is the only reason Thompson differs with me. The fact that Thomas is full of crap with his "crosstalk" (that doesn't exist) which he claims proves there are still gunshots on the Dictabelt, is ludicous on its face. And Thomas knows it! I put it to bed in my piece which not only Bugliosi published in his book, but Dale Myers published on his Secrets Of A Homicide Website when I explained what Thomas has done with a channel 2 transmission which says is picked up by the open microphone, and so it also appears during the open mic sequence, therefore was recorded onto the Dictabelt. I'm not going to go into all of it, I'm going to provide the link to my piece on Dale Myers' Website. It's irrefutable proof that what Thomas says is a transmission from channel 2 being picked up by the open mic is NOT-NOT "crosstalk". Period. https://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
Thompson agrees with Thomas, and had I known this when Thompson was interviewing me in 2014 for his book "Last Second In Dallas", I would have saved him a ton of trouble.
You have nothing to offer regarding the acoustics.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 13, 2024, 09:03:08 PM
No, I know it is over with. I know Thompson differs with me, and I know why/how. He's a believer in the BS that Don Thomas has in his book, and this is the only reason Thompson differs with me. The fact that Thomas is full of crap with his "crosstalk" (that doesn't exist) which he claims proves there are still gunshots on the Dictabelt, is ludicous on its face. And Thomas knows it! I put it to bed in my piece which not only Bugliosi published in his book, but Dale Myers published on his Secrets Of A Homicide Website when I explained what Thomas has done with a channel 2 transmission which says is picked up by the open microphone, and so it also appears during the open mic sequence, therefore was recorded onto the Dictabelt. I'm not going to go into all of it, I'm going to provide the link to my piece on Dale Myers' Website. It's irrefutable proof that what Thomas says is a transmission from channel 2 being picked up by the open mic is NOT-NOT "crosstalk". Period. https://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/of-crosstalk-and-bells-rebuttal-to-don.html
Thompson agrees with Thomas, and had I known this when Thompson was interviewing me in 2014 for his book "Last Second In Dallas", I would have saved him a ton of trouble.
You have nothing to offer regarding the acoustics.
The SIREN Test would conclusively put an end to all this back-n-forth. Instead, you choose to quickly walk away. If you, without a doubt, believe what you are saying, what do you have to lose? Oh yeah, "face" or today what they call "street cred". You either want The Truth or you Do Not. This is a perfect example of why this case remains Unsolved after 60 yrs.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 13, 2024, 09:38:23 PM
The SIREN Test would conclusively put an end to all this back-n-forth. Instead, you choose to quickly walk away. If you, without a doubt, believe what you are saying, what do you have to lose? Oh yeah, "face" or today what they call "street cred". You either want The Truth or you Do Not. This is a perfect example of why this case remains Unsolved after 60 yrs.
I already know where you going with this. You think the open microphone was in Dealey Plaza. It wasn't. It didn't record any gunshots. it was miles away from Dealey Plaza. , miles away from the Queen Mary when Kinney hit the siren button. And do NOT speak to me about "Truth", Storing. You wouldn't know the truth if it came up and kicked your behind! And furthermore, this "case" was solved 60 years ago! It's just that people like you keep trying and trying to perpeuate it with silly, ridiculous little theories that have no bearing on the assassination whatsoever.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 13, 2024, 09:51:34 PM
I already know where you going with this. You think the open microphone was in Dealey Plaza. It wasn't. It didn't record any gunshots. it was miles away from Dealey Plaza. , miles away from the Queen Mary when Kinney hit the siren button. And do NOT speak to me about "Truth", Storing. You wouldn't know the truth if it came up and kicked your behind!
Great! Then the Sirens' "acoustic footprint" would Not appear on the recording. Why are you running away from it? The Siren Acoustic Footprinting just might prove that Gary Mack actually got one right.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 13, 2024, 10:06:05 PM
Great! Then the Sirens' "acoustic footprint" would Not appear on the recording. Why are you running away from it? The Siren Acoustic Footprinting just might prove that Gary Mack actually got one right.
Remember last week when I told you that I believe that you need to see someone of a certain profession? It was removed by Duncan, but I know you read it because you responded. I would repeat it, but you get what I'm saying. I struck a nerve so hard that you ignored my posts addressed to you for several days.
You just don't get it Storing, and you never will. THERE WAS NO OPEN MICROPHONE IN DEALEY PLAZA. END OF STORY! GARY MACK, BBN, W&A ALL WERE WRONG AND NOTHING! NOT EVEN YOUR SILLY LITTLE SIREN WILL CHANGE THIS! I"M NOT "RUNNING" FROM ANYTHING, AND DON'T FLATTER YOURSELF, STORING! THE ONLY THING YOU'RE AN EXPERT AT IS ANNOYING PEOPLE! EDUCATE YOURSELF !!!
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 13, 2024, 11:01:36 PM
Remember last week when I told you that I believe that you need to see someone of a certain profession? It was removed by Duncan, but I know you read it because you responded. I would repeat it, but you get what I'm saying. I struck a nerve so hard that you ignored my posts addressed to you for several days.
You just don't get it Storing, and you never will. THERE WAS NO OPEN MICROPHONE IN DEALEY PLAZA. END OF STORY! GARY MACK, BBN, W&A ALL WERE WRONG AND NOTHING! NOT EVEN YOUR SILLY LITTLE SIREN WILL CHANGE THIS! I"M NOT "RUNNING" FROM ANYTHING, AND DON'T FLATTER YOURSELF, STORING! THE ONLY THING YOU'RE AN EXPERT AT IS ANNOYING PEOPLE! EDUCATE YOURSELF !!!
Your over-the-top reaction makes it obvious that you're Not real confident as to what the Siren Acoustic Footprinting might reveal. Why wasn't this done long ago? People in general just do take the time to scrutinize Testimony and Interviews. I really do Not recall seeing the post you are referring to. You've called me so many different things over the last several years, that they have a tendency of blurring together. I never "ignore" anything or anybody. As Gimli would say, "I have the eyes of a Hawk and the Ears of a Fox".
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Steve Barber on February 13, 2024, 11:42:39 PM
Your over-the-top reaction makes it obvious that you're Not real confident as to what the Siren Acoustic Footprinting might reveal. Why wasn't this done long ago? People in general just do take the time to scrutinize Testimony and Interviews. I really do Not recall seeing the post you are referring to. You've called me so many different things over the last several years, that they have a tendency of blurring together. I never "ignore" anything or anybody. As Gimli would say, "I have the eyes of a Hawk and the Ears of a Fox".
Bla, blah, blah, blah! You're real piece of work, Mr. Storing.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Royell Storing on February 14, 2024, 12:05:21 AM
Bla, blah, blah, blah! You're real piece of work, Mr. Storing.
The Old Guard JFK Assassination Research Community continues showing they fear being dis-proven. They immediately run away from newly revealed information. Same goes for my documenting that the Officer Haygood 12:35 motorcycle transmission DQ's his being the DPD Motorcycle Cop walking across the train yard and then down the Elm St Ext toward the TSBD on the Darnell Film. The timeline here rules Haygood out. I also have seen a Robert MacNeil interview in conjuction with the Cancellare photo that further damages the Officer Haygood timeline. Brick by brick, the 60 year old LN narrative is completely unraveling.
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Jim Jones on March 18, 2024, 06:49:40 AM
Just after that hand raise, Jacqueline climbs to the trunk and retrieves part of his brain.
Hi Allan. I posted a question on this in another thread. I joined here specifically to see what people believe she was doing on the trunk at that moment. The reason I ask is that in the Zapruder film, Jackie's head position in front of JFK's head at the moment of the headshot means she was not able to see any skull landing on the boot and yet within roughly two seconds of the head shot to JFK, she begins climbing up onto the trunk.
As she turned aft to begin climbing out of the seat, she had not yet turned her head rearward to look aft and notice the piece of skull identify it before deciding to retrieve it and then setting into motion. She doesn't seem to have been in any position to know that a piece of skull was at the back of the car yet she set off purposefully, reached out and grabbed something and returned.
What's the consensus in here on what she was grabbing? Or does everyone go with the theory that it was a piece of JFK's skull or brain?
Title: Re: JFK What the doctors saw.....Parkland hospital
Post by: Dan O'meara on March 18, 2024, 08:04:43 AM
Hi Allan. I posted a question on this in another thread. I joined here specifically to see what people believe she was doing on the trunk at that moment. The reason I ask is that in the Zapruder film, Jackie's head position in front of JFK's head at the moment of the headshot means she was not able to see any skull landing on the boot and yet within roughly two seconds of the head shot to JFK, she begins climbing up onto the trunk.
As she turned aft to begin climbing out of the seat, she had not yet turned her head rearward to look aft and notice the piece of skull identify it before deciding to retrieve it and then setting into motion. She doesn't seem to have been in any position to know that a piece of skull was at the back of the car yet she set off purposefully, reached out and grabbed something and returned.
What's the consensus in here on what she was grabbing? Or does everyone go with the theory that it was a piece of JFK's skull or brain?
It's a sunny day, the motorcade is a few minutes away from the Trade Mart and the crowds are beginning to thin out. Jackie is probably miles away, thinking about the rest of the day. Suddenly, her husband starts acting weird, he's got his hands up to his throat and Connally is screaming "No, no, no.", she doesn't have a clue what's going on. Then her husband's head literally explodes and for a very brief second she is staring into the open top of his skull, staring directly at his exposed brain. And she starts to scream:
Traumatised, her reaction is to get away. In the Z-film, as she gets out of her seat, she can be seen to push JFK's head away. She is getting out of the limo, away from the horrific sight of JFK's exposed brain and if it wasn't for Clint Hill she would have been off the back of the limo and under the Secret Service follow up car. She isn't reaching for a piece of brain or skull. She's just trying to get away.