The original draft stated:
?A bullet had entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder to the right of the spine.?
That did not make sense, since a bullet entering "above the shoulder" would not be entering the back.
The final draft stated:
?A bullet had entered the base of the back of his neck and slightly to the right of his spine.?
They changed the wording, not the location of the wound.
The original draft stated:
?A bullet had entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder to the right of the spine.?
That did not make sense, since a bullet entering "above the shoulder" would not be entering the back.
The final draft stated:
?A bullet had entered the base of the back of his neck and slightly to the right of his spine.?
They changed the wording, not the location of the wound.
"That did not make sense, since a bullet entering "above the shoulder" would not be entering the back."
Ford realized that lie in the first draft didn't make sense and moved the description of the location
of the wound, and thus the wound, from JFK's back to the back of his neck.
Unfortunately for Ford we have this report from the autopsy that tells the truth.
Of course, they couldn't change the location of the wound, Sherlock. They changed the wording to support their crazy suppositions.
Fortunately, there is enough evidence to support the shot being below the shoulder.
Judging by your recent posting history, I'd be careful if I were you when mockingly calling another member "Sherlock".
The authentic autopsy photos show that the wound was not below the shoulder.
The original draft stated:
?A bullet had entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder to the right of the spine.?
That did not make sense, since a bullet entering "above the shoulder" would not be entering the back.
The final draft stated:
?A bullet had entered the base of the back of his neck and slightly to the right of his spine.?
They changed the wording, not the location of the wound.
"The authentic autopsy photos show that the wound was not below the shoulder.'
::)
During an executive session of the WC Rankin tells McCloy they have color photos of JFK's body from the autopsy
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/backwoundautopsyphotos.jpg)
Rankin tells another executive session of the WC they have a picture showing the wound in JFK's back is lower than the one in the front of his neck.
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/backwoundwc_1.jpg)
54+ years after the fact, your claim of "Rankin was Wrong" is the Best Rebuttal you can come up with?
Rankin was wrong. So what?
So you've seen the color autopsy photographs of JFK's body that Rankin is referencing at those WC Executive
Sessions?
54+ years after the fact, your claim of "Rankin was Wrong" is the Best Rebuttal you can come up with? The glaring snippet amidst all of that was the statement regarding "....we don't have the Minutes of the Autopsy".
As a member of the Warren Commission that investigated the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Gerald Ford suggested that the panel change its initial description of the bullet wound in Kennedy's back to place it higher up in the body. The change, critics said, may have been intended to support the controversial theory that a "single bullet" struck Kennedy from behind, exited his neck and then wounded Texas Gov. John B. Connally Jr. The Warren Commission relied on it heavily in concluding that Lee Harvey Oswald was Kennedy's lone assassin, firing from a sniper's nest above and behind the president in the Texas School Book Depository. Ford's handwritten editing, revealed in newly disclosed papers kept by the commission's general counsel, was accepted with a slight change. The initial draft of the report stated: "A bullet had entered his {Kennedy's} back at a point slightly below the shoulder to the right of the spine." Ford wanted it to read:" A bullet had entered the back of his neck slightly to the right of the spine." The Final Report said:" A bullet had entered the base of the back of his neck slightly to the right of his spine." The Washington Post By George Lardner Jr. July 3 , 1997
What you have to do is go by the autopsy report which states "situated on the upper right posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula there is a 7x4 millimeter oval wound. This wound is measured to be 14 cm from the tip of the right acromion process and 14 cm below the tip of the right mastoid process."
Also, there are several problems with CTers claiming this bullet did not pass through the president's body and hit Gov. Connally.
One is: if this bullet did not create the exit wound to the president's throat then where is the exit wound for that shot and where did the bullet go? If it did exit (which there is no exit for) then the only thing in front of the president was Gov. Connally? Why was the Gov. not hit twice? Since there is no exit wound for this shot then the bullet would have remained in the president's body. It was not found.
Two: If this shot did not pass through the president's body and create the wound to the president's throat and hit Gov. Connally then the wound to the throat was caused by a shot from the front through the windshield (as a lot of CTers claim) then where is the exit wound for that shot? If that bullet did not exit then where did it go? That bullet was not found. So, conspiracy people, you have two disappearing bullets that you have to explain. Talk about magic.
(1) There is an Autopsy Photo which clearly displays the wound in JFK's BACK to be well Below the base of his neck. (2) The Autopsy Face Sheet clearly displays JFK's BACK Wound to be well Below the base of his neck (3) Humes placed his finger into JFK's BACK Wound. His finger Stopped at roughly his 1st knuckle. These are FACTS. Your questions above are the direct result of having bought into the nonsensical SBT.
Okay, Royell where did the two bullets go? And it was Humes that wrote the report stating where the hole in the back was. Where did that bullet go? Where is the exit wound for it? How much experience do you have with firearms, in particular, rifles? Rifle bullets go through things Royell. Explain to me what evidence you can cite to explain where the back wound bullet went to and where the throat wound bullet went to? Where are they? So, going by what you claimed as a pertinent fact, you are saying that a rifle bullet only penetrated "one knuckle"? Is that what you are saying? LMAO. A pellet gun would go in farther. You might want to rethink that. Have you ever stuck your finger in a wound to soft flesh?
(1) There is an Autopsy Photo which clearly displays the wound in JFK's BACK to be well Below the base of his neck.
(2) The Autopsy Face Sheet clearly displays JFK's BACK Wound to be well Below the base of his neck
(3) Humes placed his finger into JFK's BACK Wound. His finger Stopped at roughly his 1st knuckle.
Humes NEVER bought into the SBT. He knew that was pure Baloney. For 1 thing, he Knew that there were More bullet fragments remaining inside Connally than was missing from the Pristine Bullet
That is false.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sun.gif
That is false.
Have YOU No Shame? The original JFK Autopsy sheet did NOT have an X on it in the neck region. This is what people of your ilk do. Your future posts will be disregarded as YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO CREDIBILITY.
Nurse Phyllis Hall , who was 28 at the time and was in trauma room 1 saw a bullet between JFK's ear and his shoulder while cradling his head. She said it was unlike any of the other bullets that were retrieved and was removed and never presented in evidence. Hall says the bullet had a pointed tip and showed no signs of damage and was about 1 and a 1/2 inches long .Would this have been the bullet that made the throat entrance wound but never traversed the body. Tomlinson and OP Wright said that CE399 resembled the bullet they discovered on the day that JFK died. But the FBI agent who was supposed to have interviewed both men and the bureau's own suppressed records contradicts the FBI's public memo . Agent Odum denied his role, and the FBI's earliest, suppressed files say only that neither Tomlinson nor Wright was able to identify the bullet in question. This suppressed file implies the hospital witnesses saw no resemblance , which is precisely what Wright told one of the authors in 1967. I'm sorry about bouncing from Nurse Hall to Tomlinson and OP Wright but there seems to be a trail of bullets that were not tracked to the Carcano in question . It looks like JFK was hit with 3 bullets , one in the back that did not traverse the body and one frontal shot in the throat that did not traverse the body and then the frontal head shot that blew out the back of JFK's head. Gen. Walker said that the bullet that was fired at him was not the bullet that he was shown later.
Humes NEVER bought into the SBT. He knew that was pure Baloney. For 1 thing, he Knew that there were More bullet fragments remaining inside Connally than was missing from the Pristine Bullet
The bullet that created the shallow JFK BACK Wound was recovered at Parkland Hospital. This is why Specter had to dance a jig during WC Q/A to try and move that bullet onto/off of Connally's stretcher.
The throat wound/Bullet was removed/recovered from JFK's body at Bethesda. This is 1 of the reasons the body of JFK needed to arrive at Bethesda Early/Before Jackie & the empty casket. There is No disputing the early arrival of JFK's body. The arrival time of approx 18:35 is Documented on Sgt Roger Boyajian's Official MD 236, and corroborated by Humes ARRB Testimony.
Have you no shame or are you just an imbecile? The person who placed the X on the facesheet is the same person who placed the dot on it. He said that the dot was not accurate but that the notations were.
That is false.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sun.gif
That is false.
We were talking about the Original Autopsy Face Sheet. YOU Dishonestly Substituted a diagram which was NOT the Original Autopsy Face Sheet. YOU HAVE NO CREDIBILITY
Life must be really hard for you.
Not when it comes to Exposing someone perpetrating a Fraud.
~snip~
"...back in the neck....just above C7." -- Paul O'Connor, 8/29/77
~snip~
Paul O'Connor was interviewed by William Matson Law for his book, In the Eye of History: Disclosures in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence. O'Connor told Law: "We found out, while the autopsy was proceeding, that he was shot from a high building, which meant the bullet had to be traveling in a downward trajectory and we also realized that this bullet - that hit him in the back - is what we called in the military a "short shot," which means that the powder in the bullet was defective so it didn't have the power to push the projectile - the bullet-clear through the body. If it had been a full shot at the angle he was shot, it would have come out through his heart and through his sternum."
~snip~
O'Connor's much earlier recollection and signed diagram takes precedence over statements made to Law. That O'Connor would think that the bullet entering above C7 would have come out through JFK's heart and through his sternum suggests that he was definitely on the downslope as far as his mental faculties were concerned.
"he was definitely on the downslope as far as his mental faculties were concerned."
Naturally.
Isn't everybody who doesn't agree with you or contradicts the LN nararative?
Would a bullet fired from the Southeast window of the sixth floor of the TSBD and entering above C7 have come out through JFK's heart and through his sternum? Yes or no?
The wound in JFK's back was at about the 3rd thoracic vertebrae.
That doesn't answer my question. O'Connor placed the wound at above C7. Would a bullet fired from the Southeast window of the sixth floor of the TSBD and entering above C7 have come out through JFK's heart and through his sternum? Yes or no?
Post the quote from O'Connor placing the wound at C7.
"...back in the neck....just above C7." -- Paul O'Connor, 8/29/77
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=328#relPageId=6&tab=page
(https://i.imgur.com/V7KrPqN.png)
"...back in the neck....just above C7." -- Paul O'Connor, 8/29/77
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=328#relPageId=6&tab=page
(https://i.imgur.com/V7KrPqN.png)
O'Connor's much earlier recollection and signed diagram takes precedence over statements made to Law. That O'Connor would think that the bullet entering above C7 would have come out through JFK's heart and through his sternum suggests that he was definitely on the downslope as far as his mental faculties were concerned.
We were talking about the Original Autopsy Face Sheet. YOU Dishonestly Substituted a diagram which was NOT the Original Autopsy Face Sheet. YOU HAVE NO CREDIBILITY
Glad to see you quoting O'Connor, Tim.
JFK's personal physician's signed autopsy from 11/22/63 placing the wound at the 3rd thoracic
vertebrae takes precedent over O'Connor's 14 year old recollection.
So NOW you want to Rely on O'Connor's "EARLIER Recollection", when Previously you attempted to perpetrate a FRAUD by misrepresenting what was Depicted on The Autopsy Face Sheet. Pen to paper Medical Evidence with respect to the location of the BACK Wound does Not get any "Earlier" than the Autopsy Face Sheet. Dance Clown, Dance.
Who filled out the original Autopsy Face Sheet and placed the dot on the diagram indicating the location of the "back" wound? Who placed the X on the copy of the Autopsy Face sheet seen in the image of the newspaper article that I linked to?
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sun.gif
(https://i.imgur.com/596yhcI.png)
Who made the alteration to that copy of the Autopsy Face Sheet on 8/16/77 in the presence of three HSCA interviewers?
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/autopsydescriptivesheet.png)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/Image1.jpg)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/008.jpg)
STOP once again Misrepresenting/Lying. YOU posted a diagram with an X on the neck. That diagram had NOTHING to do with the ORIGINAL Autopsy Face Sheet which was under discussion. YOU got caught. YOU HAVE NO CREDIBILITY
Strange we see NO DOT on the collar/neck region on this Autopsy Face Sheet/Descriptive Sheet Vs the one YOU Posted. YOU HAVE NO CREDIBILITY
Who placed the dot on that Autopsy Face Sheet/Descriptive Sheet?
Perhaps you should tell us, Tim, as it is you posted the altered sheet.
Are you Irish? Because that is pure blarney. Most of you CTers don't have much experience with firearms do you? Because if you did have experience with firearms you would be embarrassed to claim the things you do. Name a rifle that only penetrates soft tissue one inch. You realize that you have created two "magic bullets" don't you? Name the rifle that would only penetrate one inch.
Who placed the dot on that Autopsy Face Sheet/Descriptive Sheet?
First things first Ray. Who filled out and placed the markings on the original autopsy Face sheet?
How do you even know that the missile that created the president's back wound was fired from a rifle?
John instead of the little word games you like to play, why don't you explain to me what would fire a projectile that would only penetrate an inch. And then explain to me why someone would be so stupid as to try and shoot the president with a weapon that would only go in an inch. You realize how stupid that is do you not? Besides Royell is the one that claimed it was a bullet. But now he has to explain why the wound to the throat only went in an inch or two. I'm sorry I can't stop laughing over your question? I thought I had found a serious site to debate the assassination. Evidently it is a comedy site.
According to Finck
"In 1969 Finck testified under oath that he hinself made no notes, and that Boswell made the notes on the 'face sheet'. He then corrects this to say that he did take measurements and may have written them down, or read them out for the others to write down, but that he had no notes when he left the autopsy room. He says Humes & Boswell made notes at the autopsy."
Tim, why are you posting an obvious fake face sheet?
Don't be such an ass Ray. Royell can't help himself but you should know better. It's not a fake face sheet. It's a copy of the original face sheet that the HSCA presented to Boswell and on which he placed for them a mark at where the wound in the neck was. He was the person who made the notes and markings on the original face sheet. He stated that the dot on the original face sheet was not an accurate placement of the wound. He first made that comment in 1966 when he placed an X on another copy of the face sheet.
So how does that work? He made the notes on the original face sheet in 1963 when he has just seen the body and the wounds, yet he makes a "mistake" but it takes him three to six years to realize he made that mistake and correct it?
Really... and this is one of the men you rely on for accuracy in one of the most important autopsies of the century?
He didn't make a mistake. He just wasn't being precise when he placed that mark on it.
Are Autopsy Face Sheets Supposed to be Drawn to Scale?
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/toscale.htm
He didn't make a mistake. He just wasn't being precise when he placed that mark on it.
Yeah right... That's good material for a comedy hour, when we have one...
But I'll play... So you rely on a guy that wasn't being precise?
He didn't make a mistake. He just wasn't being precise when he placed that mark on it.
He placed the wound at a completely different location, what does that have to do with scale?
Do I rely on a guy who wasn't being precise when placing a dot on an autopsy face sheet? Yes I do. The notations on the face sheet are accurate.
Scale refers to accuracy.
Huh?
So the notations on the face sheet are accurate but the face sheet itself wasn't drawn to scale and thus isn't accurate?
He didn't make a mistake. He just wasn't being precise when he placed that mark on it.
Are Autopsy Face Sheets Supposed to be Drawn to Scale?
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/toscale.htm
Scale refers to accuracy.
You're still not answering the question. Not directly anyway.
I'm answering. You're just not listening. Or don't have the ability to comprehend that JFK's physician's
11/22/63 signed autopsy trumps O'Connor's 14 year old recollection.
Do you believe the farther a witness gets, time wise, from an event the better their memory of that event?
I'm answering. You're just not listening.
Or don't have the ability to comprehend that JFK's physician's
11/22/63 signed autopsy trumps O'Connor's 14 year old recollection.
Do you believe the farther a witness gets, time wise, from an event the better their memory of that event?
At the end of the day the accurate measurements are written on the face sheet and must take precedence.
I think when they took the measurement that we see on the face sheet they also took the following photograph using the ruler as verification.
(https://s17.postimg.org/nhm9u02rz/But_Herbert_it_s_14cm_below_the_mastoid_process.jpg)
Btw the face sheet shows the classic anatomical position which is replicated by the lying down Kennedy.
JohnM
John instead of the little word games you like to play, why don't you explain to me what would fire a projectile that would only penetrate an inch. And then explain to me why someone would be so stupid as to try and shoot the president with a weapon that would only go in an inch. You realize how stupid that is do you not? Besides Royell is the one that claimed it was a bullet. But now he has to explain why the wound to the throat only went in an inch or two. I'm sorry I can't stop laughing over your question? I thought I had found a serious site to debate the assassination. Evidently it is a comedy site.
However, if any eye/earwitness saw a weapon other than a rifle being aimed at somebody in that limo, and in addition can tell the difference between the report of a high-powered rifle and the (unsaid) weapon, please post that?and pronto?because I probably won't last another 54 years.
These brainiacs apparently think the generic face sheet was an accurate drawing of Kennedy's shoulders.
Sloped, they ain't.
At the end of the day the accurate measurements are written on the face sheet and must take precedence.
I think when they took the measurement that we see on the face sheet they also took the following photograph using the ruler as verification.
JFK's physician never performed an autopsy.
JFK's physician never performed an autopsy.
Of course you're laughing. You think all of your wild-ass assumptions should just be accepted as true.
How should I know what projectile would only penetrate an inch? That depends a lot on what it was, how fast it was going, where it came from, if it hit anything in between, and a whole bunch of other factors. The Sibert and O'Neill report says that the end of the opening could be felt with a finger. They were listening to what Humes was saying and writing it down. By the way, how did "could be felt with a finger" turn into "an inch"?
Gary never said he did.
At the end of the day the accurate measurements are written on the face sheet and must take precedence.
I think when they took the measurement that we see on the face sheet they also took the following photograph using the ruler as verification.
(https://s17.postimg.org/nhm9u02rz/But_Herbert_it_s_14cm_below_the_mastoid_process.jpg)
Btw the face sheet shows the classic anatomical position which is replicated by the lying down Kennedy.
JohnM
Superimposing a ruler onto an autopsy photograph in a location where it doesn't exist in the original...
You're still not answering the question. Not directly anyway.
8)
Ok good. You caught on. Indirectly anyway.
These brainiacs apparently think the generic face sheet was an accurate drawing of Kennedy's shoulders.
Sloped, they ain't.
Right. And what you indirectly did was admit that I was correct when I stated the following:
O'Connor's much earlier recollection and signed diagram takes precedence over statements made to Law. That O'Connor would think that the bullet entering above C7 would have come out through JFK's heart and through his sternum suggests that he was definitely on the downslope as far as his mental faculties were concerned.
Gary, you lost track of what we were talking about. We were talking about O'Connor and his statements.
JFK's physician never performed an autopsy.
"JFK's physician's 11/22/63 signed autopsy"
You think that means I think JFK's physician performed a autopsy?
I would recommend you enroll in some adult education classes on reading comprehension.
Check your local community college.
GARY - Based on Nickerson's logic, your endorsement on a check therefore indicates You are President of the Bank from which the funds are dispersed.
Ford moved the back wound , thus creating " The Magic Bullet " CE 399 !
Geez Louise, what's the purpose of the ruler in the Autopsy Photo, decoration?
Gary , I did not use my wording very well about Jerry Ford and the MBT . I know Arlen Specter came up with the MBT or SBT which ever way you want to put it. I thought that Fords movement of the final location of the back wound to the base of the neck wound made it seem that there was a possible chance for the MBT to have done the damage it did . Hale Boggs , Richard Russell and John Cooper thought the MBT to be improbable. I think my main thought had to be, why did Ford think that the movement of the entry in the back of JFK needed to be moved up to the base of the neck and was Ford the only person that thought the wound needed to be moved?
"I think my main thought had to be, why did Ford think that the movement of the entry in the back of JFK needed to be moved up to the base of the neck and was Ford the only person that thought the wound needed to be moved?"
IMO Ford and the rest of the WC were conscious they were covering up the truth.
The wound needed to be in the neck not the back for the SBT and LN did it narrative.
Rankin told an Executive Session they had the color autopsy photos of JFK's body.
Rankin told an Executive Session those photos showed the wound in JFK's back was lower than the wound
in the front of his neck.
With these WC "Executive Sessions" and the Sealing of Sworn Testimony, (White House Photog Robert L. Knudsen developing/seeing B/W JFK Autopsy Photo(s) displaying probe(s) in the Neck of JFK running Front-to-Back), you have to wonder what else has been hidden from the Public?
Gary , I did not use my wording very well about Jerry Ford and the MBT . I know Arlen Specter came up with the MBT or SBT which ever way you want to put it. I thought that Fords movement of the final location of the back wound to the base of the neck wound made it seem that there was a possible chance for the MBT to have done the damage it did . Hale Boggs , Richard Russell and John Cooper thought the MBT to be improbable. I think my main thought had to be, why did Ford think that the movement of the entry in the back of JFK needed to be moved up to the base of the neck and was Ford the only person that thought the wound needed to be moved?
Ford moved the back wound , thus creating " The Magic Bullet " CE 399 !
Ford never moved any wound by even as much as a mm in any direction.
Right, generic face sheets are used in virtually all autopsies so the location of wounds and injuries on the
deceased can be obscured. geez
Tell us Bill are JFK's wounds accurately depicted in the illustrations below?
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/backclark.jpg)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/wcheadwound.jpg)
Do you understand the difference between sloped v square shoulders
Show us where Kennedy's square* shoulders match the sloped shoulders in the generic face sheet drawing
Show us where the 14 x 14 measurement noted on the face sheet changed position
Again, tell us how a face sheet drawing is meant to replace the actual measurement of the body itself.
*Hint: Google 'JFK shoulders swim'
The Autopsy Photos of JFK 's BACK Wound in No Way resemble the cockamamie illustrations you have provided above.
Correct. He would have had to have been present at the autopsy so to do. What he did, was change the description of the position of the wound. Easy peasy.
The head shot looks relatively accurate if Jackie's statement 'top, behind the forehead' was accurate.
I prefer actual photos to drawings. How a wound position is described to an artist is the responsibility of the person describing it; if the result is inaccurate then something went sideways between the two.
Do you understand the difference between sloped v square shoulders
Show us where Kennedy's square* shoulders match the sloped shoulders in the generic face sheet drawing
Show us where the 14 x 14 measurement noted on the face sheet changed position
Again, tell us how a face sheet drawing is meant to replace the actual measurement of the body itself.
*Hint: Google 'JFK shoulders swim'
"CLOSE ENOUGH" is also what Gerald Ford was probably muttering after finishing with his Clerical Wound Moving Alteration.
Bill, those are very poor illustrations. Very poor representations of the shots that they are supposed to be illustrating.
The head shot looks relatively accurate if Jackie's statement 'top, behind the forehead' was accurate.
I prefer actual photos to drawings. How a wound position is described to an artist is the responsibility of the person describing it; if the result is inaccurate then something went sideways between the two.
Do you understand the difference between sloped v square shoulders
Show us where Kennedy's square* shoulders match the sloped shoulders in the generic face sheet drawing
Show us where the 14 x 14 measurement noted on the face sheet changed position
Again, tell us how a face sheet drawing is meant to replace the actual measurement of the body itself.
*Hint: Google 'JFK shoulders swim'
A more apt description of the twofer inshoot would be 'neck/back' wound, given that the missile struck precisely at the junction where the neck merges into the back (according to the autopsy, and described elsewhere as such)
Gary provided the 'cockamamie' illustrations above, not me. I agree they look wonky; pretty sure JFK would be hard-pressed to remain in that bolt-upright position, or even attain it.
Did Ford move the point of entrance on the back wound higher up to the base of the neck so the "Single Bullet Theory' would have a chance to somehow sway the public into thinking that the " Magic Bullet Theory " could possibly have happened ? JFK's bullet hole in his shirt and suit jacket are" right on " to where the original point of entry was made on the face sheet which showed the shot to hit to the left of the right shoulder blade and to the right of the midline (spine).
It was just a fantastic coincidence that his jacket and shirt both bunched up an equal amount to make it look that way.
I believe that Ford's movement of the back wound up to the base of the neck caused those on the Warren Commission to become divided on the subject and of course CE 399 , which was at one time a back wound with the depth of Humes little finger stopping at the knuckle . Who would have told Ford that it would have been more plausible to have the back wound moved up to the base of neck so the SBT could have a chance of working. I think we got the same type of crime on 9/11 as we went through on 11/22/1963 ! A very sad state of affairs !
Gerald Fords placement of the "base of the neck" ( AKA back wound ) would almost have put the bullet hole very close to where JFK's shirt collar would have been . But that really doesn't matter because DR. HUMES WOUNDS OF MOVEMENTS would have covered for any placement . Apparently Thomas Robinson should not have been in the room when Humes was rearranging wounds ! "That's what the Drs. did" Ooops !
As a member of the Warren Commission that investigated the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Gerald Ford suggested that the panel change its initial description of the bullet wound in Kennedy's back to place it higher up in the body. The change, critics said, may have been intended to support the controversial theory that a "single bullet" struck Kennedy from behind, exited his neck and then wounded Texas Gov. John B. Connally Jr. The Warren Commission relied on it heavily in concluding that Lee Harvey Oswald was Kennedy's lone assassin, firing from a sniper's nest above and behind the president in the Texas School Book Depository. Ford's handwritten editing, revealed in newly disclosed papers kept by the commission's general counsel, was accepted with a slight change. The initial draft of the report stated: "A bullet had entered his {Kennedy's} back at a point slightly below the shoulder to the right of the spine." Ford wanted it to read:" A bullet had entered the back of his neck slightly to the right of the spine." The Final Report said:" A bullet had entered the base of the back of his neck slightly to the right of his spine." The Washington Post By George Lardner Jr. July 3 , 1997
Sure, John, sure. I had to double check but Ford got it spot on "back of the neck."
Here's what it looked like during the autopsy:
(http://grandsubversion.com/jfkAssassination/nobotimg/jfk_autopsy_photos/atp3pho4.jpg)
...and then I checked it again on Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neck
Yep, Ford got it right, alright.
Another wonderfully biased piece of AnAlysis
Hi Mike O --
The people on this board can only handle one conspiracy at a time so let's stick to JFK. :-)
Ford - yes, just a nice little last-minute tweak to the official report to shove that round peg into a square hole a little bit further.
Hale Boggs - heard about the plane crash; don't think anything sinister happened
Brown and Clinton - never heard of such a conspiracy
Ted Kennedy crash - probably just a run-of-the-mill crash
JFK Junior's crash - he should have never been flying so late in the day. He was not instrument rated and lost his bearings up there. Nothing sinister.
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/opinion/30iht-edcarroll.4.6900205.html
The peril of valuing celebrity over history
By JAMES CARROLLJULY 30, 2007
....the simultaneously banalizing methods of capitalist enterprise (false advertising, consumerism, pieties of affluence, amoral bureaucracy) are exactly what that enterprise created to keep from being criticized.....
Indiana cemetery objects to plan to exhume body of gangster John ...
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-john-dillinger-body-exhumation-20190815-4nk2wv6owbd4ll2ganaft7qdja-story.html
3 days ago - The Indianapolis cemetery where 1930s gangster John Dillinger is buried is objecting to his body's planned exhumation as part of a television ...
Why John Dillinger's Relatives Want to Exhume His Body | Smart News
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/why-john-dillingers-relatives-want-exhume-his-body-180972801/
Aug 2, 2019 - After the notorious bank robber John Dillinger was shot to death by federal agents in 1934, thousands of spectators converged at his funeral, ...
Finding Amelia Earhart's Plane Seemed Impossible. Then Came a ...
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/12/science/amelia-earhart-search-robert-ballard.html
6 days ago - Dr. Ballard has always wanted to find the remains of the plane Amelia Earhart was flying when she disappeared in 1937. But he feared the hunt ...
Inside Robert Ballard's search for Amelia Earhart's airplane
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/2019/08/inside-search-for-amelia-earhart-airplane/
6 days ago - Many attempts have been made to discover the famed aviator's fate, but never with the technological tools at Robert Ballard's disposal.
Robert Ballard Launches Search for Amelia Earhart's Airplane
https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/robert-ballard-launches-search-for-amelia-earhart-s-airplane
6 days ago - Famed oceanographer Dr. Robert Ballard and the crew of his foundations research vessel, the Nautilus...
http://edition.cnn.com/US/9907/22/kennedy.plane.01/index.html
...Officials also said the Navy has given approval for the remains of his wife, Carolyn Bessette Kennedy, and her sister, Lauren Bessette, to be buried at sea, but it was not immediately clear if the women's family has elected to do so...
https://www.nytimes.com/1999/07/23/us/kennedy-burial-overview-private-ceremony-sea-for-3-kennedy-plane.html
...July 23, 1999
...Mr. Kennedy did not meet any of the criteria for people who are automatically entitled to naval commitment at sea. The special service was possible only because of a dispensation from the Secretary of Defense, William S. Cohen, in response to a request from Mr. Kennedy's uncle, Senator Edward M. Kennedy.
Such ceremonies are usually reserved for active or retired military members, their spouses and dependent children. A Defense Department official said the service itself did not follow military protocol, but instead was a religious service.
Officials acknowledged that the service was unprecedented. But the Pentagon spokesman, Kenneth H. Bacon, defended the decision, saying, ''It's a family that has distinguished itself through public service and sacrificed itself through public service for more than 30 years.''...
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a28188303/lauren-bessette-carolyn-kennedy-sister-facts/
The Other Passenger: Who Was Lauren Bessette?
Reduced to a footnote to the national tragedy of losing JFK Jr. and his wife Carolyn, Lauren Bessette was a star in her own right—accomplished, ambitious, beautiful, and loved by her friends.
by ADRIENNE GAFFNEY
JUL 9, 2019 ....
...In any other grouping, Lauren would have been the star. Thirty-four years old and on the fast track at Morgan Stanley, Bessette had an Ivy League MBA, was fluent in Mandarin, and had a sophisticated group of friends. She was the kind of New York City talent many people dream of befriending. Her friends say she was brilliant, compassionate, quick witted, and a champion of those who were struggling. One colleague told the New York Observer, “She may have been more successful than [John and Carolyn] were.”...
https://photo.wn.com/lauren_bessette
OTIS AIR FORCE BASE, MA, UNITED STATES
07.22.1999
Courtesy Photo
U.S. Coast Guard District 1
Subscribe 32
Otis AFB, MA (July 22) -- The wooden wall that conceals the wreckage of John F. Kennedy's Piper Saratoga airplane Air Station Cape Cod hangar. John F. Kennedy Jr., his wife Carolyn and her sister Lauren Bessette. The three died when Kennedy's crashed into the sea July 17. USCG photo by MILNES, PETE PA1USCG photo by MILNES, PETE PA1
(https://cdn.dvidshub.net/media/thumbs/photos/1312/1079637/1000w_q95.jpg)
From the junction where the back joins the neck
A voice comes over the intercom:
'Back, meet neck... neck, meet back'
Back: Guess we'll have to share the fame on this one, huh?
Neck: Seems only fair, since the Inshot landed right on top of the both of us.
Back: We'll flip for who gets top billing.
Neck: Nah, back/neck.. neck/back.. no biggee, as long as both are included when describing the twofer.
Back: Okay, let's take a shot at it.
Sure, Bill, sure. There's a thing in anatomy called the nape:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nape
The very first line at the above says the back of the neck.
Now if you want to argue and disagree over thousands of medical professionals who call that area the nape - that loose fold of skin that everyone has - vs a politician who was trying to further a square peg into a round hole - then you go right ahead. And you know, it's the same politician who pardoned one of the most corrupt US presidents in US history rather than let him face the consequences.
But it sure looks to me like that bullet hole is well below the nape, also known as the back of the neck.
But that's OK Bill. Let that old Kennedy bias hate creep in, blinding you to what's obvious to many more unbiased eyes.
Sure, Bill, sure. There's a thing in anatomy called the nape:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nape
The very first line at the above says the back of the neck.
Now if you want to argue and disagree over thousands of medical professionals who call that area the nape - that loose fold of skin that everyone has - vs a politician who was trying to further a square peg into a round hole - then you go right ahead. And you know, it's the same politician who pardoned one of the most corrupt US presidents in US history rather than let him face the consequences.
But it sure looks to me like that bullet hole is well below the nape, also known as the back of the neck.
But that's OK Bill. Let that old Kennedy bias hate creep in, blinding you to what's obvious to many more unbiased eyes.
| (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/normal_Be3_crop.jpg) | (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/normal_BE5_HI.jpg) | (http://www.securico.co.jp/image/left.jpg) |
Sure, John, sure. You didn't even look at the neck link I posted. And here's a photo from your heroes.
(http://www.whokilledjfk.net/images/fBI%20JU2.jpg)
That's NOT the neck, John. It's not. You're being very clever by posting that cutaway 3D photo that shows the spinal column because any dumbass would think that because the column is in the neck that makes the lower portion part of the neck. And it's not.
And it was not a mistake in the final report. They got it right the first time UNTIL old Gerry penciled in "...of neck."
But you go right on ahead and remainunbiased in your ANALysis.
Sure, John, sure. You didn't even look at the neck link I posted. And here's a photo from your heroes.
(http://www.whokilledjfk.net/images/fBI%20JU2.jpg)
That's NOT the neck, John. It's not. You're being very clever by posting that cutaway 3D photo that shows the spinal column because any dumbass would think that because the column is in the neck that makes the lower portion part of the neck. And it's not.
And it was not a mistake in the final report. They got it right the first time UNTIL old Gerry penciled in "...of neck."
But you go right on ahead and remainunbiased in your ANALysis.
Doesn't the jacket have to be bunched and the trajectory slope made sleeper? That's a cartoon for idiots.
Doesn't the jacket have to be bunched
That's a cartoon for idiots.
Thumb1:
(https://i.postimg.cc/yxQz3kS4/Kennedy-stand-in-sbf.gif)
Exactly, that's precisely the audience that gobbles up such illogical absurdities.
JohnM
| (https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/neckwound/generic-anatomic-and-seated-positions.jpg) Generic example of change in neck posture while sitting; not mean to duplicate JFK's posture | (https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/neckwound/bunch/love-field-cap-showing-bunch-at-nape.jpg) |
Sure, John, sure. Sure, Bill, sure.
Here's my all-time favorite photo about this whole sordid deal. Here's your heroes again. Not us wacky and fun-loving conspiracy theorists but, you know, officialdom:
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-tVgp0Sl8FIc/TqiYWAXVt1I/AAAAAAAAHEc/beNcB8X4opQ/s1600/1964_FBI_REENACTMENT_color4.jpg)
See the two markers on the stand-in? Do you know why they have TWO markers? It's very simple, Bill and John (and Jerry). First, they know what the medical evidence is. So now, after some lawyer tells them, "Well, we know your boss wants no questions about this. The playboy is gone and we can do all manner of fudging (and xxxing around with) the evidence. It's just gotta be one shooter from right up thar."
So they know the medical history. A hole in the throat (hence the sticker on the stand-in's back of the neck) and the lower sticker. Even G-Men know where the back of the neck and the back are located for crissake! And, you know, the EXACT SAME HOLES we see in the autopsy photos. So they put the stickers there to somehow - SOME WAY - try to figure it out during this reenactment.
| (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/normal_alt5Groden.jpg) Altgens on Houston | (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-tVgp0Sl8FIc/TqiYWAXVt1I/AAAAAAAAHEc/beNcB8X4opQ/s1600/1964_FBI_REENACTMENT_color4.jpg) |
Only they can't. It's not possible. The bullet's traveling downward, yet the stickers are going UPWARD. Duh, much?
So hence, the final report is honest ("back") until old Gerry pencils in "back of neck."
As John I says above, there was no bunch. But even if there was, it doesn't change anything. All you gotta do is look at the autopsy photo of the back. Even if the jacket had a hole way down the bottom due to bunching (but ALAS it doesn't) the back wound in the photo shows they got it right in the above photo like they got it right with the stickers.
Now if you guys want to let your Kennedy bias kick in again and go all like, "BUT BUT BUT what about this...or that...or this..." - then you go right ahead. And I'm sure you will. But all the bias in the world is not going to change what's obvious in these photos as well as the autopsy.
'Night John Boy. 'Night Mary Ellen.
The Altgens photo of Kennedy on Houston shows the bunch more clearly (ie: there's no shadow on the back from the jacket collar).
What bunch?
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/altgens5-bunch.jpg)
Bunch? What bunch?
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/willis-bunched.jpg)
Kennedy's jacket at Love Field as compared to Kennedy's Jacket on Elm street.
You think the magic bullet traversed at Z-160?
Willis 5 was taken on Elm street as well.
You think the magic bullet traversed at Z-160?
Willis 5 was taken on Elm street as well.
No, and I don't think that CE399 was fired a couple of seconds later at about Zapruder frame 202 either, so what's your point?
How do you know if or how the jacket was bunched when JFK was struck in the back?
AFAIK, one testified to seeing Kennedy straighten his bunch (or his junk) between Croft 160 and his Zap vanishing act.
Is it necessary to overtly and visibly straighten one's bunch?
That seems to be the case re Oswald/TT ;)
Re one hand waving and the other doing God/Gawd knows what, I'll go with a little show 'n tell here.
How do you know if or how the jacket was bunched when JFK was struck in the back?
Was the placement of the bullet that supposedly hit JFK at the base of the back of his neck all thought up and posed as a fact , all thought up and said to be all of Jerry Fords idea or did the others in the Warren Commission all jump on what Jerry Ford said about the placement of the shot and try to say they were in agreement of what Ford had said about the placement of the shot ? With all respect to the Parkland Staff and to the people who have been told that they were wrong about what they saw at Parkland compared to what we were told by Bethesda as to what their autopsy showed , should lead us to figure that we were lied to our faces .
From Z160 to the last Zapruder frame before Kennedy's jacket disappears behind the sign, as expected the rght side of Kennedy's jacket slightly rises as he waves his right hand.
The burden would be on the people who claim that he pulled a gun to show that he pulled a gun.
An apparent bunch at Z-160 tells you nothing about an alleged bunch at Z-223 (even if you could show that this is when a bullet entered JFK's back, which you cannot).
As usual, “Mytton” posts a fuzzy graphic and tells us what “we” see.
The burden would be accompanied by a sane standard of proof
And by “sane standard”, you mean one that you are willing to settle for.
Gary , your Post on the C-Span interview with FBI Agent James Sibert is very much worth listening to. It reveals that Gerald Ford changed the location of the back wound to the base of the neck in order to coincide with the magic bullet theory which more than likely made Ford and Arlen Specter to be in collusion about that entry placement . Sibert stood there at close range and he said the back bullet entry was in the upper back and not where Ford places it , which was in the base of the back of the neck . J. Lee Rankins son showed Sibert over 40,000 pages of notes that were taken during the Warren Commission and they found notes pertaining to Gerald Ford and his placement of the bullet hole . Sibert was at the autopsy and saw 1st hand where the wound was . They used a probe to go into the entry wound in " The Back " and the probe went in about as far as Humes went in with his small finger , which only went to his first knuckle . There was no exit for the back wound until Gerald Ford moves the entrance wound to the base of the neck so Specter can force feed all of us " The Single Bullet Theory " !
To John M, Bill and the other Kennedy hating biased "researchers" here:
The start of this thread was why old Gerry penciled in "of neck."
I disputed that way up above - before it got buried with all of your ridiculous nonsense - about the G-Men's reenactment showing two stickers on the stand in. The G-Men knew it was the back and front of the throat (hence the stickers).
Instead of running around bringing up bunches, 3D photos of the spinal column that show absolutely nothing of interest, I'm still waiting for you to dispute my dispute.
Remember - if it's not too difficult to do, stick to the task at hand.
Remember - no more bunches. No more other bullspombleprofglidnoctobuns.
How is it that your heroes know where the wounds are based on their stickers, yet old Gerry pencils in "of neck?" How is it that they actually got the wound locations almost precisely where the autopsy photos are, yet Gerry would still pencil it in?
How is it that any of you can't see what the G-Men - your heroes - CAN see?
Dispute please.
Bumping this for John M, Bill and other [biased] Kennedy haters...
Come on, I'm waiting. Please dispute why the FBI reenactment photo shows a throat marker for the frontal wound, a marker for the back wound, why they knew where the wounds were located, and why old Gerry felt compelled to add "of neck" to the report.
Does thisassholeguy really think members are going to bother to debate with someone who starts every post with " biased Kennedy haters"? I certainly won't be. ~shrug~
Go to you tube and type in --- Uncut interview-- JFK's Emergency Room Doctor : Dr.Robert McClelland . Starting at about the 9:00 minute mark , Dr. McClelland goes into detail of the wound in the right back of JFK's head wound where he describes a wound of about 5 inches in diameter and he ask the other Drs. if they have seen the back of his head of which they said no and with that Dr. McClelland says that the right side of the back of his head is gone . Dr. McClelland and Dr. Malcolm Perry were best of friends and Dr. Perry to Dr. McCelland that he was approached by a person who cautioned him that he should not say anything . It was odd that when I typed in the https://you tube.com/watch?v=IQ435IMaCng , it took me to you tube but it said the video was unavailable but when I just went to you tube and typed in --- Uncut interview--JFK's Emergency Room Doctor : Dr. Robert Mclelland , then the video came up .
Why would Dr. McClelland ask the other Drs. if they had seen the right back of the head where Dr. McClelland says the right back side of the head is missing which he said was about a 5 inch circumference hole " about the size of a large orange if the autopsy photos show the right side of JFK's head with several hinged skull bones going different directions above and forward of the right ear . If the Parkland Drs. did not see this type of wound on the right side of the head , that tells me that wound on the right side of the head did not exist in Dallas.
that tells me that wound on the right side of the head did not exist in Dallas.
Dr. McClelland had no reason to lie ! Now on the other hand Dr. Humes had every reason to lie as to the wounds he said he observed at Bethesda . It's hard to mistake a 5 inch wound in the right side back of the head on JFK . If Parkland had seen what supposedly was the right side of the head above and forward of the right ear then I would have to think that Dr. Perry would have of course seen that wound .
As Thomas Robinson the Embalmer from Gawlers Funeral home talked about the Bethesda wounds on JFK , Oh that's what the Drs. did !
Dr. McClelland had no reason to lie !
Does thisassholeguy really think members are going to bother to debate with someone who starts every post with " biased Kennedy haters"? I certainly won't be. ~shrug~
Mike, you didn't even attempt to explain how on Earth McClelland could look down into the hole on Kennedy's skull,
Mike, you didn't even attempt to explain how on Earth McClelland could look down into the hole on Kennedy's skull, what McClelland descibes in his testimony under oath is what we see in the authenticated autopsy photos.
Zapruder and the Newman's were interviewed on the same afternoon and they describe a wound on the right side of Kennedy's head, so we can at least establish that when Kennedy was in Dealey Plaza he had a wound on the right side of his head.
(https://lalitkumar.in/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/frame-13-zapruder-film.png)
(https://i.postimg.cc/TPRjTnxr/Dealey-Plaza-Eyewitnesses2-zpsc1d78c8b.gif)
Btw the Zapruder film has been authenticated at the granular level and in addition the very next week in LIFE magazine of which they only had a few days to prepare, LIFE printed images from around the most important frames which means that there was no sequences of any significance left to tamper with.
(https://i.postimg.cc/nh08FY7x/Zap-lifea.gif)
JohnM
You may not like what I say, Denis, but it's very true. Go back to my thread above about what I posted. I know you won't but go anyway. Read it. Now tell me why not a single person here is willing to try to dispute what I'm saying?
How can it be that during this reenactment they had the stickers on the Kennedy stand-in exactly where the injuries were on the body? How can it be that instead of not writing the obvious about those stickers, we then had a policitian pencil in "of neck" to further fudge the official record?
| (http://www.whokilledjfk.net/images/fBI%20JU2.jpg) | (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cH6TIrBe72w/UomNj_vsNZI/AAAAAAAAw6M/yUNOMnmLfN4/s530/Commission-Exhibit-903.jpg) |
| (https://cbsnews1.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2013/11/22/d90988c3-7938-41f5-8372-f33eaf214d8f/thumbnail/1200x630/UTTMgreen_JFK112213_640x360.jpg) | (https://media2.s-nbcnews.com/i/MSNBC/Components/Video/__NEW/n_mj_jfk_131114.jpg) |
What else is there to say? Do you not find it the least bit intriguing to see those two stickers on that stand-in? Do you have any explanation at all of how a shot that hits that lower part of the back to then some how work its way up and exit where the throat sticker is on the other side? We're talking simple physics here, Denis.
And per the autopsy the back wound DID NOT EVEN EXIT. Humes said as much...it terminated there and he could stick his finger into it and feel where ended. So what about that, Denis?
If you or anyone else is jumping around all over the place on this not facing the facts, then yes, your biased. What else is there?
I liken it to the police investigator who hates prostitutes and then has to investigate one's murder. He's not going to give a vigorous and honest investigation because in his mind, she deserved it or whatever.
There's more than enough of that to go around in this case too. The truth hurts, Denis.
'Night John Boy. 'Night Mary Ellen.
A simple matter of a "Bullet Right Through the Brain".
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/kilduff.jpg)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/groden.jpg)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/jfktemple.jpg)
Arlen Spector thought the President's jacket raised up because Kennedy in the Z-film had his right arm up waving. But the bunch at the nape was present in most, if not all, photos (of sufficient resolution) of the motorcade after it left Love Field. The bunch at the nape wasn't dependent on how high the right arm was.
So if a photo doesn’t show a bunch then it’s not of “sufficient resolution”. How convenient.
Hmm.....”because he said so” seemed to be good enough for you when you were asked how Brennan knew that the person crouched down behind boxes aiming a rifle was the same person he saw earlier on a windowsill.
So if a photo doesn’t show a bunch then it’s not of “sufficient resolution”. How convenient.
What has that got to do with the price of fish? Brennan saw the same guy in the same window twice within several minutes, what's so hard to believe about that?
Out of the scores of windows in the buildings surrounding Brennan he just happens to pick the one window which has Oswald's prints on the recently moved rifle rest
, shells from Oswald's rifle
and on the same floor Oswald's rifle
is found with Oswald's prints.
So it was either Oswald
Here's what has to be Brennan looking up at Oswald's sniper's nest.
Anyway, getting back on track there is no need to speculate what McClelland could see because we have photos which conclusively show that it was possible for McClelland to look DOWN into Kennedy's head wound.
The jacket was bunched because Zapruder filmed the bunched jacket.
What’s so hard to believe about seeing a hole in the back of somebody’s head?
What “recently moved rifle rest”?
LOL
LOL
No, some prints were found near the trigger guard that we’re useless for identification purposes, and a partial palm print showed up a week later on an index card.
Or it was not Oswald.
What “bunched jacket”?
This bunched jacket. Practically from the moment he sat down in the limo @Love Field
Hilarious, I knew you'd take the stupid route and go with the massive still unproven conspiracy where everyone whose name wasn't Oswald lied, nice.
What massive still unproven conspiracy where everyone whose name wasn't Oswald lied? The one you just made up as a false alternative because you can't actually prove that Oswald did it? Nice.
Iacoletti at the Gates of Hell:
'Lee my darling, what are YOU doing here?'
Oswald: 'I shot Kennedy and Tippit'
Iacoletti: 'LIAR! PROVE IT! YOU MADE THAT UP!
Oswald: ::)
Very creative fiction
>>> See my creative non-fiction re the muzzled revolver in the hand of the NotResistingArrestOswald @TT
>>> Oh, you mean the narrative where I say no one here can prove squat?
Speaking of narratives, where's your counter-narrative or are you just going to continue JAQ*ing-off?
This bunched jacket. Practically from the moment he sat down in the limo @Love Field
(https://i.postimg.cc/nckQHYTZ/jacket-bunch-jfk.png)
The Wild Bunch
Love Field 11/22/63
(https://i.postimg.cc/BZMXk5gK/bunchy-01.png)
(https://i.postimg.cc/KzTCL58s/bunchy-02.png)
(https://i.postimg.cc/7ZVzPv1K/bunchy-03-love-field.png)