Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Contrary to what Fancy Prancer Rants and Stormtrooper Storing think [sic], the women in this Darnell frame are not, from left to right, "Uhh ... I'm not sure," Gloria Calvert [sic], and ditzy Karen Westbrook, but self-described American Indian Stella Mae Jacob, strawberry-blond Gloria Jeanne Holt, and blue-headscarf-wearing Sharon Simmons.

Unfortunately, they mistakenly told the FBI (or one of them did and the FBI agent created a boiler-plate template for the other two to sign) that they were standing on the south side of Elm Street during the motorcade.

Factoid: They were standing on the north side of Elm Street, as can be seen in the Zapruder film where they're standing "next to" the Stemmons Freeway sign.

D'oh!

    You're babbling. What's your point?
22
It's funny how certain tinfoil-hat JFKA CT cockroaches keep returning to this forum.

Doesn't it depend on what your criteria are for TF-H ?

Try to keep up, Tommy. Skim the following and then post examples of what is not well supported.:

Wikipedia, in my experience, practices a rule unique to the wikipedia page of John Connolly. At one time, his living daughter was permitted
space on that page, but not anymore. Connolly's immediate predecessor as Texas governor, enjoys a complete accounting, naming all of his children.:

Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Connally
....
Spouse   Nellie Brill ​(m. 1940)​
Children   4
Relatives   Wayne Connally (brother)...

Compare with Gov. Connally's predecessor :

Quote
Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_Daniel
...
Personal life
Marion Price Daniel Sr. is also known as Marion Price Daniel Jr. and as Marion Price Daniel II, because his father, Marion Price Daniel Sr. (1882–1937) was the first generation with the name. Daniel II married the former Jean Houston Baldwin on June 28, 1940. Their son, publicly known as Price Daniel Jr., is properly Marion Price Daniel III. The couple also had three other children: Jean Houston Murph, Houston Lee, and John Baldwin....

Quote
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2031.msg154502.html#msg154502
....
We live in a society in which John Connally's children cannot be named in his wikipedia page, and the FBI could not connect the wife of its former agent, IB Hale, or his wife who sent Oswald to Leslie Welding, as Connally's deceased daughter, Kathleen's in-laws. Kathleen's spouse, Bobby Hale and his brother were observed breaking into the FBI 1962 stake-out of Judith Campbell's L.A. apartment. ...

Quote
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pdf/WH23_CE_1891.pdf
 Warren Commission, Volume XXIII: CE 1891 - FBI report dated May 14 ...
VIRGINIA HALF., 6475 Fortune Road, employed in the Job Placement Division of Tex" Employment Commission, furnished the following informationi She -alled LEE HARVEY OSWALD quite well and she sent him out on the job to the Leslie Welding Company ....

Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Allen_Hale
....
 Both fathers testified at the inquest; John Connally stated that his daughter was pregnant and had been despondent over the move to Florida.[3] After 45 minutes of deliberations, Hale was cleared of responsibility for Kathleen's death when the jury ruled it to be an accident.[1][2][3]...

https://www.maryferrell.org/xdoc/128382#relPageId=4&search=hale%20exner%20corvette
 No Title, pg 4
RIF#: 124-10220-10433   (08/08/62)    FBI#: 92-3267-290, 291
Found in: FBI - HSCA Subject File: John Roselli
On 8/10/62 it was ascertained from NATB in Los Angeles that the VIN of above car shows that it is a Corvette.
The San Antonio office advised that HALE proba- bly identical with I. B.
HALE,
3548 Kent, Fort Worth, is identical with former Bureau Agent; whether above car and/or license has been reported stolen, and, if not, if HALE still
see all page hits in this document »

https://www.maryferrell.org/xdoc/128396#relPageId=3&search=hale%20exner%20corvette2. No Title, pg 3
RIF#: 124-10226-10086   (08/17/62)    FBI#: 92-3267-303
Found in: FBI - HSCA Subject File: John Roselli
Belmont RE: JOHN ROSELLI Hale has twin sons, Billy and Bobby, who are approximately 22 years of age. An associate of I. B.
According to our Los Angeles agents, the man observed leaving the vicinity of Campbell's apartment did so in a Chevrolet Corvette which is a sports car
Hale, the above information is not being disseminated to the Los Angeles Police Department at this time.
...As a matter of interest, one of Hale's sons was formerly married to the daughter of John Connolly..

Quote
The Dispatch
https://thedispatch.com › article › smears-and-myths-the-october-surprise-revisited
April 15, 2023
Smears and Myths—The October Surprise Revisited
The New York Times reports that Ben Barnes, a Texas politician, and his mentor, former Treasury Secretary John Connally, toured the Middle East in the summer of 1980 and advised Arab leaders to pass on a message to the Islamist leaders of Iran: "Don't release the hostages before the election.

Defector Robert E. Webster was employed by and sent to Moscow by H. James Rand, the best man in John Shaheen's wedding.

Quote
https://consortiumnews.com/2006/102906.htmlOriginal October Surprise (Part 3)
By Robert Parry  October 29, 2006
...The Shaheen connection led Cyrus Hashemi to William Casey even before Casey took over Ronald Reagan’s presidential campaign, according to Jamshid Hashemi and a 1984 CIA memo that surfaced later.....

https://newspaperarchive.com/sterling-daily-gazette-may-01-1951-p-9/


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Furmark
Roy Furmark....
"He began working with John Shaheen in 1966, who would later introduce him to William Casey.[3]..."

Christian Science Monitor
https://www.csmonitor.com/1987/0102/zgate.html
THE IRAN-CONTRA AFFAIR: Anatomy of a Quagmire - CSMonitor.com
Jan 2, 1987 Oct. 7 CIA Director Casey and aides meet with New York consultant Roy Furmark, who says a group of private Canadian investors, formed to help finance Iran's purchase of US arms at a profit, has

Tampico, IL population was less than 1,000 !
Quote
https://www.tampicohistoricalsociety.com/Tampico_Time_Line.html
....
TAMPICO AREA NATIVES INCLUDE: Ronald Reagan, President of the United States; Neil Reagan, Ronald's brother; Rear Admiral Reeves, Commander-in-Chief U.S. Fleet 1934-1936, Distinguished Service Medal WWII; The Shaheen Family: John (deceased)- former OSS member during WWII, newspaper and oil man;...

Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Shaheen
John Shaheen - Wikipedia
Prior to World War II, Shaheen worked in publicity in Chicago. [2] During World War II Shaheen was at the Office of Strategic Services, and was awarded the Silver Star and Legion of Merit. [3] At OSS he was "chief of OSS Special Projects" and head of the Reports Declassification Section, [2] and an advisor on

Yeah, they were wonderful! Heaven forbid they granted this, being completely incurious as they professed to be.

Quote
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1993/06/18/connally-takes-bullet-pieces-to-grave/1cab4644-c1be-4499-8d85-ed3bae858d17/
CONNALLY TAKES BULLET PIECES TO GRAVE
June 18, 1993

..."It's really offensive," said George Christian, a longtime Connally friend and once his press secretary. "Nobody in the Connally family that I know of ever heard of these fragments."

Revell said there was a fragment in one of Connally's thighs and perhaps some traces in a wrist. The nonprofit Assassination Archives and Research Center urged Attorney General Janet Reno on Wednesday to secure the fragments and compare them, using neutron activation analysis and other sophisticated tests, with the nearly intact bullet the Warren Commission said the pieces came from. The bullet was found on a hospital stretcher and was believed to have dropped out of Connally's thigh.

"If the family would agree and we can examine those under current technology," Revell said, "we could do one of two things. We could say, 'Yes, indeed, this was the bullet {that hit both men} and there is no basis for saying there were additional shots. But if the mass and metallurgy don't match, we've got a different ballgame."...

The New York Times Replica Edition
https://nytimes.pressreader.com/article/281526525293240

43-Year Secret of Sabotage: Mission to Subvert Carter Is Revealed - The ...
The New York Times What happened next Mr. Barnes has largely kept secret for nearly 43 years. Mr. Connally, he said, took him to one Middle Eastern capital after another that summer, meeting with a host of regional leaders to deliver a blunt message to be passed to Iran: Don't release the hostages before the election. Mr. Reagan will win and give you a better deal.

New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/22/us/politics/jimmy-carter-american-hostages-iran.html
Former Iran Hostages Are Divided on Jimmy Carter and a Sabotage Claim
Mar 22, 2023 A former Texas politician, Ben Barnes, told The New York Times that he had toured the Middle East that summer with John B. Connally Jr., the former Texas governor, who told regional leaders that ...
23
Given that you can't speak English at a high-school level, and given how many times you've been caught committing inexcusable gaffes, it is remarkable that you consider yourself competent to be judging anyone else's arguments, much less mine. {/quote]

You're never funnier than when you put on your Mr. Smarty Pants act.

All I have to do is be more competent than you which isn't a very high bar to clear.
Quote


LOL! Uh, so the autopsy doctors were "totally unqualified to render judgments about the medical evidence"?! Sheesh, did you just skim over those paragraphs and miss the citation of the autopsy doctors?! Your replies are just one clown show after another.

When I saw MTG quote half a sentence, I figured he was quoting me out of context, but i had to go back and see what I had written to see if he had misrepresentd what I wrote. He had.

This is what MTG said and my reply:

MTG: Five autopsy witnesses -- Sibert, O'Neill, Lipsey, Stringer, and Kellerman -- said the rear head entry wound was near the EOP or the hairline. The three autopsy doctors insisted to their dying days that the EOP site was correct.

ME: Not surprising that a person totally unqualified to render judgements about the medical evidence would cite other people totally unqualified to render judgements about the medical evidence.


The five witnesses were clearly not qualified to render judgements about medical evidence and the unqualified person that I was referring to that cited them was MTG himself. A real buffoon. A legend in his own mind.
Quote
.



Dr. Joseph Riley was "totally unqualified" to talk about the medical evidence?! Really?! Dr. Riley was a highly respected neurologist who specialized in neuroanatomy and neuropathology. His neuroscience research was published in several peer-reviewed scientific journals, including the Journal of Comparative Neurology, Cell and Tissue Research, and Brain Research, and his research was cited by many other neuroscientists. He taught neuroscience at the University of Florida, the University of California, and the State University of New York.

When did I say he was unqualified? Hint: NEVER.

Dr. David Mantik is "totally unqualified" to talk about the medical evidence?!

Yes he is. He is an oncologist. That's a cancer doctor. No qualifications to render judgements about forensic medical issues. MTG thinks anybody with "Dr." in front of their name is an expert on all things related to the medical evidence. He'd probably cite Dr. Jill Biden if she expressed skepticism about the autopsy findings or the FPP review 
Quote

He has viewed the autopsy materials at the National Archives more often than any other medical expert, 29 times in all, and has been studying the medical evidence longer than any other medical expert who has written about the JFK case. He is one of only three medical experts who have done optical-density (OD) measurements on the autopsy skull x-rays, and he has done more OD measurements than either of the two other experts. He's board-certified in radiation oncology, licensed in radiology, holds a doctorate in physics, and is a former professor of physics at the University of Michigan.

Good for him. Did he discuss his findings with any actual forensic medical examiners or did he just wing it and offer his own conclusions? FYI. If JFK had died of cancer, Mantik would have had the expertise to comment on it. He actually died of a gunshot wound to the head. Maybe Mantik had one or two patients over the years who were in such pain that they decided to put a bullet in their head, but that would be the closest Mantik ever got to a victim of a gunshot.
Quote

And Dr. Larry Sturdivan, who was the HSCA's wound ballistics consultant, is "totally unqualified" to talk about the medical evidence?! He worked as a physical scientist at the Wound Ballistics Branch of the Aberdeen Proving Grounds for years. You realize that Sturdivan is a lone-gunman theorist, right? You know this, right?

I never said Sturdivan was "totally unqualified". I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on this one and chalk it up to your rather poor reading comprehension instead of a bald faced lie by you. MTG seems to think that when I call him unqualified, I am also referring to the people he has cited. Only some of those people are unqualified.
Quote

Ah, but here's the problem with Sturdivan for your side: He has admitted that the 6.5 mm object cannot be a bullet fragment and that no FMJ bullet would ever deposit a fragment on the outer table of the skull upon entry. Those are two devastating admissions that your side just can't stomach.

So he doesn't think the 6.5mm is a fragments. What does he think it is and tell us the significance of that.
Quote

Virtually every word of this dodge is false. Drs. Mantik, Chesser, Aguilar, and McClellan have seen the autopsy photos and x-rays at the National Archives. Moreover, you seem to be ignorant of the fact that several decent copies of the autopsy photos became available in 1981 (i.e., from the Fox Set) and that the HSCA released decent copies of the autopsy x-rays in 1978.

Mantik is unqualified for reasons I have already stated. Gary Aguilar has been posting kooky stuff on forums for as long as you have. I remember his crap from the Prodigy forum back in the early 1990s. For those who don't know, Gary Aguilar is an ophthalmologist from San Francisco. As far as I know, he is very good at his job. That hardly qualifies him as an expert in forensic medicine. But he has a "Dr." in front of his name and that is good enough for MTG.

Dr. Chessar is a neurologist who believes JFK sustained a frontal entry wound. Being a neurologist does not qualify him to distinguish entry wounds from exit wounds. Again, MTG cites someone who is outside their area of expertise. That's because every forensic medical examiner who has seen the medical evidence agrees with the original finding that JFK was shot in the back of the head. 

Dr. Robert McClelland (not McClellan) was a surgeon who was summoned to the ER at Parkland. JFK was only in the ER a short time before being pronounced dead. In that short time, most of the efforts were at maintaining JFK's vital signs in what I'm sure they realized right away was a losing battle. JFK was on his back the whole time and the head wound was never treated. In the Z-film we see a large flap of skull was hanging down the right side of JFK's head but no one at Parkland  noticed that which indicates Jackie had probably closed that flaps as best she could but couldn't close the hole in the back of his head because that piece had been blown away. Since they never examined the head wound at Parkland, It's easy to understand why they would have thought the blowout was confined to the back of the head when in fact i involved the entire upper right side of his head.

The following passage from McClelland's WC testimony is most telling:
Mr. SPECTER - Do you have anything to add which you think might be helpful in any way to the Commission?
Dr. McCLELLAND - No; I think not except again to emphasize perhaps that some of our statements to the press about the nature of the wound may have been misleading, possibly--probably ,because of our fault in tolling it in such a way that they misinterpreted our certainty of being able to tell entrance from exit wounds, which as we say, we generally can make an educated guess about these things but cannot be certain about them. I think they attributed too much certainty to us about that.

By his own admission, McClelland said the impressions of the nature of JFK's wounds were educated guesses, which do not trump the findings of either the original autopsy team, or the FFP review.
Quote

You again ignore the fact that Dr. Michael Baden, the FPP chairman, admitted to Vincent Bugliosi in a recorded interview that the autopsy brain photos show "less than 1-2 ounces" of missing brain tissue, and that this fact has been confirmed by Dr. Mantik and Dr. Chesser, both of whom examined the brain photos at the National Archives. 

So?
Quote

Let me remind you that the autopsy doctors saw the actual head wounds in person, and handled the skull and the skull fragments with their own hands, whereas the FPP doctors could only rely on an incomplete set of autopsy photos and x-rays.

This is really laughable. They saw far more and better photos than you have ever seen as well as the original x-rays, have far more training and expierience in forensic medicine than you will ever have, yet you think you car capable of making a better judgement about the nature of JFK's wounds than the FPP. It doesn't get more ridiculous than that.
Quote


The FPP doctors did not see "all" the photos and x-rays because we know for an absolute fact that a number of photos and x-rays are missing from the extant collection of autopsy materials.

They saw a hell of a lot more than you and they knew a hell of a lot more than you.
Quote

If you're now back-pedaling to the view that the FPP was correct about the location of the rear head entry wound ("So who should we believe? MTG or the FPP?"), then you need to explain how the brain tissue directly under the cowlick site is undamaged in the autopsy photos, a fact confirmed by WC apologist Dr. Robert Artwohl when he viewed the autopsy materials at the National Archives. You need to deal with the fact that the FPP, like the Clark Panel, relocated the entry wound up to the cowlick site based on the now-debunked assumption that the 6.5 mm object was a bullet fragment that was deposited in the outer table of the skull as the bullet entered the skull. You need to deal with the fact that nobody at the autopsy reported seeing an entry wound in the cowlick area, that every single witness who commented on the wound's location said it was much farther down on the skull, near the EOP/hairline.

I really don't care whether the autopsy team or the FPP accurately placed the entrance wound, they both agree that JFK was shot in the back of the head which fits with all the other available forensic evidence, the fragmented bullet found in the limo which had been fired by the same rifle that was found on the 6th floor of the TSBD and which had also fired the spent shells found at the location where several witnesses spotted the shooter. Given these facts, it's comical that people treat the assassination as if it is a mystery.
Quote


I notice you made no attempt to explain how the brain photos could be authentic when the skull x-rays show about 2/3 of the right brain to be missing, a fact first noticed way back in 1975 by Dr. Fred Hodges, one of the leading radiologists in the world at the time, a fact later also confirmed by Humes himself in 1992, and when multiple sets of OD measurements have proven that 2/3 of the right brain is missing in the skull x-rays.

Unlike you, I know how to stay in my lane. I don't assume that reading some kook conspiracy books somehow makes me qualified to interpret the medical evidence. I leave that to the people with actual expertise.
Quote

I notice you also ducked the fact that numerous eyewitnesses saw brain matter from JFK's brain on 16 surfaces, and that Jackie Kennedy brought a "large chunk of brain" into the Parkland ER and handed it to Dr. Jenkins, a fact that even Bugliosi did not dispute. I guess even you realize it would be discrediting and hilarious for you to claim that all that brain matter added up to no more than 2 ounces.

I don't recall ever making such a claim. I don't recall even thinking that. Please cite where I wrote that.
Quote

Perhaps you lack the capacity to grasp the obvious fact that the brain photos cannot be authentic because the skull x-rays show 2/3 of the right brain to be missing and because so much brain tissue was blown from JFK's brain, but you only make yourself look foolish and disingenuous when you float your flim-flam about needing "years of medical training" to understand this fact.

I'm not the dipshit who thinks he can interpret the medica evidence based on a handful of leaked photos and x-rays.
Quote

You don't need "years of medical training" to understand that a brain with less than 1-2 ounces of missing tissue cannot be the same brain (1) that is missing 2/3 of its substance on its righthand side in the skull x-rays, (2) that had pieces of tissue blown from it that fell onto 16 surfaces, and (3) that had a "large chunk" blown from it that was handed to Dr. Jenkins by Jackie Kennedy.

Furthermore, medical experts, i.e., people who have "years of medical training," have pointed out that the brain photos cannot be authentic for the above-mentioned reasons.

Medical experts? You mean like oncologists or ophthalmologists. Or did you get that from a gynecologist?
Quote

I notice you said nothing, not one word, about the OD measurements of the skull x-rays, about Dr. Hodges' finding that the x-rays show a large part of the right brain to be missing, about Dr. Humes's statement to JAMA that 2/3 of the right cerebrum was blasted away, and about the numerous eyewitness accounts of a large amount of brain tissue being blown from JFK's brain.

Just what could I contribute? [quoote]

Yeah, uh-huh. You bet. Too bad for you and your ducking and dodging that so many medical experts have likewise observed that the brain photos cannot be authentic given that the skull x-rays show 2/3 of the right brain to be missing and given the large amount of brain tissue that numerous witnesses saw blown from JFK's brain.
[/quote]

Funny how the FPP never came to that conclusion. Just a lot of guys who don't know how to stay in their lane. Guys like you.
24
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: A question for Brian Doyle
« Last post by Tom Scully on Yesterday at 05:55:00 PM »
I suspect that you're a nut case.

Pardon me, Mark, but this cannot be ignored. Tommy is wearing his disability on his sleeve. If TDS, vote fraud, antifa, or Biden era "lawfare" actually existed,
Tommy could be a true believer in all of them and still not be as divorced from reality as he is in his suspicion of you, quoted above!

Tommy, regardless your position on the influence of nature vs nurture,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture

....Mark has an unrivaled background, either way.
(Mark, I'll delete the text following this line, if you prefer....)

His grandma's obit, which I located, motivated by my own curiousity. In the more than the dozen years I have known Mark, I am confident I would
have had to pry out the details of what shaoed his development, if I had not established a starting point to question him.

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/143570513/katherine-m-mcandrew

Consider who Mark's grandma's two siblings were, as well as her son, Mark's uncle Bill. A hint... who did Garrison complain to the FCC was not willing
to grant him "equal time"?

Google AI
Quote
Jeremiah Aloysius O'Leary Sr. (1897–1969) was a long-time congressional reporter for the Washington Star, spending 45 years covering the U.S. House and Senate.Career and Life Newspaper Career: Began his reporting career at age 15 and spent nearly half a century working in the Capitol press galleries before retiring in 1964.

Google AI :
Quote
Michael W. (Mike) Flynn was a veteran Washington journalist who served as city editor of the Washington Herald and later as managing editor. He passed away in May 1962 at the age of 74, which generated prominent obituaries in the local press that year.Career HighlightsEarly Start: Became city editor of the Washington Herald at age 21.

Mark's first cousin, uncle Bill's daughter.:

Quote
https://www.chicagotribune.com/1999/01/19/mary-mcandrew-53-longtime-newswoman/
PUBLISHED: January 19, 1999

...The daughter of one-time .... McAndrew Sr., who vowed his daughter would never be a journalist, Ms. McAndrew politely defied his wishes after graduating from Marymount College in Arlington, Va., and went to work for United Press International, Roberts said.

Two years later, she joined the Associated Press and worked for its New York City bureau for three years. While there, she worked undercover assignments and was shot at while covering a sniper’s attack in Central Park.

“She dictated half the lead when a bullet from the sniper snapped off her antenna,” said Roberts, a reporter for WMAQ-AM in Chicago. “The people back at the bureau thought she was shot. But she was behind a tree, unable to transmit.”

During the 1968 convention, she was working for AP but on loan to NBC News. One year later, she began an 18-year career with the company, working her way up to being a bureau chief in Newark and Connecticut, Roberts said.

When U.S. journalist Nicholas Daniloff was taken into custody by the KGB in 1986, Ms. McAndrew sought out Vice President George Bush at the U.S. Open tennis championships to get the first Reagan administration reaction to the event, Roberts said.

In 1988, McAndrew relocated to Chicago, where she worked for WBBM-FM, was a field producer for the Chicago bureau of USA Today on Television and anchored, reported and produced news for WGCI-AM/FM, he said.

In 1993 she moved into public relations, working for the American Red Cross and the American Medical Association...

Mark was author Leo Damore's researcher. He attempted to talk some sense into Princeton educated psychologist, Peter Janney, son of the personnel director
of the CIA. Obviously Dr. Janney "knew what he knew," and was beyond Mark's fact supported counsel.
25
I see two problems with this scenario:

One, the HSCA's acoustical evidence shows there is a nearly 100% probability there was a rifle shot from the grassy knoll. Try as they did, the NRC panel could only reduce that probability down to 77.7%, and even then they did so only by introducing two outright errors into their calculations.

Two, the HSCA finding that the grassy knoll shot missed was forced into the final report by Blakey, who trusted Dr. Baden to tell him the truth when he asked Baden if there was any medical evidence of a shot from the front.

Since then, a number of medical experts have found strong evidence of a frontal shot in the autopsy skull x-rays, and of course we now know that, contrary to the HSCA report, numerous witnesses at the autopsy saw a large right-rear head wound, the same wound that the Dallas doctors and nurses described. We further know from OD measurements that the skull x-rays indicate a substantial amount of missing bone in the right-rear part of the skull.

We should keep in mind that the two Parkland nurses who cleaned the large head wound and packed it with gauze said the wound was in the right-rear part of the head, and that the three morticians who reassembled the skull after the autopsy also said they saw a large wound in the right-rear part of the head. It boggles the mind to try to imagine how all five of these medical personnel, who actually handled the skull, could have mistaken a wound above the right ear for a wound several inches farther back that included part of the occiput. In fact, mortician Tom Robinson specified that there was a visible hole in the back of the head even after it had been reconstructed, and that further reconstruction was necessary to conceal it.

Also, it is therefore not surprising that we also now know that one of the biggest disagreements between radiology consultant Dr. Gerald McDonnel and FPP member Dr. James Weston involved the direction of the shot as indicated by the skull x-rays.

I should add that given the integrity and courage that Blakey displayed when he was faced with the acoustical evidence, I believe he may well have changed his mind about the grassy knoll shot missing if he had been aware of the medical evidence of a right-frontal shot to the head.

26
I suspect that you're a nut case.
yeah?….. well I think we’re all bozos on this bus…….. so there, haha.  What say you, Duncan? Amnesty time yet? no wait…….
27
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: A question for Brian Doyle
« Last post by Tom Graves on Yesterday at 04:36:56 PM »
My Hendrix research would be a vast improvement for The Education Forum but when I inquire why they are preventing my posting it I get no answer...I suspect they are loyalists who don't want to damage their home nation's reputation...

I suspect that you're a nut case.
28

Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 01:23:20 PM
It is remarkable that WC apologists who (correctly) accept the EOP entry site refuse to admit that the EOP site proves the autopsy brain photos are fraudulent.


JC: It is remarkable that MTG considers himself to be competent to make such a judgement.

Given that you can't speak English at a high-school level, and given how many times you've been caught committing inexcusable gaffes, it is remarkable that you consider yourself competent to be judging anyone else's arguments, much less mine.


Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 01:23:20 PM

Yes, I agree: The evidence strongly favors the EOP site. I was encouraged to see Lance Payette state that he is convinced by Pat Speer's arguments for the EOP site. Dr. Larry Sturdivan, the former HSCA wound ballistics consultant, argues for the EOP site in his book The JFK Myths: A Scientific Investigation of the Kennedy Assassination. Dr. David Mantik likewise argues for the EOP site in his 2024 book The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy: The Final Analysis. Dr. Joseph Riley, a neuroanatomist, argued for the EOP site and noted that the area of the brain beneath the phantom cowlick entry site is undamaged:

We have autopsy photographs that show the top of JFK's head. Everyone agrees (including Dr. Bob Artwohl) that intact cerebral cortex is visible. If you are a neuroanatomist, you can identify the cerebral cortex (superior parietal lobule visible). What's the significance of that? Simple: that is the part of cortex that is immediately under the high entrance wound -- so, the brain at the point of the high entrance wound is not damaged. Now that is indeed a magic bullet. ("What Struck John?" pp. 4-5, https://kenrahn.com/Marsh/Autopsy/riley.html)

Five autopsy witnesses -- Sibert, O'Neill, Lipsey, Stringer, and Kellerman -- said the rear head entry wound was near the EOP or the hairline. The three autopsy doctors insisted to their dying days that the EOP site was correct.


JC: Not surprising that a person totally unqualified to render judgements about the medical evidence would cite other people totally unqualified to render judgements about the medical evidence.

LOL! Uh, so the autopsy doctors were "totally unqualified to render judgments about the medical evidence"?! Sheesh, did you just skim over those paragraphs and miss the citation of the autopsy doctors?! Your replies are just one clown show after another.

Dr. Joseph Riley was "totally unqualified" to talk about the medical evidence?! Really?! Dr. Riley was a highly respected neurologist who specialized in neuroanatomy and neuropathology. His neuroscience research was published in several peer-reviewed scientific journals, including the Journal of Comparative Neurology, Cell and Tissue Research, and Brain Research, and his research was cited by many other neuroscientists. He taught neuroscience at the University of Florida, the University of California, and the State University of New York.

Dr. David Mantik is "totally unqualified" to talk about the medical evidence?! He has viewed the autopsy materials at the National Archives more often than any other medical expert, 29 times in all, and has been studying the medical evidence longer than any other medical expert who has written about the JFK case. He is one of only three medical experts who have done optical-density (OD) measurements on the autopsy skull x-rays, and he has done more OD measurements than either of the two other experts. He's board-certified in radiation oncology, licensed in radiology, holds a doctorate in physics, and is a former professor of physics at the University of Michigan.

And Dr. Larry Sturdivan, who was the HSCA's wound ballistics consultant, is "totally unqualified" to talk about the medical evidence?! He worked as a physical scientist at the Wound Ballistics Branch of the Aberdeen Proving Grounds for years. You realize that Sturdivan is a lone-gunman theorist, right? You know this, right?

Ah, but here's the problem with Sturdivan for your side: He has admitted that the 6.5 mm object cannot be a bullet fragment and that no FMJ bullet would ever deposit a fragment on the outer table of the skull upon entry. Those are two devastating admissions that your side just can't stomach.


Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 01:23:20 PM

The problem is that the brain photos show no damage whatsoever to the right occipital lobe, but a bullet that entered near the EOP could not have missed tearing through the right occipital lobe, as the HSCA FPP correctly pointed out. The FPP hammered the autopsy doctors on this point, and they had no explanation for it. However, the FPP argument against the EOP site only works if the brain photos are authentic.


JC: MTG tries to substitute his judgement of what the medical evidence is based on a few leaked photos and x-rays for the unanimous judgement of a panel of some of the most highly qualified forensic medical examiners of their day who saw ALL the photos and ALL the x-rays. So who should we believe? MTG or the FPP? Of course, the question answers itself.

Virtually every word of this dodge is false. Drs. Mantik, Chesser, Aguilar, and McClellan have seen the autopsy photos and x-rays at the National Archives. Moreover, you seem to be ignorant of the fact that several decent copies of the autopsy photos became available in 1981 (i.e., from the Fox Set) and that the HSCA released decent copies of the autopsy x-rays in 1978.

You again ignore the fact that Dr. Michael Baden, the FPP chairman, admitted to Vincent Bugliosi in a recorded interview that the autopsy brain photos show "less than 1-2 ounces" of missing brain tissue, and that this fact has been confirmed by Dr. Mantik and Dr. Chesser, both of whom examined the brain photos at the National Archives. 

Let me remind you that the autopsy doctors saw the actual head wounds in person, and handled the skull and the skull fragments with their own hands, whereas the FPP doctors could only rely on an incomplete set of autopsy photos and x-rays. The FPP doctors did not see "all" the photos and x-rays because we know for an absolute fact that a number of photos and x-rays are missing from the extant collection of autopsy materials.

If you're now back-pedaling to the view that the FPP was correct about the location of the rear head entry wound ("So who should we believe? MTG or the FPP?"), then you need to explain how the brain tissue directly under the cowlick site is undamaged in the autopsy photos, a fact confirmed by WC apologist Dr. Robert Artwohl when he viewed the autopsy materials at the National Archives. You need to deal with the fact that the FPP, like the Clark Panel, relocated the entry wound up to the cowlick site based on the now-debunked assumption that the 6.5 mm object was a bullet fragment that was deposited in the outer table of the skull as the bullet entered the skull. You need to deal with the fact that nobody at the autopsy reported seeing an entry wound in the cowlick area, that every single witness who commented on the wound's location said it was much farther down on the skull, near the EOP/hairline.

I notice you made no attempt to explain how the brain photos could be authentic when the skull x-rays show about 2/3 of the right brain to be missing, a fact first noticed way back in 1975 by Dr. Fred Hodges, one of the leading radiologists in the world at the time, a fact later also confirmed by Humes himself in 1992, and when multiple sets of OD measurements have proven that 2/3 of the right brain is missing in the skull x-rays.

I notice you also ducked the fact that numerous eyewitnesses saw brain matter from JFK's brain on 16 surfaces, and that Jackie Kennedy brought a "large chunk of brain" into the Parkland ER and handed it to Dr. Jenkins, a fact that even Bugliosi did not dispute. I guess even you realize it would be discrediting and hilarious for you to claim that all that brain matter added up to no more than 2 ounces.


Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 01:23:20 PM

The evidence that the brain photos are fraudulent is truly impressive. As experts from both sides have confirmed, the brain photos show "less than 1-2 ounces" of missing brain tissue. Yet, multiple sets of optical-density measurements have confirmed that about 2/3 of the right brain is missing in the autopsy skull x-rays, a fact that Dr. Fred Hodges noted in 1975 when he served on the Rockefeller Commission's medical panel. Humes himself told JAMA that 2/3 of the right cerebrum was blasted away. A number of witnesses who saw the brain said that 1/4 to 1/2 of it was missing. And, we have a veritable mountain of eyewitness testimony that bits of JFK's brain were blown or fell onto 16 surfaces, and that's not counting the "large chunk of brain" that Jackie brought into the ER and handed to Dr. Jenkins.


JC: The evidence that MTG is an amateur hack trying to perform analysis that requires years of medical training and experience is truly impressive.

Perhaps you lack the capacity to grasp the obvious fact that the brain photos cannot be authentic because the skull x-rays show 2/3 of the right brain to be missing and because so much brain tissue was blown from JFK's brain, but you only make yourself look foolish and disingenuous when you float your flim-flam about needing "years of medical training" to understand this fact.

You don't need "years of medical training" to understand that a brain with less than 1-2 ounces of missing tissue cannot be the same brain (1) that is missing 2/3 of its substance on its righthand side in the skull x-rays, (2) that had pieces of tissue blown from it that fell onto 16 surfaces, and (3) that had a "large chunk" blown from it that was handed to Dr. Jenkins by Jackie Kennedy.

Furthermore, medical experts, i.e., people who have "years of medical training," have pointed out that the brain photos cannot be authentic for the above-mentioned reasons.

I notice you said nothing, not one word, about the OD measurements of the skull x-rays, about Dr. Hodges' finding that the x-rays show a large part of the right brain to be missing, about Dr. Humes's statement to JAMA that 2/3 of the right cerebrum was blasted away, and about the numerous eyewitness accounts of a large amount of brain tissue being blown from JFK's brain.


Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 01:23:20 PM
Only those who are emotionally committed to believing in the lone-gunman theory will continue to believe the autopsy brain photos are genuine.


JC: Only extremely gullible CT fanatics would believe MTG is competent to make such judgements based an a smattering of the medical evidence he has seen.

Yeah, uh-huh. You bet. Too bad for you and your ducking and dodging that so many medical experts have likewise observed that the brain photos cannot be authentic given that the skull x-rays show 2/3 of the right brain to be missing and given the large amount of brain tissue that numerous witnesses saw blown from JFK's brain.

29
"So what"?  First, it is a crime for federal employees to solicit cash awards.  Second, he took time and resources away from dealing with an ongoing pandemic to instruct his employees to spend their time seeking awards on his behalf.  Third, he didn't deserve the awards because he was either an incompetent and/or complicit in a pandemic that resulted in the deaths of millions.  Other than that I guess it was fine.

Posting unconfirmed BS without proof. - Doesn't mean very much.

He did not solicit the award.
It was lifetime achievement award.
He certainly deserved it  - having expertly handled infectious diseases since 1984.

 Thumb1: You don't agree with that then show some kind of proof he "stole" or illegally solicited it.
You have provided nothing
30
so what?  6 others won as well. More "Richard Smith"  BS:
He was;  "Recognized for a lifetime of achievement, including his leadership on HIV research, AIDS relief, and communicating essential public health measures."

Meanwhile;
"Trump minimized the severity of the virus by stating that 99% of COVID-19 cases are "totally harmless"

"Trump aggressively promoted the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a "game changer," even claiming he took it prophylactically. His promotion caused a temporary run on the drug, which complicated access for lupus and arthritis patients who relied on it."

In July 2020, Trump retweeted a video featuring doctors making false claims about a coronavirus "cure" and dismissing "the efficacy of masks. He defended the presenters as "very respected" after social media platforms removed the video for violating misinformation policies."

“Our doctors get more money if somebody dies from COVID. You know that, right?” Trump told a crowd in Michigan, falsely asserting that doctors purposefully chose to blame COVID-19 for terminal illnesses like cancer or heart attacks."

"Trump speculated about whether disinfectants could be used internally to treat the virus."

"Donald Trump downplayed the virus and blocked Fauci from appearing on several television programs. Trump called Fauci part of a group of "idiots" and suggested he might fire him after the presidential election, which Trump lost."

Trump has taught you to hate and it serves him well.

"So what"?  First, it is a crime for federal employees to solicit cash awards.  Second, he took time and resources away from dealing with an ongoing pandemic to instruct his employees to spend their time seeking awards on his behalf.  Third, he didn't deserve the awards because he was either an incompetent and/or complicit in a pandemic that resulted in the deaths of millions.  Other than that I guess it was fine.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10