Can We Agree On A Consensus Statement Regarding Conspiracy?

[Ron Ecker]

Dan Rather allowed no other critics on either. But he did have Gus Russo on. And recall how Danny closed his show, something like this: In 30 years of digging, no material piece of evidence have ever surfaced to contradict the WC.

I can't figure out what it is or was with Dan Rather. I don't know if it was the money or if he is actually crazy. (Remember the "What's the frequency, Kenneth?" episode?) I'll never forget something he said at the height of the Clinton sex scandals, when Clinton was credibly accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick, who was interviewed about it on national TV. When some fellow newsperson (I forget who) asked Rather about her, he said, "Who is Juanita Broaddrick?" When the person who asked him said something to the effect of "Oh, come on," Rather stammered and said something about it being an unproven allegation (when he supposedly didn't even know who the questioner was talking about).

What hope is there when you have people like that (Rather and Jennings have been replaced by "worthy" successors, I'm sure) controlling the network news?

[Steven Kossor]

The newer generations don't trust the mainstream media and are seeking more authoritative, "untainted" sources of information. They get their news more from the internet than anywhere else, with an increasing emphasis on twitter and other social media. They're becoming more discerning about who they bestow credibility upon, too. The relentless and abusive sniping that exists in this forum is the antithesis of what is needed to move in the direction of changing policy and establishing the truth about the JFK assassination and its meaning in American history. We might concentrate on updating Wikipedia with new facts, "troubling questions" and a statement about the need for an honest investigation because in much less than 50 years, the internet is likely to be the most (only?) respected information source for the majority of Americans. They are trusting Facebook less and less as its invasions of privacy become more notorious and its foundation becomes ever more blatantly oriented toward advertising, so a site that maintains a professorial presence will become more important as the years pass. JFKfacts, Mary Ferrell, they may have better legs than this forum, especially if the relentless sniping and name-calling isn't better managed.

[Micah Mileto]

In a now-deleted comment, Jim said this:

Quote

Futhermore, Von Pein is also wrong--yawn--about the red spot aligning with a so-called entrance wound on the skull. Mantik, who has spent more time with these exhibits than any other person I know, shows that this is simply not true. It is actually one cm, (not a MM, a CM) below this so-called entrance wound. (Assassination Science, p. 124)

And if one looks at this lateral x ray, which is in the same book on p. 123, you will see that, as Mantik notes, this is not really a hole, it actually looks like a fracture.

I can only find a reference to a metal fragment located one centimeter below the cowlick fracture. Does the red spot correspond to that fracture or no?

 

Assassination Science, 1998 version - full PDF

Edited January 6, 2017 by Micah Mileto

[Steve Thomas]

On 5/2/2013 at 9:59 AM, John Dolva said:

 I don't think the JFK assassination the most significant political assassination of the 20'th Century.

I don't know if John Dolva is still posting anymore, but what do others think of his 2013 comment?

 

Steve Thomas

[David Andrews]

8 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

I don't know if John Dolva is still posting anymore, but what do others think of his 2013 comment?

 

Steve Thomas

As I recall, John never identified the more significant assassination.  In my opinion, JFK opens the door to the assassinations of Malcolm X, MLK and RFK. 

So who did John have in mind?  Franz Ferdinand?  I suspect WW I was in the cards regardless.

Edited January 6, 2017 by David Andrews

[Micah Mileto]

Is there any actual proof that the red spot corresponds to the cowlick fracture?

[David Josephs]

Maybe some of these will help with your question Micah.

This is Humes' description of the wound for the WCR.  I then took this description and placed it on a few images of a 3D skull and brain to give you an idea of what he was describing.  In reality, most of the damage HUMES describes is related to the pre-craniotomy he (or someone else) performed on JFK prior to 8pm.  If a single bullet entered at that red spot - ask yourself if the following accurately represents the results of such an entry.  

And then ask yourself how those fragments got to be at a point above the entry and exit as offered when in fact they represent a straight line from the right temple to the middle occipital.

Commander HUMES - Exhibit 391 is listed as a supplementary report on the autopsy of the late President Kennedy, and was prepared some days after the examination.
This delay necessitated by, primarily, our desire to have the brain better fixed with formaldehyde before we proceeded further with the examination of the brain which is a standard means of approach to study of the brain.
The brain in its fresh state does not lend itself well to examination.
From my notes of the examination, at the time of the post-mortem examination, we noted that clearly visible in the large skull defect and exuding from it was lacerated brain tissue which, on close inspection proved to represent the major portion of the right cerebral hemisphere.
We also noted at this point that the flocculus cerebri was extensively lacerated and that the superior sagittal sinus which is a venous blood containing channel in the top of the meninges was also lacerated. 
To continue to answer your question with regard to the damage of the brain, following the formal infixation, Dr. Boswell, Dr. Finck and I convened to examine the brain in this state.
We also prepared photographs of the brain from several aspects to depict the extent of these injuries.
We found that the right cerebral hemisphere was markedly disrupted. There was a longitudinal laceration of the right hemisphere which was parasagittal in position. By the saggital plane, as you may know, is a plane in the midline which would divide the brain into right and left halves. This laceration was parasagittal. It was situated approximately 2.5 cm. to the right of the midline, and extended from the tip of occipital lobe, which is the posterior portion of the brain, to the tip of the frontal lobe which is the most anterior portion of the brain, and it extended from the top down to the substance of the brain a distance of approximately 5 or 6 cm.
The base of the laceration was situated approximately 4.5 cm. below the vertex in the white matter. By the vertex we mean--the highest point on the skull is referred to as the vertex.
The area in which the greatest loss of brain substance was particularly in the parietal lobe, which is the major portion of the right cerebral hemisphere.
The margins of this laceration at all points were jagged and irregular, with additional lacerations extending in varying directions and for varying distances from the main laceration.
In addition, there was a laceration of the corpus callosum which is a body of fibers which connects the two hemispheres of the brain to each other, which extended from the posterior to the anterior portion of this structure, that is the corpus callosum. Exposed in this laceration were portions of the ventricular system in which the spinal fluid normally is disposed within the brain.
When viewed from above the left cerebral hemisphere was intact. There was engorgement of blood vessels in the meninges covering the brain. We note that the gyri and sulci, which are the convolutions of the brain over the left hemisphere were of normal size and distribution.
Those on the right were too fragmented and distorted for satisfactory description.
When the brain was turned over and viewed from its basular or inferior aspect, there was found a longitudinal laceration of the mid-brain through the floor of the third ventricle, just behind the optic chiasma and the mammillary bodies.
This laceration partially communicates with an oblique 1.5 cm. tear through the left cerebral peduncle. This is a portion of the brain which connects the higher centers of the brain with the spinal cord which is more concerned with reflex actions.
There were irregular superficial lacerations over the basular or inferior aspects of the left temporal and frontal lobes. We interpret that these later contusions were brought about when the disruptive force of the injury pushed that portion of the brain against the relative intact skull.
This has been described as contre-coup injury in that location.
This, then, I believe, Mr. Specter, are the major points with regard to the President's head wound.

 

 

Edited October 31, 2017 by David Josephs

[James DiEugenio]

David:

Is that the long way of saying, no there is not?