David Von Pein

And, of course, it is YOU (and you alone) who now gets to decide who has "lied" and who hasn't, is that it? And a member now gets punished for expressing his OPINION about a particular subject, eh? Pat seems to really believe that McClelland (in his initial report) was talking about a large wound in the left temple. I think Pat is dead wrong on this McClelland/Left Temple subject. McClelland's "left temple" reference, as you and others have correctly pointed out earlier, was referring to the alleged ENTRY wound that McClelland said was being pointed out by Dr. Jenkins. This was, of course, all just one big misunderstanding on McClelland's part. But Pat Speer evaluates this situation differently. And Pat's certainly entitled to his opinion....as am I and all other EF members. So what it boils down to is ---- You, Sandy, are penalizing Pat for having a different opinion than yours. Do you think that's fair?

.....

I was, of course, doing no such thing. I have never communicated the idea that I have ever thought that Dr. McClelland ever placed the large head wound anywhere except the far-right-rear portion of JFK's head. I have no idea how or why you have latched on to the goofy notion that I was trying to say that McClelland was placing the wound "over the ear" in the above screen captures from the 1988 NOVA program. I never said any such thing. You just decided to make that up (for some reason). Here's the way I set Keven straight when this same subject first surfaced here in January of this year: "I have no idea why Keven Hofeling is blasting me on the McClelland "hands-on demonstrations" topic. McClelland's "demonstrations" have ALWAYS placed the large "blow out" wound at the RIGHT-REAR of JFK's head (with very little variation). So where's the disagreement there, Keven? The disagreement comes, of course, when I point out the fact that Dr. McClelland was 100% wrong, as proven for all time by the HSCA-authenticated autopsy photos and X-rays, plus the Z-Film, which also proves that ALL of the witnesses who said there was a huge blow-out wound at the rear of Kennedy's head were dead wrong. But CTers like Keven Hofeling will, evidently, continue to pretend that the autopsy photos AND the X-rays AND the Zapruder Film AND the autopsy report AND the testimony of all 3 autopsy surgeons are ALL (in perfect tandem) fake/phony/altered/manufactured." -- DVP; January 24, 2024

It's kind of fun watching two conspiracy theorists calling each other liars on a daily basis now. I'm enjoying it. Even though such accusations are, of course, in direct violation of one of the most fundamental rules of this forum. But I guess if you're a moderator (or two), you can get away with such infractions. And maybe that's why we can now write out the word LIAR at this forum without it being X'ed out. Perhaps the mods removed that restriction so they themselves can utilize that word more often and more freely (on each other). Nice. "No member is allowed to accuse a fellow member of lying." -- Education Forum Rules and Membership Behaviour

Well, Pat, let's assume just for the sake of this discussion that Dr. Guinn was, indeed, a big fat liar (as you apparently believe). I'd still like to know what you think the odds are of a multi-gun conspiracy taking place in Dallas, with bullets from more than just a single rifle striking the two limo victims, and yet, after the bullets stopped flying, NOT A SINGLE BULLET OR FRAGMENT from any non-Oswald gun turned out to be large enough to be tested in order to positively eliminate Oswald's rifle as the source for ALL of the bullets and fragments that hit any of the victims on Elm Street? I think that's an important "What are the odds?" question to ask, because that's precisely what did occur in this JFK murder case. No bullets or fragments exist in this case that were definitely determined to be from some OTHER non-Oswald gun. With or without any Neutron Activation Analysis entering into the discussion, what I just said above is a proven fact. And it's a proven fact that conspiracy believers should be a little concerned about. Wouldn't you agree? And the traditional CTer responses of "Nothing in this case can be trusted" and/or "Everything's been faked" are worn-out and unprovable responses that reek of conspiracy theorist desperation. Would you not agree, Pat?

1. The Rydberg drawings are, of course, a total mess. Both of the entry wounds are in the wrong place. Those drawings are completely worthless and useless. But I think the Warren Commission was doing the best they could with what they had....i.e., the memory of Dr. Humes and the total lack of relying on the best evidence for the wound locations---the autopsy photos. The silliness of the WC's decision to not rely on or thoroughly review the autopsy photos still boggles the mind. A crazy, nutty decision to be sure. So, the LNers and CTers are therefore left to fight about the awful Rydberg drawings. 2. Re: the strap muscles and Arlen Specter's placement of those muscles. It's not that important in the long run, in my view, because the totality of the evidence indicates that the bullet which struck JFK in the upper back most certainly did make its way thru Kennedy's upper body without hitting any bone and without doing any severe damage to any internal structures in the body. And this is true regardless of the precise location of the strap muscles. Key Fact Reminder --- No bullets were found in JFK's body. That's a fact, and it's a fact that most certainly supports the idea that one bullet traversed the President's upper body from back to front. (And I don't think it's a very good idea to utilize Paul Landis' recent 2023 anti-SBT story. Here's why.) 3. Dr. John Lattimer's work on the JFK case was quite solid and factual (IMO). CTers, of course, totally disagree. Like Lattimer, I believe the bullet (CE399) did, indeed, traverse JFK's upper back and neck and emerge from the throat intact to go on and hit John Connally. No other alternative, IMO, comes even close to matching the known facts (and wounds) in this case. 4. Re: Dr. Vincent P. Guinn and his NAA studies --- Let's all ponder the "What Are The Odds?" question after probing Dr. Guinn's findings HERE. 5. Yes, in my opinion, the HSCA was most certainly incorrect in its assessment that JFK was showing signs of being struck by a bullet as early as Zapruder frame 190. And I think the proof that the HSCA was dead wrong about that timing issue can be found later in that same Zapruder Film, in frames 224 thru 226. Because if Kennedy was hit as early as Z190, then there's no way we'd be seeing JFK doing what he's doing with the hands as late as Z226. That jerking upward of his hands would certainly have occurred well prior to Z226 if he had been hit as early as Z190.

Nah. It was Jim Gordon who was thoroughly embarrassed in our 2015 SBT discussion (plus a few others).

Nor do CTers.....especially when it comes to the obviousness of the SBT. That became crystal clear right here at the EF almost ten years ago.

Well, Pat, given the wholly-untenable alternative(s) that would have no choice but to be true in order for the Single-Bullet Theory to not be true, I do indeed believe that the SBT can be categorized as more of a "fact" versus merely a "theory". After weighing all of the possible options and alternatives, it couldn't be clearer to me that the single-bullet conclusion is by far the best solution. And it's rather incredible to me that so many people have such a hard time seeing the obvious truth that resides within those three controversial letters—S.B.T.

I have frequently experienced that exact type of attitude being aimed at me by conspiracy theorists during the last 20+ years---at this forum and also at every other Internet forum I've joined since 2003---without exception. Most CTers I've encountered just simply cannot stand having their unprovable and untenable theories torn to shreds by anyone---be it an LNer or a fellow CTer like Patrick J. Speer. Such conspiracists prefer fantasy over reality (and facts). Sad indeed. But that's the way it is. At least that's been my experience since plugging in my first computer in September of 2000.

All Playlists:

Refresh.... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2019/08/narrative-prepared-by-marina-oswald.html

.....