Tim Carroll Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 (edited) As recounted in my online seminar, The Autopsy Photos: A New Perspective, Robert Groden acknowledged just last month that the autopsy photos show an entrance wound in the location described by Humes, Finck, and Boswell. He went even further, however, and insisted that he's always said so. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Pat: I went back to your seminar to find your source for such an assertion about what you say Bob Groden "acknowledged just last month" about the entrance wound "in the location described by Humes, Finck, and Boswell." I see that you cite a personal conversation with Groden on November 20, the day after I had dinner with him. First, I don't consider a casual conversation under questionable conditions a valid seminar citation. Is there a tape recording or signed transcript? Second, as to whichever location you allude, the doctors themselves have been extremely unclear. Here is a rear head photo with circles around the two allegedly potential entry wounds: At the HSCA hearings, Humes almost walked out when he became so befuddled over which of the two circled spots was the wound. I find that you have been no clearer on the subject. Please humor me and tell me which is the entry wound and then explain what the other one is. If you can do that, you have accomplished something the doctors themselves could not. Tim Edited December 22, 2004 by Tim Carroll Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Carrier Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 Slightly Off-Topic, but dealing with the competency, sincerity and drive of Robert Groden. I am on vacation for the remainder of the year, other than teaching classes here and there, and had some downtime today after completing my daily honey-do list, that my wife sets out for me. I sat down and watched the KGB Files tape narrated by Roger Moore, for the twentieth time since I purchased it. I again had to laugh and at the same time feel for the frustration Bob Groden showed in dealing with the ballistic experts when reconstructing the crime using lasers. The experts had their minds made up that the autopsy photos were genuine and that the Parkland Doctors and other wits were simply mistaken about the evulsion in the occupital region of the head (plus their misunderstanding of bloodspatter analysis). When Groden challenged them on the reaction of the President being thrust back upon head impact, they basically laughed at him and told him that that was James Bond movie mantality and that it does not happen. Then then spoke of hanging a body from a hook (or something similar) and firing a 12 gauge slug (then added buckshot which is not a slug) and the body does not move. DUH! We are talking about two different wound ballistics issues here. A freeswing solid mass of a body receiving such energy will likely go forward into it to receive it. A sitting body where the center of weight is rested and the impact is to the head which sits atop a hinged neck is another animal all together and they definately should know this. Both these ballistic experts and the Soviet experts speak of the initial forward movement of the head and spray to show that the impact was from behind. This is total bullxxxx! The head was forward and facing downward and impact high on the head pushed the head down, not forward, until it met resistance and then slammed it back. We are talking 2000+fps in a projectile of 150+gr and the movement forward (downward) coming in at roughly 1/9th of a second before the rearward violent thrust (2 frames of Zapruder). Bob must have developed some ulcers filming that one. Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Carroll Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 This is total bullxxxx! Al <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Carrier Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 This is total bullxxxx! Al <{POST_SNAPBACK}> <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Great reply Tim! Care to address any of the content or are you simply taking your anti-establishment stance? Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 Al, I'm sure you dismiss UM as a possible accomplice, just as you dismiss DCM. You therefore dismiss the fletchette theory regarding the throat wound. So I want to ask you about that wound. (I still consider the umbrella gun a possibility, but only that.) I'm sure you've probably answered this before on Lancer, but I don't recall it. What do you think happened to the bullet that entered JFK's throat? Ron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wim Dankbaar Posted December 22, 2004 Author Share Posted December 22, 2004 (edited) Sorry, Ron, but the fletchette is just baloney (my opinion). However, I am sure that indeed UM and DCM were acomplices, Signaling to the shooters (or better said spotters) that more shots were needed. The fact that BOTH are signilaling (with umbrella and waving hand), that BOTH are in the absolute centre position in the Plaza for crossfire triangulation, that BOTH seem to be together and display the same relaxed behaviour, that DCM seems to have a walky talky, and that BOTH have never been identified and never have come forward, is too much for coincidence. I think the bullet that hit JFK in the throat did not exit and was obstructed by JFK's vertebrae. Wim ------------------ JF – In 1963 the Agency, which I’m referring to as the CIA, they had weapons, basically based on an umbrella, like you can use it, walking canes, some of them carried a small caliber round. You couldn’t put a big caliber in there. To me the weapon was strictly an in-house weapon where you had to be right on top of the target. There is no way you can stand out on a sidewalk and take an umbrella and point it at a moving target without aiming. I mean this is a lot of fantasy here. I tought the umbrellas, and they come out with them and they had the little darts in them, they had the poison on the end of them where you could jab a guy going downstairs or in a house or in a room, any place where there is a lot of people moving, molling around together. You can walk up to somebody and you can shoot a fairly small 22 caliber round in him. But as far as somebody using an umbrella on a sidewalk and firing a round, no, that’s a lot of fantasy. Edited December 22, 2004 by Wim Dankbaar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Carroll Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 This is total bullxxxx! Al <{POST_SNAPBACK}> <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Great reply Tim! Care to address any of the content or are you simply taking your anti-establishment stance? Al <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Al, Noting that you were offtopic is addressing your content. You began your own post by noting that it was offtopic. Your post interrupted a serious discussion about Pat's misassertions regarding Bob Groden, about whom I thought we shared a mutual respect. It was you who didn't respond to the content or the context. Additionally, noting that you're now resorting to obscenity on this forum, to which I personally and respectfully invited you on the basis of its decency after you'd rendered yourself unwelcome elsewhere, is on topic. Any reasonable reading of my posts demonstrates that I have been very respectful toward you, welcoming you here with the inclusion of the following photo: When you were being overly dismissive of the history of CIA hired Mafia assassins, a unique time in our history when the lines between government and underworld were blurred and possibly backfired, I finally weighed in to support Ron Ecker's reasonable debating points. I have not resorted to name-calling or obscenity, as you have. The position I raised regarding the possible involvement of anti-Castro and/or Mafia elements, without over-certainty, is one held by Tosh Plumlee, Larry Hancock, Wim Dankbaar, Ron Ecker, Shanet Clark, James Richards, Dawn Meredith and many others. So why single me out, when I have made it abundantly and repeatedly clear that I respect the ballistics expertise you bring to the discussion, and have refrained from any debate with you to avoid such misbehavior on your part? As for your certainty about the latino mindset, did you read my post this past week, in response to Gary Webb's death, about the dozens of Mexican police drawn and quartered at Caro Quintero's ranch in Vera Cruz? Was I wrong about that? Have you read my seminars or the responses? Is it just that you can't allow anyone to question the work of the DPD? When I mentioned the overwhelming police response to a non-paying movie-goer in the immediate aftermath of the assassination, you retorted about how would I expect police to respond to the murder of a family member as compared with that of a "stranger," even when that "stranger" was the President of the United States. Your offtopic post was misplaced, your singling me out for considering a position that so many others hold with far more certainty than I was misplaced and inappropriate, and your use of name-calling and obscenity is just plain dishonorable and you should apologize. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Healy Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 I will confess my ignorance. Can someone tell me what Pig on a Leash is? As best I can determine from the link provided by Denis, Pig on a Leash is the title of a chapter written by Lifton for someone's book. If so, what is the book title? Ron <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hi Ron. Pig on a Leash is Liftons' extensive chapter in "The Great Zapruder Film Hoax: Deceit and Deception in the Death of JFK". If you are a fan of Liftons' work you have to read it. The insights into Davids' personal experiences in the early years of this case are worth the price of the book alone imo. The best read since "Best Evidence". Alan. PS. If anyone has read "Pig on a Leash" then I would hope that they understand why I described Roberts' description of David in the Black Op interview as "pathetic". I wasn't critizing him as a researcher, I still like & respect his what he has done with the photographic evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 I will confess my ignorance. Can someone tell me what Pig on a Leash is? ------------- see: The Great Zapruder Film Hoax -- Jim Fetzer latest amongst his JFK books, David Lifton's contribution in the book is: "Pig on a Leash"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 I will confess my ignorance. Can someone tell me what Pig on a Leash is? As best I can determine from the link provided by Denis, Pig on a Leash is the title of a chapter written by Lifton for someone's book. If so, what is the book title? Ron <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hi Ron. Pig on a Leash is Liftons' extensive chapter in "The Great Zapruder Film Hoax: Deceit and Deception in the Death of JFK". If you are a fan of Liftons' work you have to read it. The insights into Davids' personal experiences in the early years of this case are worth the price of the book alone imo. The best read since "Best Evidence". Alan. PS. If anyone has read "Pig on a Leash" then I would hope that they understand why I described Roberts' description of David in the Black Op interview as "pathetic". I wasn't critizing him as a researcher, I still like & respect his what he has done with the photographic evidence. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> _____________________________________ What I Want for Christmas: I want Tim Carroll to take all this insight, brilliance, superior writing and analytical skills and utilize these talents by writing a book. Stop wasting his valuable time arguing with people on the forum who he does not know and who do not know him. It's a drain of energy, mental and physical, that has no goal, at least that is how it appears to me. TIM: Get back to where you were with your seminar, pick up where Oglesby left off. You are his literary "heir". Don't let this forum suck away that energy. Please. Bob Groden is a hero. His sacrifices to this case are legendary. He has also had some serious physical problems that some of us are aware of. I have known Bob since 1975; he needs no defense!! He's a hero, period. Case Closed. Dawn Meredith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 Pig on a Leash is Liftons' extensive chapter in "The Great Zapruder Film Hoax: Deceit and Deception in the Death of JFK".If you are a fan of Liftons' work you have to read it. The insights into Davids' personal experiences in the early years of this case are worth the price of the book alone imo. The best read since "Best Evidence". Alan, Thanks. I might find a used copy. I'm a fan of "Best Evidence," but not of film alteration theory. The latter reminds me of creationism. The Zapruder film was intelligently designed by the CIA. There's no way to prove it, it's a matter of faith, based on seeming miracles (shoes changing color, the car not stopping, etc.). Ron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 _____________________________________ What I Want for Christmas: I want Tim Carroll to take all this insight, brilliance, superior writing and analytical skills and utilize these talents by writing a book. Stop wasting his valuable time arguing with people on the forum who he does not know and who do not know him. It's a drain of energy, mental and physical, that has no goal, at least that is how it appears to me. TIM: Get back to where you were with your seminar, pick up where Oglesby left off. You are his literary "heir". Don't let this forum suck away that energy. Please. Bob Groden is a hero. His sacrifices to this case are legendary. He has also had some serious physical problems that some of us are aware of. I have known Bob since 1975; he needs no defense!! He's a hero, period. Case Closed. dgh01: H A R D L Y, period ! Dawn Meredith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 _____________________________________ What I Want for Christmas: I want Tim Carroll to take all this insight, brilliance, superior writing and analytical skills and utilize these talents by writing a book. Stop wasting his valuable time arguing with people on the forum who he does not know and who do not know him. It's a drain of energy, mental and physical, that has no goal, at least that is how it appears to me. TIM: Get back to where you were with your seminar, pick up where Oglesby left off. You are his literary "heir". Don't let this forum suck away that energy. Please. Bob Groden is a hero. His sacrifices to this case are legendary. He has also had some serious physical problems that some of us are aware of. I have known Bob since 1975; he needs no defense!! He's a hero, period. Case Closed. dgh01: H A R D L Y, period ! Dawn Meredith <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ___________________________---- David Healy: Could I trouble you to request that you respond in english. I have no idea what " (b)dgh01" means???? I know the words "hardly" and "period", but I am accustomed to seeing them used in a sentence, so your post makes no sense to me. Thank you, Dawn ps By "Case Closed" I was referring to Bob Groden not the JFK case, which remains an open homicide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 _____________________________________ What I Want for Christmas: I want Tim Carroll to take all this insight, brilliance, superior writing and analytical skills and utilize these talents by writing a book. Stop wasting his valuable time arguing with people on the forum who he does not know and who do not know him. It's a drain of energy, mental and physical, that has no goal, at least that is how it appears to me. TIM: Get back to where you were with your seminar, pick up where Oglesby left off. You are his literary "heir". Don't let this forum suck away that energy. Please. Bob Groden is a hero. His sacrifices to this case are legendary. He has also had some serious physical problems that some of us are aware of. I have known Bob since 1975; he needs no defense!! He's a hero, period. Case Closed. dgh01: H A R D L Y, period ! Dawn Meredith <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ___________________________---- David Healy: Could I trouble you to request that you respond in english. I have no idea what " (b)dgh01" means???? I know the words "hardly" and "period", but I am accustomed to seeing them used in a sentence, so your post makes no sense to me. Thank you, Dawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ___________________________---- David Healy: Could I trouble you to request that you respond in english. I have no idea what " (b)dgh01" means???? I know the words "hardly" and "period", but I am accustomed to seeing them used in a sentence, so your post makes no sense to me. Thank you, Dawn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Dawn - If you look at many of other replies David Healy has made on this forum you will find them no better than the one he gave you. Groden was critical of what Lifton wrote in the 'Hoax book' and Healy feels that if he cannot counter with something intelligent - then his one word moronic replies will do. Expect another one very from him very soon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now