Bush not in Dallas- He is dead

[David Von Pein]

3 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

Lets settle this rather easily, do any of the wc defenders believe that even 1 xray from the autopsy was lost destroyed or unaccounted for?  

Here's what Vince Bugliosi had to say on the subject of "missing photographs" (and I would assume that this comment would extend to the similar topic of "missing or lost X-rays" as well)....

• "For years conspiracy theorists have charged that the "missing" autopsy photographs are, in their minds, one more indication of a conspiracy in the assassination. .... But...with literally hundreds of people from various official investigative agencies...examining and working with the photos throughout the years, I not only don't find it suspicious, I find it completely predictable that one or more photographs ended up missing, misplaced, or expropriated by people through whose hands they passed." --Vincent Bugliosi; Page 275 of "Reclaiming History" (Endnotes)

[Cory Santos]

10 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Here's what Vince Bugliosi had to say on the subject of "missing photographs" (and I would assume that this comment would extend to the similar topic of "missing or lost X-rays" as well)....

• "For years conspiracy theorists have charged that the "missing" autopsy photographs are, in their minds, one more indication of a conspiracy in the assassination. .... But...with literally hundreds of people from various official investigative agencies...examining and working with the photos throughout the years, I not only don't find it suspicious, I find it completely predictable that one or more photographs ended up missing, misplaced, or expropriated by people through whose hands they passed." --Vincent Bugliosi; Page 275 of "Reclaiming History" (Endnotes)

Thank you. So the very compelling evidence that Douglas Horne of the AARB found is ignored?  What does Bugliosi have to say about that?  It’s ok because lots of fellers looked at them. Heck someone might have used it for a napkin by mistake. That doesn’t fly in a murder investigation and he knew that. 

Edited December 21, 2018 by Cory Santos

[Cory Santos]

My point is if Bugliosi admits even one might be missing then the evidence as a whole is questioned. So we know now we have an incomplete record from the autopsy. We know from Douglas Horne that testimony calls into question if x rays were forged and or done in ways to make them easily be misinterpreted and that this was intentional. Sorry but in a court this doesn’t fly. So the evidence is not as neat as wc defenders wish. Let’s be honest here. 

Edited December 21, 2018 by Cory Santos

[David Von Pein]

47 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

So the very compelling evidence that Douglas Horne of the [ARRB] found is ignored?  What does Bugliosi have to say about that?

"RECLAIMING HISTORY" EXCERPTS (RE: DOUGLAS P. HORNE).....

[Vincent Bugliosi Quotes On:]

      "Unbelievably, [Doug] Horne said that the depositions taken by
the ARRB caused him to conclude that there were two (not one)
supplemental brain examinations following the autopsy, and the second
one--are you ready?--wasn't on the president's brain, but on another
brain from some anonymous third party.

      "Horne, accusing Drs . Humes and Boswell of criminal conduct to
cover up the true facts of the assassination, said that what happened
was a "carefully controlled, compartmented operation in regard to
orchestrating who was present, and what procedures were performed, at
the two separate brain examinations." ....

      "It was critical to Horne's mad theory that the "first" exam be
NO LATER than the morning of November 25 because he concludes the
brain was buried with the president's body, and the funeral was that
afternoon. Hence, per Horne, the president's brain wasn't even
available to be examined on November 29, when Horne says the "second"
supplementary exam took place.

      "But to arrive at the twenty-fifth as the date of the "first"
supplementary brain exam, Horne had to engage in what appears to be
deliberate distortion. The only other option is serious
incompetence. ....

      "Horne conveniently omits from his report the reference to the
brain being turned over to [Dr. George] Burkley after December 6,
1963. If he had, this would have proved that his theory that the
president's brain was buried with his body on November 25, 1963, was
wrong.

      "Instead, he focuses only on the desire of the Kennedy family to
inter the brain with the body, and since the president's funeral was
on the afternoon of November 25, 1963, he concludes that "the
supplementary brain examination [took place] prior to the November 25,
1963 state funeral of President Kennedy." ....

      "Exactly like his congenitally suspicious predecessors, who
apparently have different experiences in life than normal humans,
whenever Horne spots a discrepancy in the recollection of two or more
people trying to remember a long-ago event that supports his theory of
what happened, he immediately smells the sweet (to him) aroma of a
conspiracy. .... But when a discrepancy can't be used to support
Horne's theory, he suddenly becomes normal and doesn't think anything
of it. ....

      "Now why would Humes and Boswell, who testified that there was
only one supplementary brain exam, have conducted a second one of a
different brain? Of course, Horne has an answer, in effect accusing
Humes and Boswell of being a part of a vast conspiracy to cover up the
true facts of the assassination. ....

      "Horne also goes on to say he believes "that President Kennedy's
body was altered--tampered with--prior to the commencement of
the...autopsy, presumably to remove evidence (i.e., bullets or bullet
fragments) inconsistent with the lone-assassin-from-behind cover
story." ....

      "Since Horne and his fellow conspiracy theorists passionately
believe that the conspirators shot Kennedy from the grassy knoll to
the president's right front, then tried to frame Oswald by making it
look like the shots came from the president's rear, where Oswald was,
did the thought ever enter their mind that rather than get surgeons
beforehand to alter the wounds on Kennedy's body and remove bullets or
fragments, and then have the autopsy surgeons engage in a monumental
charade of having two separate brain exams, why wouldn't the
conspirators avoid the necessity for all of this by simply shooting
Kennedy from the rear instead of the front? That way they wouldn't
have to pull off an operation of staggering difficulty and complexity
and wouldn't have to bring into the conspiracy all these surgeons and
doctors, each one of whom could expose it and put all the conspirators
on death row. ....

      "Before Doug Horne, the main beef that most conspiracy theorists
had with the autopsy surgeons was their alleged incompetence. But
thirty-five years after the assassination, Horne showed all these
naive, whippersnapper conspiracy theorists a thing or two. Humes and
Boswell weren't incompetent. They were criminals and co-conspirators.

      "One would think that Horne would be ashamed of himself for
writing the memorandum he did. But to the contrary, he is very proud.
In an introduction to his memo that he wrote for 'Probe', a small,
informative conspiracy publication that has since folded, he said his
view of his memo as being "extremely significant, even seminal" was
confirmed by the reaction of others of its importance, and that while
he was writing it he "felt electrified" because of his "unique and
revelatory interpretation" of the evidence "that was critical to
proving that there was a massive government cover-up of the medical
evidence in the JFK murder."

      "Horne goes on to say in his introduction that he was "still
surprised" that no one else previously saw what he did and published
the hypothesis before he did. But he has no reason to be surprised.
Most people don't have thoughts this irrational. And if, perchance,
such a vagrant thought enters their mind, they recognize it as such.
When you have such a virtually insane thought and you don't realize
it, that's when, you know, there's a problem.

      "There is one delightful gem that I must add to this section to
lighten it up. Dr. David Mantik, a Loma Linda, California, cancer
specialist, is, like Dr. Gary Aguilar, a part of the new wave of
conspiracy theorists. Taking Horne's theory to vertiginous heights,
listen to what he has to say about Horne's substitute brain.

[Quoting Mantik:]

      "If there was a surrogate brain, it ALSO has disappeared...It is
not likely that RFK would have wanted even a surrogate brain placed on
public display as if it were his brother's. Most likely, RFK placed
the authentic brain into the coffin for initial burial on Monday,
November 25, and was therefore fully aware that a surrogate brain had
later surreptitiously appeared...If RFK understood the role that the
surrogate brain had played, as he probably did, he could have used any
convenient waste disposal site [to dispose of it]."

[End Mantik quote.]

      "My God. RFK somehow finds out that Humes and Boswell, as part
of an apparent conspiracy to cover up the assassination of his
brother, used a brain other than his brother's to conduct their
examination. So he [RFK] goes out and finds, seizes, and then gets rid
of his brother's substitute brain [DVP: instead of taking the proper
action to prosecute these criminal autopsists to the fullest extent of
the law]. Is there any end to this silliness? ....

      "A great number of nuts have kept pumping out conspiracy
theories for years. But these are private nuts, on the outside as it
were. But when someone like Horne, working for an official review
board of the federal government, someone we expect to be responsible,
can author a document that couldn't possibly be any sillier or
transparently irresponsible, then unfortunately we know that the
notion of a conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination will be alive and
well until the crack of doom.

      "I suppose it is a given that there will be other Doug Hornes
who will breast-feed the conspiracy loonies for generations to come
with their special lactations of bilge, blather, and bunk.

      "One wants to take earnest, well-intentioned, and intelligent
people like Drs. David Mantik and Gary Aguilar seriously, even though
neither of them are pathologists. But when they take someone like Doug
Horne seriously, and accept his outrageous and patently false theory
as completely valid, it becomes much more difficult to take them
seriously."

-- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 435-437, 439-440, and 443-444 of "Reclaiming History"

==============================

More:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com#Doug-Horne

 

Edited December 21, 2018 by David Von Pein

[Cory Santos]

I am asking about x ray and autopsy photos, not what Doug Horne believes about the brain.  That was a clever pivot but I ask the witness to answer my question, that is, do you admit that the collection of x ray and autopsy photos which are available today is not complete?  Yes or no please.

Edited December 21, 2018 by Cory Santos

[David Von Pein]

20 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

...do you admit that the collection of x ray and autopsy photos which are available today is not complete?  Yes or no please.

I don't know. Since all the photos and X-rays have never been made available on the Internet (and probably never will be, since that action would require the permission of the Kennedy family, and that's not ever going to happen), I can't say for certain if any pictures or X-rays are "missing".

The Clark Panel, in Feb. 1968, did an inventory of the photos and X-rays that they examined that year. I assume this is the entire "inventory" of photos & X-rays. But perhaps it's not a complete list. I really have no idea ---- http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html.

Let me add this further observation by the late Mr. Bugliosi....

"There is little reason to place importance in these kinds of accounts of a few allegedly missing or altered photographs. Why? Because they can’t possibly show something that contradicts what is depicted in the many photographs that do exist and are available. More importantly, as I’ve stated frequently, the photographic experts of the HSCA unanimously agreed that the existing photographs (and accompanying X-rays) were authentic and depicted the president’s body as it was on the night of the autopsy. And they prove beyond any doubt that the president was shot from above and behind. Consequently, any missing or “altered” photographs cannot show something else, as the conspiracy theorists claim." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 276 of "Reclaiming History" (Endnotes)

 

Edited December 21, 2018 by David Von Pein

[Cory Santos]

So where is the xray mentioned in Dr  humes memo?  Mr  Horne references it in his video? Does Bugliosi answer that?

[David Von Pein]

1 minute ago, Cory Santos said:

So where is the X-ray mentioned in Dr. Humes' memo? 

What memo?

 

[David Von Pein]

Reprise....

4 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

So where is the X-ray mentioned in Dr. Humes' memo?

Is it listed (by number) in the Clark Panel report? ....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html

 

Edited December 21, 2018 by David Von Pein

[James DiEugenio]

Incredible, Davey swears by the HSCA authentication without mentioning any of the serious problems I listed about it. Talk about religious zeal.

Now, Cory tries to get him to tell the truth about the missing photos, and what does he refer to: the Clark Panel inventory.  When in fact Clark admitted himself that Humes said there was at least one missing photograph.  Gary Aguilar then writes, this is wrong, Humes actually said there were two missing pictures.  One showed the bullet entry into the skull and the other was in the thorax. (MIDP, p. 203)  Boswell also agreed that they took a photo of the thorax that he has never seen. (ibid) FInck agreed about the missing skull photo. (p. 207)

Things are about to get worse.

Stringer also said he recalled two photos of the thorax which are not present.  But he also said that he took 11 duplex folders which should have yielded 22 pictures.  He said he was only shown 16 by the HSCA. ( Ibid,  p. 204)  Stringer's assistant, Riebe, also said he took several photos which are not there either.  Both men said they were ordered to sign a false inventory. (p. 205)

The end game: Both Knudsen and Spencer later told the ARRB (remember them?) that they saw pics that are not in the inventory. (pp. 208-09)  Both revelations  are bad for the WC.  Knudsen said he saw probes in JFK's back that did not match up with the throat wound. (Others recalled this picture being taken.)  Spencer said she saw a picture that revealed a wound in the back of the skull of about  an inch or two in diameter. 

Did VB  report on any of this Davey?

[Cory Santos]

 

49 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Reprise....

Is it listed (by number) in the Clark Panel report? ....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html

 

3:57:33 of this video.  https://youtu.be/svDEw3Jgkw8

 

[Sandy Larsen]

12 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Gary Aguilar then writes, this is wrong, Humes actually said there were two missing pictures.  One showed the bullet entry into the skull and the other was in the thorax. (MIDP, p. 203)

 

Jim,

Are you saying that Humes said that one of the missing photos showed the EOP bullet wound?

 

[Guest]

14 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

In this case Elmer Moore of the Secret Service admitted that his function after the assassination was to inhabit Parkland Hospital and get the doctors to jump on board the official story, and he specifically talked about what he did to Perry to get him to change his story. (The JFK Assassination: The Evidence Today, pp. 166-69)  Moore was so bad that he showed up for his fist interview for the Church Committee with his lawyer in tow.

This is one of those "factoids" on which the Conspiracy Gospel is based that simply does not withstand scrutiny.  Such factoids always have these things in common:  (1) the factual basis is either non-existent or extremely weak; (2) in the hands of True Believers, every aspect of the original factoid just keeps getting better and more sinister as the factoid is recounted; and (3) the improved factoid eventually hardens into Conspiracy Gospel and is repeated as such without regard to items (1) and (2).

I love closely examining a single factoid such as this, as I have done on several past occasions here, because it is a narrowly focused task and the results so clearly expose the methodology by which the Conspiracy Gospel is woven - dubious factoid by dubious factoid.  I have accumulated a truly massive history of this particular factoid and will accumulate even more.  Crafting a definitive expose of this factoid will be a fair amount of work, but I shall undertake the task.  When I have completed the task, I shall not bury my work on page 937 of this particular exercise in mental masturbation, which will surely still be an active thread even if the task takes me nine months, but shall start a new thread.

Until then, ta-ta.

[James DiEugenio]

Yes, that is what both Humes and FInck said according to Gary. (See MIDP, pp 206-07)

[James DiEugenio]

Lancie:

Here is a more recent article on Perry's recanting and how it haunted him

https://crosscut.com/2017/11/john-f-kennedy-assassination-files-seattle-trump-release-shooters