Bush not in Dallas- He is dead

[Ron Ecker]

4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Maybe FC should start studying alien abductions like Lancie Boy.

Did Lance get abducted by aliens? If so, it's fascinating, based on his photo here, that he came back as a kid.

 

 

[James DiEugenio]

LOL ROTF

[David Von Pein]

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Sandy, this is the typical three blind mice--Lancie Boy, FC and DVP--and their appeal to authority.  That is, if the HSCA or the WC says something is true, then ipso facto its true.

But it's not JUST the authentication of the autopsy photographs and X-rays by the HSCA, Jimmy Boy (which is nice for LNers to have, granted), but there's also the other "photographic" piece of evidence (i.e., "virtual proof") that exists in this case which practically proves, all by itself, that the conspiracy theorists don't have a leg to stand on when they keep insisting that JFK had a huge hole in his occipital----the Zapruder Film. So, is that film a fake and a fraud too, Jim?

In your plethora of appearances since 2006 on Len Osanic's All Conspiracy Radio Network, Inc., I've noticed that you've been hesitant to come right out and admit that you think the Z-Film is phony. Around the edges of your comments, you've hinted at possible Z-Film fakery, but, unlike your CT-loving colleagues, you've stayed away from totally endorsing such a silly notion. Maybe you'd like to now go on the record and state your unequivocal opinion regarding the topic of "Zapruder Film Fakery/Forgery". Eh, Jim?

Because if the Z-Film isn't a big fat lie (at least as far as this "BOH" discussion is concerned), then how can you possibly still maintain that President Kennedy had a big hole in the back part of his skull after he was shot in the head? The Z-Film shows no such back-of-the-head blow-out.

"Lest anyone still has any doubt as to the location of the large exit wound in the head...the Zapruder film itself couldn't possibly provide better demonstrative evidence. The film proves conclusively, and beyond all doubt, where the exit wound was. Zapruder frame 313 (when the president's head exploded) and frame 328 (almost a second later) clearly show that the large, gaping exit wound was to the right front of the president's head. The back of his head shows no such large wound and clearly is completely intact." [Bugliosi's emphasis.] -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 410 of "Reclaiming History"

Edited December 18, 2018 by David Von Pein

[Sandy Larsen]

6 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

54 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

If you're an honest person, you can't say that my proof is wrong unless you can point out a flaw in it.

What is the flaw in my proof, Francois?  (Here it is again, for your convenience.)

Francois is right. You didn't PROVE anything. You merely laid out the two basic options---either the 20 Parkland "BOH" witnesses are right or the autopsy photos/X-rays are right---and you then declared the Parkland witnesses to be the victors.

 

No David, I didn't do that at all. Did you even read my proof? The two options I gave are not what you say they are.
 

One of the following two options explain the Parkland/Autopsy contradiction:

1. Either the 20 Parkland professionals mass hallucinated the same thing; or
2. The BOH photo was altered or faked.

The option I chose is #2.

Now tell me Dave, do you instead choose #1? Or do you think there is a third option explaining the contradiction?

Which is it, David?

 

[James DiEugenio]

OMG, Davey so you ignored everything I wrote correct?

About the HSCA report giving the wrong info in their report what you and FC relied upon right?

Then you ignore the stuff about the camera also and how the HSCA fudged that one.

And now you bring up the Z film as the last bastion?

I am not big on the Z film alteration that is true.  But if you really listened to me, what I have said is that if there is such a case, the WIlkersons have made a pretty good argument for it being just about this issue: the rear skull wound was blacked out.

Can we now drop this.  Like Soupy Sales, you never get tired of the custard pie in the face do you?

[David Von Pein]

55 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

No David, I didn't do that at all. Did you even read my proof? The two options I gave are not what you say they are.

One of the following two options explain the Parkland/Autopsy contradiction:

1. Either the 20 Parkland professionals mass hallucinated the same thing; or
2. The BOH photo was altered or faked.

The option I chose is #2.

Now tell me Dave, do you instead choose #1? Or do you think there is a third option explaining the contradiction?

Which is it, David?

Essentially, you laid out the options I mentioned --- either the Parkland people are correct, or the photos are correct.

But, yes, I DO think there's a third option beyond just the two carefully-worded options you are giving us in your post. And that's another thing that makes your "proof" so bogus. YOU'VE decided, on your own, how many options to give us and exactly what those options are going to be.

But, IMO, the way you've worded it shows your own bias. Because the Parkland people don't necessarily have to be "mass hallucinating". They were ALL WRONG, yes, when they THOUGHT there was a big HOLE in the back of Kennedy's head. But they didn't "hallucinate" anything. They saw something that FOOLED them into THINKING there was a wound back there, IMO.

So, yes, there's a third option....

3.) The 20 Parkland professionals saw a large amount of blood and gore at the right-rear of President Kennedy's head, and those witnesses were honestly mistaken when they reported that there was a large "wound" in that area of the President's head.

Edited December 18, 2018 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

2 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

I am not big on the Z film alteration that is true.  But if you really listened to me, what I have said is that if there is such a case, the Wilkersons have made a pretty good argument for it being just about this issue: the rear skull wound was blacked out.

And I think I've made a pretty good argument [below] to show that nobody "blacked out" anything in the Z-Film....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-895.html

 

[Sandy Larsen]

15 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

So, yes, there's a third option....

3.) The 20 Parkland professionals saw a large amount of blood and gore at the right-rear of President Kennedy's head, and those witnesses were honestly mistaken when they reported that there was a large "wound" in that area of the President's head.

 

Oh please... the blood completely concealed a huge hole on the top of the head, and created what looked like a large hole on the back of the head? And that's the way it appeared to 20 different medical professionals? Some of them looking down into the FAKE hole and seeing cerebellar tissue oozing out? One doctor describing skull fragment protruding from out that FAKE hole? One nurse saying she could have fit her fist inside the FAKE hole?

Well, as unlikely as that option is, I'll add it to the list.

 

[James DiEugenio]

Davey is forgetting that the same amount of people saw it at Bethesda.

Way to go Davey Boy!

[David Von Pein]

8 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Oh please... the blood completely concealed a huge hole on the top of the head,

Well, the "real" hole was more on the right SIDE of the President's head, not the "top". (But I agree that the "top" of the head was, indeed, affected by the bullet, and some of the "top" part of the head was missing.)

But I think the main reason that nobody (that I'm aware of) saw TWO "wounds" (the "real" one at the right-front and the one that was mistakenly perceived to be a "wound" in the right-rear/occipital) is due to the work of Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy on the ride to the hospital. We know from her testimony that she was "trying to hold his head on". So she very likely put the loose flap of scalp back into place as best she could before they arrived at Parkland, thereby concealing it effectively from view. Ergo, nobody said they saw TWO wounds at all. (IMHO.)

 

8 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

and created what looked like a large hole on the back of the head? And that's the way it appeared to 20 different medical professionals? Some of them looking down into the FAKE hole and seeing cerebellar tissue oozing out?

Which would have been impossible --- the "looking down" (into an occipital hole) part of your statement, I mean --- if the President had been lying on the stretcher FACE UP the whole time----which, of course, he was.

Dr. McClelland's observations are particularly bizarre (and virtually impossible), as I discuss here....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/head-wounds.html

 

8 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

One doctor describing skull fragment protruding from out that FAKE hole? One nurse saying she could have fit her fist inside the FAKE hole?

Well, as unlikely as that option is, I'll add it to the list.

It should have been on your "list" of options for years.....particularly since the head man of the HSCA's Forensic Pathology Panel totally endorses it....

• "Dr. Michael Baden has what I believe to be the answer, one whose logic is solid. [Quoting Baden] "The head exit wound was not in the parietal-occipital area, as the Parkland doctors said. They were wrong," [Baden] told me. "That's why we have autopsies, photographs, and X-rays to determine things like this. Since the thick growth of hair on Kennedy's head hadn't been shaved at Parkland, there's no way for the doctors to have seen the margins of the wound in the skin of the scalp. All they saw was blood and brain tissue adhering to the hair. And that may have been mostly in the occipital area because he was lying on his back and gravity would push his hair, blood, and brain tissue backward, so many of them probably assumed the exit wound was in the back of the head. But clearly, from the autopsy X-rays and photographs and the observations of the autopsy surgeons, the exit wound and defect was not in the occipital area. There was no defect or wound to the rear of Kennedy's head other than the entrance wound in the upper right part of his head." [End Baden quote]." -- Vince Bugliosi; Pages 407-408 of "Reclaiming History"

[Sandy Larsen]

Revised proof with David VP's option included:

The testimonies of the 20 Parkland medical professionals are quite consistent with each other, but irreconcilably contradict with what the back-of-head (BOH) autopsy photo shows. This means that one of the following must have happened:

1. Either the 20 Parkland professionals mass hallucinated the same thing; or
2. The 20 Parkland professionals saw a large amount of blood and gore at the right-rear of President Kennedy's head, and those witnesses were honestly mistaken when they reported that there was a large "wound" in that area of the President's head; or
3. The BOH photo was altered or faked.

Which of the above three options is most likely to have happened?

Number 1:  Impossible.

Number 2:  I'm confident in stating that this has never occurred in the history of gunshot wounds to the head. That is to say, a gaping hole on the top of the head being mistaken by doctors in a hospital as a hole on the back, one that could be looked down into.

Number 3: Number three is very plausible. It's easy to fake a photograph of the back of somebody's head.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

20 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Davey is forgetting that the same amount of people saw it at Bethesda.

Way to go Davey Boy!

 

Jim,

Do you mean that ~20 medical professionals at Bethesda also saw and described the wound as being on the back of the head?

I haven't studied that part of Dr. Aguilar's list yet.

 

[David Von Pein]

24 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Davey is forgetting that the same amount of people saw it at Bethesda.

A severe overstatement by Jim.

Way to go, Jimmy Boy!

You think TWENTY different people said they saw a huge BOH blow-out at BETHESDA too? Hardly.

Edited December 18, 2018 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

10 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Number 2:  I'm confident in stating that this has never occurred in the history of gunshot wounds to the head. That is to say, a gaping hole on the top of the head being mistaken by doctors in a hospital as a hole on the back, one that could be looked down into.

Explain how anyone could "look down into" a big hole in the occipital if JFK was lying FACE UP the whole time? Did those 20 Parkland professionals have X-ray vision or something? ~big shrug~

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ron Ecker said:

Did Lance get abducted by aliens? If so, it's fascinating, based on his photo here, that he came back as a kid.

That's my "inner child."  I unleash him at places like this.