Micah Mileto

https://www.flickr.com/photos/spcouta/10999406294 also https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/malcolm-perry-signed-jfk-fdc-kennedy-1874928248

Bill Miller passed away a while ago, just noticed now

Where did you identify such a microphone? Gary Mack said there were never-before-digitized photos of the conference where there weren't any microphones visible.

REST IN PEACE!

His Church Committee testimony is missing, but what isn't missing is the report on his first interview for the Church Committee, and the transcript of his interview by the HSCA. No mention of a gun coming out. I feel like he's a clown, but if he's a clown, he must have had some huge cojones to tell such lies to government people.

So, there's no record of Gochenaur ever saying the part about Moore pulling out the gun until 2020? He didn't say that at the 2018 CAPA conference.

It's harder to find this guy than an upload of The Man Who Killed Kennedy with the audio in sync!

Hot stuff to come.

It didn't go into the dummy wrist, but it did go through two ribs instead of just one.

Nice one.

Although Parkland Drs. Malcolm Perry and Robert McClelland told the Warren Commission about cutting through the strap muscles on the front of Kennedy’s neck (WC Vol. 6, p. 30, McClelland's 3/21/1964 testimony [text]; WC Vol. 6, p. 7, Perry’s 3/25/1964 testimony [text]; WC Vol. 3, p. 366, Perry's 3/30/1964 testimony [text]), the Bethesda pathologists failed to make any known statements that describe finding a surgical defect on the strap muscles, such as scalpel cuts. The pathologists did, however, describe bruising on the strap muscles. They officially concluded that the bruising was caused by the nearby exiting bullet (WC Vol. 17, p. 30, CE 397, handwritten autopsy protocol; WC D 77, typed autopsy protocol [text]; WC Vol. 2, p. 347, Dr. Humes' WC testimony, 3/16/1964 [text]), although they were not totally clear on when they began to realize the defect in the throat was a former bullet hole. According to a report by Arlen Specter on a 3/11/1964 meeting with Humes, Boswell, and witness Admiral Calvin Galloway, “...Dr. Humes and Dr. Boswell further said that it was their current opinions that the bullet passed in between two major muscle strands in the President's back and continued on a downward flight and exited through his throat. They noted, at the time of the autopsy, some bruising of the internal parts of the President's body in the area but tended to attribute that to the tracheotomy at that time…” (Specter, 3/12/1964, Interview of Autopsy Surgeons [page 1] [page 2]). But, in Humes’ testimony to the Warren Commission, he said “...We examined in the region of this incised surgical wound which was the tracheotomy wound and we saw that there was some bruising of the muscles of the neck in the depths of this wound as well as laceration or defect in the trachea. At this point, of course, I am unable to say how much of the defect in the trachea was made by the knife of the surgeon, and how much of the defect was made by the missile wound. That would have to be ascertained from the surgeon who actually did the tracheotomy. There was, however, some ecchymosis or contusion, of the muscles of the right anterior neck inferiorly, without, however, any disruption of the muscles or any significant tearing of the muscles. The muscles in this area of the body run roughly, as you see as he depicted them here. We have removed some of them for a point I will make in a moment, but it is our opinion that the missile traversed the neck and slid between these muscles and other vital structures with a course in the neck such as the carotid artery, the jugular vein and other structures because there was no massive hemmorhage or other massive injury in this portion of the neck...”, “...When examining the wounds in the base of the President's neck anteriorly, the region of the tracheotomy performed at Parkland Hospital, we noted and we noted in our record, some contusion and bruising of the muscles of the neck of the President. We noted that at the time of the postmortem examination. Now, we also made note of the types of wounds which I mentioned to you before in this testimony on the chest which were going to be used by the doctors there to place chest tubes. They also made other wounds. one on the left arm, and a wound on the ankle of the President with the idea of administering intravenous. blood and other fluids in hope of replacing the blood which the President had lost from his extensive wounds. Those wounds showed no evidence of bruising or contusion or physical violence, which made us reach the conclusion that they were performed during the agonal moments of the late president, and when the circulation was, in essence, very seriously embarrassed, if not nonfunctional. So that these wounds, the wound of the chest and the wound of the arm and of the ankle were performed about the same time as the tracheotomy wound because only a very few moments of time elapsed when all this was going on. So, therefore, we reached the conclusion that the damage to these muscles on the anterior neck just below this wound were received at approximately the same time that the wound here on the top of the pleural cavity was, while the President still lived and while his heart and lungs were operating in such a fashion to permit him to have a bruise in the vicinity, because that he did have in these strap muscles in the neck, but he didn't have in the areas of the other incisions that were made at Parkland Hospital. So we feel that, had this missile not made its path in that fashion, the wound made by Doctor Perry in the neck would not have been able to produce, wouldn't have been able to produce, these contusions of the musculature of the neck” (WC Vol. 2, p. 347, 3/16/1964 testimony [text]). Again, why would Humes say there was “...some ecchymosis or contusion, of the muscles of the right anterior neck inferiorly, without, however, any disruption of the muscles or any significant tearing of the muscles…”, if Perry and McClelland said the strap muscles were cut through?

David Lifton's tapes! They are in the archive!

Can the website be fixed?

Three books called Killing Kennedy? Come on. At least "What In Tarnation Happened In Dealey Plaza?" is original.

A basic statement of correlation does not necessarily imply causation, not does a basic statement of causation preclude the possibility of a feedback loop - racism causes poverty, poverty continues racism, people are affected based on race.

Part 2 and part 3 of the 2018 CAPA conference also shows some early clips from the animation: https://capa-us.org/the-last-witnesses-revealing-the-truth/ In the later half of part 3, there is also a cool video about Zapruder film authenticity.

Why not a sequel or a trilogy?

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/24196-dust-on-the-shirt/

Doesn't the Zapruder film not really show the large head wound? The red blob appears to "move around" the head because it's supposed to just be the bloody inner surface of a skull fragment hanging on by a piece of scalp? Is it also possible that all of Doug Horne's alleged "photo experts" are working off of the fallacy of thinking the red blob is brain?

In the 1970's (or 80's/90's?) interview, did Bell also talk about Perry complaining of receiving phone calls (from Bethesda?) trying to get him to change his opinion on the throat wound?

[delete]

Kennedy was initially given an endotracheal tube through the MOUTH, and such a tube is supposed to go all the way down the trachea, but the doctor noticed that the throat wound interfered with his ability to push the tube all the way down and get a tight airflow, so the endotracheal tube was taken out of the mouth and a tracheostomy tube was instead used directly in the trachea. That's the official story - - unless somebody wanted to suggest that the doctors tried using the same endotracheal tube from the mouth to also be inserted into the throat wound. A modern endotracheal tube is around 10-11 mm in diameter, while a tracheostomy tube is around 13-15 mm - - but that would probably involve the witnesses lying about using a tracheostomy tube to replace the endotracheal tube.

You interviewed McClelland on camera in 1989? Any others? Were these ever released to the public? Also, any update on your alleged 1969 McClelland source where he suggests there was no trach incision? (Comment 370888; comment 370979; comment 370991; comment 371024) [...comment 370888] 11A. In 1967 (as I recall), Stewart had told one of the major Tennessee newspapers that Perry had said it was not necessary to make an incision (at all); he simply pushed the trach tube into the little bullet hole that was already there (i.e., what I, and many others, believe to have been a bullet entry wound). 11B: Update. I recently found an obscure late 1960s record in which Dr. McClelland said the same thing (!). […comment 370979] My answer: My final conclusion on this matter is that Dr. Perry never made an incision. He simply maneuvered the tube into the pre-existing bullet hole, as Dr. Dave Stewart said and (as I have now ascertained, Dr. McClelland said, also. More on that in Final Charade). And then the following events occurred: […comment 370991] […] Furthermore, and as will be shown when I publish Final Charade, Dr. McClelland supported that account. He, too, said no incision was necessary: the tracheotomy tube was simply "pushed through" the pre-existing bullet hole. [...comment 371024] As to what Perry actually did (as distinguished from "what he said he did" [my quotes]: in Final Charade, I will be publishing an account from Dr. McClelland in which he (McClellan) states that Perry did not have to make an incision, and, by way of explanation, Mcclelland stated the following: that as Perry withdrew the endotracheal tube originally inserted by Dr. Carrico, Perry was then able to enter the trachea by inserting the tracheotomy tube through the pre-existing bullet wound, as soon as the endotracheal tube was withdrawn, and was at a location above that bullet wound.

So even transcripts in the new re-uploads are false in labeling the interviewer as Livingstone?