Micah Mileto

The autopsy photos have a comically bad chain of custody. That would be true even if the photos were genuine.

Is it just my own biases, or is the age of BOH-wound broke? Or course, that doesn't necessarily mean the end of criticism of the medical evidence - on the contrary, I'm currently creeping up on 600 pages for a project on wounds that aren't the large head wound. And besides those issues, I've previously talked about the chest tubes, the witness evidence for neck organs being removed at the autopsy, and the feigned ignorance of the throat wound during the autopsy. Maybe the temple wounds and torso wounds are the new "woke". So maybe those issues cannot be proven scientifically - the lack of decent explanation for the witness evidence is enough to make a probably-permanent stain on history. There's already a lot of witness evidence on extra weapons, bullet holes, shells, slugs, and other evidence at the scene which does not fit the official story.

35 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

 

Are we sure now that the "air pocket" isn't an artifact like the HSCA said?

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

 

After Kennedy is done waving his hand in the late z170's, his body language in the film becomes ambiguous. There was about 2.3 seconds between that z180 and z222.

@David Von Pein

26 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

The government is out of the theory business. At least for now. But you're right. If the animation shows JFK's neck in alignment with JBC's shoulder at any time between Z-190 and Z-225, single assassin theorists will say it proves the viability of the SBT. 

Do you have any thoughts on the physical possibility of a separate Oswald shot to Connally? It seems to me like with such a theory, the government's biggest problem would just be explaining why nobody reported finding a round in the limo if it barely dropped out of Kennedy's throat/back... unless one wanted to argue that it somehow got lost on the street.

https://youtu.be/GkQyYgr_aqY?feature=shared&t=81

With the Knott laboratories model looking as if Connally's shoulder could've been available to be shot from the Sixth Floor at Zapruder frame 225, what would prevent the government from just coming out with a new theory that Oswald shot JFK at about z180 with a 6.5 round, modified to have less charge and barely exiting the throat, followed about 2.3 seconds later by another round shot into Connally at around z224? Would it be possible to physically disprove this theory? They could even try theorizing that the witnesses mistook the first two shots as a single shot because of how the first one was undercharged, and that the next two shots described by the witnesses were actually a single shot followed by the skull exploding.

I have already posted the most important statements from McClelland on the left temple wound. His final version of the story (post 1980s) is that there was a spot of blood on the left temple that looked like a wound. I have decided to combine my two-years-late "Case for an Altered Throat Wound" with the temple wound information, under the basic theme of information suggesting the coercion of Parkland witnesses

Just now, Cory Santos said:

 

There is no such thing as unbiased, there is only a question of which side you are biased against, and for what reasons.

48 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

chology is equally as stupid as armchair psychology. You shouldn't listen to anything these "professionals" claim. Weren't they doing labotomies then?

Micah Mileto

END QUOTE

Micah, please tell us more.  What is your basis for such an observation?

With all due respect, what is your extraordinary evidence for the extraordinary claim that mental healthcare workers know more about the human mind than the average person? The human mind is one of the most extraordinary phenomena in the universe that "we" know of, so it must follow that somebody claiming to understand the human mind better than most will need to provide some very extraordinary evidence to corroborate them. Virtually all of what modern mental healthcare claims to be science is just witness evidence. Witness evidence is notoriously unreliable. On it's face, it is obvious how psychology is just another cult, albiet one that has convinced virtually every government in the world of it's importance. Those papers are just pretentious and circular - not worth the paper they are (sometimes) printed on. Just try reading a random new paper from a mainstream psychology journal, and notice how any truly skeptical reader will understand how truly stupid and hollow the research is. This is the circus that decides prison sentences and executions.

Professional Psychology is equally as stupid as armchair psychology. You shouldn't listen to anything these "professionals" claim. Weren't they doing labotomies then?

23 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

All of those things have, indeed, been explained in non-conspiratorial ways over the last 60 years. Most of those items (if not all) were covered in a pretty decent amount of depth, of course, in Vincent Bugliosi's 2007 tome. And many other Lone Assassin advocates, including myself, have tackled most of those things as well.

A very reasonable possibility for Tague's injury, as a matter of fact, is provided right there in the Warren Report itself (on my all-time favorite WCR page, which nearly every CTer continues to ignore on a daily basis --- Page 117). So the Warren Commission itself had, in effect, started debunking some of the pro-conspiracy nonsense before their final report ever went to press.

 

Did the Warren report expressly tell the reader that the curb mark could not have been made by a direct hit because a direct hit would've taken out too much concrete? Also, the report acknowledges a possibility that the curb mark could've been made by one of the shots that wounded the torsos of Kennedy and Connally - strange that the Warren report feigned ignorance of the official story's need for the SBT (Specter would reportedly later admit to Josiah Thompson that he always thought the SBT was necessary). Again, I have always wondered that if the day comes the SBT is scientifically disproven, the government will just try making a cover story for the masses about Oswald tampering with his ammunition to make one low-velocity 6.5 slug enter Kennedy's back and barely exit the throat, perhaps at Zapruder frame 180, then perhaps followed by a separate Oswald shot into Connally's torso at z223 (2.38888888889 seconds at 18 frames per second).

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

 

It would seem that McClelland or another doctor said out loud during the ordeal "a piece of cerebellum just fell onto the cart".

Isn't the red blob on the Zapruder film meant to be the inner surface of the skull flap, not brains?

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Mormons are more likely to be hired by the FBI. Officially, this is because Mormons are less likely to have a problematic legal record, but perhaps the real reason is that they have genocide in their hearts.

3 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

 

Where in the FBI report did it give any specific detail indicating that Akin was capable of fabricating information? That report is high on opinion but low on detail.

11 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

 

Wow, just wow. Evidence, please. I don't care what the Mormon Nazis at the FBI think, I want specific information indicating that Akin could've been capable of fabricating information or being delusional, and no such information was provided in that report. If he saw a left temple wound, he could've told others about it pre-1981.

Is this Akin? Did he die in 1986 at the age of 56 shortly after telling the FBI about the forehead wound? https://www.myheritage.com/names/gene_akin

5 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

 

6/28/84 FBI Memorandum, SA Udo H. Specht to SAC, Dallas, re: interviews with Akin (RIF#124-10158-10449)---”On 6/18/84, the writer and SA DOUG DAVIS interviewed an individual who stated he was formerly Dr. GENE COLEMAN AKIN, the senior resident anesthesiologist at Parkland Hospital, Dallas, Texas. AKIN stated that he was on duty at the hospital on 11/22/63 when President KENNEDY was brought in the emergency room. AKIN stated that the FBI interviewed him during the 1963-1964 period concerning any of the observations he made on 11/22/63. AKIN stated that the “historic accident” of being present in the emergency room on 11/22/63 changed his whole life in a negative way. He feels that the governments on both a federal and state level have harassed him since that time. He stated that he quit practicing medicine in 1979 or 1980 and that DEA took his narcotics license away. He has never recouped the money it cost him to practice medicine because of government interference with his own destiny and self-initiative. He has been on welfare since 1980 and feels it is now the government’s obligation to take care of him. He claims that his sister had him committed to Terrell State Hospital and he was incarcerated in that institution from March 9 through May 25, 1984. He stated that it took him that long to convince the doctors that he was not a “nut.” AKIN is in the hospital for heart by-pass surgery on 6/20/84 and he has also been diagnosed as having renal cancer. AKIN also stated that he had his name changed to SOLOMON BEN ISRAEL and he was interviewed in Room 439, St. PAUL’s HOSPITAL, Dallas, Texas. AKIN ranted and raved about government injustice and conspiracies against him and behaved in a general aberrant manner. His mannerism in communicating, in the opinion of the writer, gave him or the information he was trying to relate no credibility whatsoever. The writer attempted to listen to him for over one hour. AKIN made efforts to contact the Dallas news media in order to tell his story, but apparently received very little favorable response. The writer made efforts to get AKIN to tell his story. AKIN kept ranting and raving about items from the right to the left of the political spectrum. AKIN did finally say that when he saw President KENNEDY in the emergency room on 11/22/63, he thought he saw a bullet entrance wound on the President’s forehead. The President was covered with blood in the head area and the back of his head was blown wide open. AKIN feels that his observation as to the possible entrance wound on the President’s forehead is significant and that he did not mention this item when he was interviewed in 1963-1964 because he did not want to be killed by any conspirators. AKIN stated that if this entrance wound was not documented in the Presidential autopsy, then plastic surgery was probably conducted to cover this up. AKIN made available a cassette tape recording of items he recorded himself during the past few days. The tape recording was reviewed by the writer and contained no information whatsoever concerning AKIN’s comments about the assassination of President KENNEDY. [redaction: at least one paragraph] At 1:45 pm, 6/28/84, AKIN telephonically contacted the writer and stated that he checked himself out [of] St. Paul’s hospital to [be] re-evaluated as to what to do about his medical condition. He stated that he was calling from the Dallas County Jail and that he had been arrested on 6/26/84. He was unspecific as to why he was arrested, but he indicated that it was some type of fraud charge and alcohol might have been an issue also. He wanted the writer to get him out of Jail and that it was all the FBI’s fault that his troubles are continuing. AKIN became extremely verbally abusive and the writer terminated the call. [redaction: at least a few sentences; end]”

Where does it say any specific thing against his credibility? Sounds like the FBI, like most dirty rotten humans, will just call anything they don't agree with a mental illness.

Also,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovCdMKfthXw

3 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

 

A. Dr. Jones never further clarified what he told the ARRB about the left temple. B. Is there any good reason to disregard Dr. Gene Akin AKA Solomon Ben-Israel? I also can't tell if that guy has passed away or not.

I have a few to add to the list. Will post later.

12 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

 

Akin claimed he was coerced. Entertaining the possibility of a temple wound probably also entails entertaining the possibility of a massive cover-up of Parkland witnesses.

25 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

In my scenario the bullet erupted upon impact with the skull, with many of the fragments embedding into the scalp. if this is what happened, then some of them may have made contact with the face area when the skull flap blew forward. Alternatively, it could be that the divots noted by the morticians were made by the triangular fragment when it broke loose. In any event, no one viewing the face noted a bullet entrance on the face, including the morticians claiming they noticed some minor defects on the face. 

And yes, I know, the morticians weren't pathologists. But one would think they'd seen a few bullet wounds, and could tell the difference between a tiny defect and the entrance of a high-velocity bullet. I mean, no abrasion ring. No bullet wipe. No skin tears. Just a small defect. It doesn't add up as a bullet entrance. 

Robinson and even allegedly Crenshaw spoke of multiple tiny wounds on the face. This could be from a bullet or from shrapnel entering from the front, or perhaps bullet or skull fragments passing through the facial bones and through the skin. Could it be possible that exiting and flapping fragments of skull bone pierced the face from the outside?

Again, Dr. Gene Akin AKA Solomon Ben-Israel and Hugh Huggins are witnesses who have stated directly on record, unambiguously, that they saw a small ENTRANCE wound on the front of Kennedy's head. And I am not aware of any serious reason to doubt Gene Akin AKA SBI. There are also the witnesses who said there was a small spot of blood on the front of the head which looked like it could be mistaken for a wound. And, of course, the witnesses who stated that  they saw what could've been one or more small holes, or a spot of bullet metal on the frontal head area caused by shrapnel.

You also don't need to believe in alteration to accept the possibility of a small frontal head wound. So why not join the temple wound parade?

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1uvGaBl2_EanXn4OwQrr083_yiLVrNGYK?usp=sharing

Could this be one or two holes in the right front of the head on the F8 skull photos, or just a glisten of light?

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

 

Could your proposed "tangential 6.5 skull shot" have sent one or more fragments out of the front of the skull? It may depend on the proposed size of the shrapnel exit wound, because larger fragments would have more velocity.