Keyvan Shahrdar
-
Posts
475 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Keyvan Shahrdar
-
-
@Vince Palamara Vince Palamara's contributions to the study of the Secret Service detail for President John F. Kennedy will be remembered throughout history. His work has secured him a place in history books that people will read for centuries, if not millennia, to come.
-
-
@Keven Hofeling I can't wait to see your self inflicted brain-washed of a narrative fall apart after you answer Pat.
-
On 4/24/2024 at 1:00 PM, Roger Odisio said:JFK's killers had 3 objectives. 1. A plan to murder Kennedy 2. A plan to cover up their involvement and blame someone else. 3.The implementation of the policy changes that were the reason for the murder in the first place. Johnson was indispensable to the last two objectives.
I my head, what logic dictates is the following:
- President John F. Kennedy confronted Governor George Wallace in 1963 over the issue of racial segregation in Alabama's schools. This confrontation came to a head on June 11, 1963, during the infamous "Stand in the Schoolhouse Door" incident. Governor Wallace stood at the entrance of Foster Auditorium at the University of Alabama in a symbolic attempt to block two African American students, Vivian Malone and James Hood, from enrolling at the university. Wallace was making a statement against desegregation and in support of his pro-segregation stance. President Kennedy asserted his federal authority decisively and embarrassed Wallace.
- General Curtis LeMay ran as the vice presidential candidate with George Wallace in the 1968 presidential election. It is easy to make a claim that General Lemay was a racist. He was in a segregationist ticket with George Wallace after all!
- General Lemay was a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
- The Air Force tapes from that day have not been fully released, only redacted versions have.
- After the assassination, did the General make it clear to LBJ that he needed to be sworn in before the plane took off from Dallas, probably by telling LBJ that they believed the Russians killed JFK? I bet this is why the recordings have not been released.
- My assertion is the secret service was in on the conspiracy. JFK's original driver, Thomas Shipman "died" of a heart attach weeks prior to the assassination and the driver, William Greer, slowed the limousine down in the kill zone. They probably forced the body be removed from Dallas. There are no records that state Jaqueline wanted the body moved.
- The Nix film has reference marks in places where shots were fired. This makes me believe the FBI was probably investigating this to try to find out what happened. My assertion is that J Edgar Hoover found out and told LBJ that there were multiple shooters and the assassination was a coup d'état by the generals. LBJ had no choice but to go accept it and go along with it.
- I personally don't think LBJ knew anything about the assassination before hand.
- This assassination was a military operation by the JCS.
-
8 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:
@Keyvan Shahrdar, on two separate threads now you have responded to the evidentiary challenges @Sandy Larsen and I have presented to you with various reiterations of the above mantra, and have offered absolutely nothing substantive in response, and it is so far appearing futile to even attempt to communicate with you because you are revealing yourself to be a one trick pony capable of nothing other than this solitary hollow mantra:
The suppressed premise underlying your mantra appears to be the proposition that the films and photographs of the assassination are authentic, pristine and inviolate, and that the abundant evidence that impeaches the authenticity thereof is mere "gibberish" and "narrative" unworthy of the least consideration, so Sandy and I have presented you with questions within the conceptual framework you have presented which you appear to be refusing to address, even though it is the photographic evidence itself we have presented you with.
So I am here going to present these challenges to you again, while reminding you that we have presented same to you within the criteria which you have -- however unwisely -- labeled as "facts" as opposed to "gibberish" and "narratives." In essence, for the sake of argument, we are attempting to engage you in a discussion, on your own terms, and in doing so have presented you with issues on your own turf which one would think you should be able to understand.
The questions Sandy presented you with were at the post linked as follows: https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/30149-can-speer-and-his-confederates-counter-the-only-math-that-really-counts-re-jfks-occipital-parietal-wound/?do=findComment&comment=534070
And the related questions I presented you with were at the post linked as follows: https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/30149-can-speer-and-his-confederates-counter-the-only-math-that-really-counts-re-jfks-occipital-parietal-wound/?do=findComment&comment=534128
For your convenience, those questions were essentially as follows, which challenges you with the additional question of whether you are capable of responding without resort to your dismissive "gibberish/narrative" mantra, given that these questions relate exclusively to the photographic evidence:
__________________
I am with you, Sandy, and would like to see Keyvan answer the questions you have posed about where Keyvan believes the large head wound was located, and about whether it is the Zapruder film head wound imagery or the right profile autopsy photographs of JFK that are fraudulent (given that they contradict each other).
However, I would like to add the following Zapruder film headwound imagery to the equation (from the 1998 MPI "Images of an Assassination" direct copy of the extant "original" Zapruder film), so that Keyvan can fully appreciate the cantaloupe sized cavernous wound crater that is depicted as being in JFK's forehead in the film which not one single Dealey Plaza, Parkland Hospital or Bethesda autopsy witness ever reported or described, and which clearly contradicts the autopsy photographs:
What specifically I would like to see Keyvan explain is why in the Zapruder film in frames Z-335 and Z-337 we are see Jackie Kennedy's pink shoulder pad where we should be seeing President Kennedy's forehead, when the autopsy photographs demonstrate that the President's forehead is perfectly intact:
ZAPRUDER FRAME 335
ZAPRUDER FRAME 337
Now, Keyvan, how do you reconcile Z-335 and Z-337, as well as the other Zapruder film images above showing a cavernous cantaloupe sized crater in JFK's forehead with the following right profile autopsy photographs of the fallen President which demonstrate that there was no such crater in his forehead and that the forehead was perfectly intact? In other words, which photographic images are fraudulent, the autopsy photographs, or the Zapruder film images?
1. Can you please quit the long posts? Really!
What I have replied to you is substantive and factual.
Did you notice what you just did? You have claimed that all the photographs that you posted have been compromised because they do not fit your "narrative" and now you are using the same photographs to try to prove your narrative.
You have been brainwashed by greedy authors and researchers who just want to make money from you. You need to go through retraining camp on your JFK research.
Do some research on the Autopsy photo 13,14 (B & W) 40,41 (Color) Figure 60. This I see is a bad copy of the autopsy photograph. All of your photographs are bad copies that do not show detail. Where did you get them? The web? I have a much sharper images where you can see details that you cannot see on the photos you supplied.
Look at that photograph, to the left of the throat shot, there seems to be a red dot. Is it an exit shot? IDW. To the right side of the throat wound there seems to be a incision on the top of his nipple. In his left arm pit, there seems to be something circular at the crease of the arm pit and the left pectoral. Those are questions that need answers. I don't know what they are. Why don't you spend time trying to figure them out.
His head shows signs of a tangential shot similar to what Pat showed, except it is going upward from the temporal bone of the right ear to the top of the skull.
Stop spewing mis information in the evidence of factual autopsy photos.
-
On 4/26/2024 at 12:51 AM, Sandy Larsen said:
The "solid scientific evidence of a tangential wound" that Pat posted has nothing to do with Kennedy. It's somebody else's wound.
Keven has presented Robinson's ARRB testimony explaining what that triangular piece is, at least the part of it above the ear, as indicated in his drawing below. Though apparently he recalled its locationto be a couple centimeters nearer the ear than its actual location. He said that it was a flap of skin. As well as the location of a 1/4 inch wound.
Neither Keven nor I have commented on what the beliefs of any authors are. Only Pat has done that. To which I've warned readers not to believe what Pat says about other researchers because of his history of misrepresenting the evidence and what the researchers believe.
Keven went one step further and proved that what Pat said were misrepresentations. No big surprise for me.
That was Dr. Paul Peters' judgment after carefully observing the autopsy photographs. Why do you consider a medical doctor to be "utterly unqualified?" (See the video in the OP.)
Oh, I know. Because his opinion contradicts your preconceived notions. You have already admitted to being a closed-minded ideologue regarding the authenticity of the photos, films, and x-rays. So why not regarding this incision (as described by Dr. Peters) as well?
@Sandy Larsen In the same breath you are claiming the autopsy photos are fake and you are using the same photos to make you claim. Irrefutable scientific evidence is presented to you and you don't believe it. I am afraid that you have been brainwashed into believing information that has no basis in fact.
You need to evaluate fact not narratives or what people say or write. You don't need to belief Pat or what he writes, but when photographs are presented with a narrative with basis of fact, that is a fact.
-
On 4/21/2024 at 12:11 AM, Pat Speer said:
The denuding of skin is symptomatic of tangential wounds, Vince. As the bullet strikes at a shallow angle, a piece of bone pulls forward and tears the skin.
Pat, your post shines a spotlight on a glaring inconsistency: the same individuals who dismiss the autopsy photographs as fabrications are using these very images to bolster their own dubious claims.
@Sandy Larsen, @Keven Hofeling, et al. - Here, Pat presents solid scientific evidence of a tangential wound from a missile on a human skull and its effects. Yet, despite this clear evidence, you choose to believe speculative authors who exploit your credulity. You accept the claim that this wound is merely a surgical incision, based solely on the word of someone utterly unqualified to judge such matters.
-
On 4/20/2024 at 10:15 PM, Keven Hofeling said:
I've had several extensive, though oddly disjointed, discussions with @Keyvan Shahrdar on Facebook about the "question" of the location of JFK's large avulsive headwound.
On a number of occasions, Keyvan cited the names of Parkland doctors in support of a top of the head location for the large avulsive headwound (consistent with Zapruder film imagery), but then when I presented Dr. Gary Aguilar's chronologies of the varies testimonies of those doctors, he became unresponsive, and would not defend his previous claims about the doctors.
More recently on Facebook, Keyvan cited Bethesda Tech James Jenkins in an effort to rebut the occipital-parietal location of the large avulsive headwound (perhaps after reading some of @Pat Speer's conjecture about Jenkins), to which I responded by posting the following 2018 markings of the wounds by Jenkins on a skull model:
As well as the following, earliest drawing by Jenkins of the occipital-parietal wound, that Jenkins did for the HSCA in 1977:
After I posted these Jenkins renderings for Keyvan's inspection, he became unresponsive again, and refused to address the contradiction I was pointing out between his claim that Jenkins was a top of the head witness, and the drawings Jenkins had made of the occipital-parietal wound on the back of JFK's head, resorting instead to his mantra that "facts supersede narrative."
I am with you, Sandy, and would like to see Keyvan answer the questions you have posed about where Keyvan believes the large head wound was located, and about whether it is the Zapruder film head wound imagery or the right profile autopsy photographs of JFK that are fraudulent (given that they contradict each other). For that matter, I'd also like to see Pat Speer answer the same questions, as he always seems to be reticent about identifying an exact location for the large head wound.
However, I would like to add the following Zapruder film headwound imagery to the equation (from the 1998 MPI "Images of an Assassination" direct copy of the extant "original" Zapruder film), so that Keyvan and Pat can fully appreciate the cantaloupe sized cavernous wound crater that is depicted as being in JFK's forehead in the film which not one single Dealey Plaza, Parkland Hospital or Bethesda autopsy witness ever reported or described, and which clearly contradicts the autopsy photographs:
What specifically I would like to see Keyvan and Pat explain is why in the Zapruder film in frames Z-335 and Z-337 we are see Jackie Kennedy's pink shoulder pad where we should be seeing President Kennedy's forehead, when the autopsy photographs demonstrate that the President's forehead is perfectly intact:
ZAPRUDER FRAME 335
ZAPRUDER FRAME 337
Now, Keyvan and Pat, how do you reconcile Z-335 and Z-337, as well as the other Zapruder film images above showing a cavernous cantaloupe sized crater in JFK's forehead with the following right profile autopsy photographs of the fallen President which demonstrate that there was no such crater in his forehead and that the forehead was perfectly intact?
Keven, you have been
BRAINWASHEDand the only person to blame is yourself.
BTW - The only reason I become unresponsive to your posts is because they are way too long and filled with lies and gibberish and I just don't want to spend the time to have a discussion with a habitual agent of misinformation.
Why have you been brainwashed? I know you are smart. You are a lawyer after all. Why did you let yourself get brainwashed this way? What am I thinking, you researched all this information yourself, your probably purchased books about the JFK assassination from authors whose sole intent is to make money from you. These authors will write anything to make a buck and you have decided of your own free will to get brainwashed with their hogwash.
All you have to do is look at the medical evidence, the Zapruder film, and the Nix film, the Marie Muchmore film, and the Mary Moorman photo.
Look at the x-rays, they were taken before JFK got cut up by the pathologists.
But you wont, because you are BRAINWASHED and all you have are these long posts full of conjecture from wayward authors.
-
5 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:
I've never had a discussion with the "Nix film study."
You should have a conversation with it. I can see how watching it is difficult because the factual evidence in it contradicts everything you have been brainwashed and duped to believe by these wayward authors.
-
43 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:
So Keyvan,
Where do you believe the large blowout wound was located? And why do you believe what you believe?
So Sandy,
I would love to hear the discussion that you have with the Nix film study.
-
14 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:
Keyvan,
Where do you believe the large blowout wound was located? And why do you believe what you believe?
Sandy and Keven,
I know you guys are bright intellectuals, I find it hard to believe that you guys choose to believe anything that anyone writes as fact. I am a math and logic person, that is with what I deal with every day running a silicon valley technology company. Nothing you guys say match up with what you see in film, autopsy photographs and x-rays.
In the same breath both of you discount the film, autopsy photographs, and x-rays as fake and then use them to try to make a point of where the fragment came from or where the shots came from. Come on!There is nothing you can post to make me believe these narratives over the facts shown in the film, autopsy photographs, and x-rays. There is nothing you can say that could make me question the authenticity of them.
Look at the junk spewed by Mantik, the x-rays are fake but they show where the shots came from. This is ridiculous at best.This keystone cops scenarios that you guys are spewing reminds me of the wrap up smear by Nancy Pelosi. This is what those authors are doing in the JFK assassination community.
-
2 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:
You'd be laughed out of court regurgitating that mantra...
You'd be disbarred out of law regurgitating your long disjointed narratives of a mantra...
-
1 hour ago, Keven Hofeling said:
All you know about this book is what you've read on an Amazon review page and you are out trumpeting claims from the rooftops that Dr. Mantik has retreated from his long-held scientific findings about the Harper Fragment, fraud in the X-ray evidence and the large avulsive occipital-parietal wound on the right side of the back of JFK's head? Dr. Mantik's findings are all completely consistent with all of the evidence I have presented for you which you have admitted you are too lazy to even read.
As with all of your other rantings, you have no idea what you are talking about regarding Dr. Mantik's books...
I appreciate your call for direct evidence amidst the sea of narratives surrounding the JFK assassination. It's clear that you value a narrative over succinctness and factual clarity. Let's address your points with the existing evidence and without diving too deep into interpretative narratives:
-
Harper Fragment: It's just a fragment. Dr. Mantik and others have interpreted its origin based on its composition and location found, but without comprehensive and incontrovertible proof, we must remain open to different interpretations.
-
X-Rays: The claim about the x-rays being altered stems from analyses like those by Dr. Mantik, who pointed out inconsistencies in their optical density and structure. However, these are professional interpretations of the evidence, not indisputable facts. The authenticity of the x-rays is supported by the majority of forensic experts.
-
Zapruder Film: This film is one of the most scrutinized pieces of evidence. Claims of alteration come from discrepancies observed by researchers. However, no concrete proof has surfaced that definitively proves the film was altered. This film, alongside others like the Nix film and the Moorman photo, has been validated by multiple investigations to have no alterations that impact the understanding of the sequence of events.
Your narratives need an emphasis on sticking to the facts is crucial, and so is recognizing that some aspects of this case involve interpretation of evidence, where different experts might disagree. While we may not convince each other of a different viewpoint, it's important to discuss these matters respectfully and consider all evidence critically, whether it supports or challenges our views.
-
-
1 hour ago, Keven Hofeling said:
Sorry @Keyvan Shahrdar, but the size of the font you use doesn't imbue your claims with additional value and importance. What you are advocating for is prioritizing fraudulently altered photographic and film evidence over the official reports and witness accounts of 50+ individuals, most of whom were law enforcement and medical professionals. All film and photographic evidence must meet authentication standards in courts of competent jurisdiction where ultimate truth is adjudicated in our rule of law based civilization, and film evidence which is contradicted by the testimony and reports of 50+ witnesses cannot be authenticated and entered into evidence (except to prove fraud).
Take, for example, the Zapruder film, which fraudulently depicts a cantaloupe sized cavernous hole in President Kennedy's forehead which was not reported by any of the Dealey Plaza, Parkland Hospital or Bethesda autopsy witnesses:
____________
Exhibit Number One of my Federal Rule of Evidence 402 Motion in Limine is going to be the first day admittance note medical reports that were filed by Drs. Kemp Clark, Charles Carrico, Malcolm Perry, Charles Baxter, Robert McClelland and Marion Jenkins immediately after their efforts to resuscitate President Kennedy on November 22, 1963. None of these reports support the existence of the frontal head wound depicted by the fraudulent Zapruder film imagery:
COMMISSION EXHIBIT NO. 392: APPENDIX VIII - MEDICAL REPORTS FROM DOCTORS AT PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, DALLAS, TEXAS: https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/jfkinfo/app8.htm
Summary (By Dr. Kemp Clark)
The President arrived at the Emergency Room at 12:43 P. M., the 22nd of November, 1963. He was in the back seat of his limousine. Governor Connally of Texas was also in this car. The first physician to see the President was Dr. James Carrico, a Resident in General Surgery.
Dr. Carrico noted the President to have slow, agenal respiratory efforts. He could hear a heartbeat but found no pulse or blood pressure to be present. Two external wounds, one in the lower third of the anterior neck, the other in the occipital region of the skull, were noted. Through the head wound, blood and brain were extruding. Dr. Carrico inserted a cuffed endotracheal tube. While doing so, he noted a ragged wound of the trachea immediately below the larynx.
At this time, Dr. Malcolm Perry, Attending Surgeon, Dr. Charles Baxter, Attending Surgeon, and Dr. Ronald Jones, another Resident in General Surgery, arrived. Immediately thereafter, Dr. M. T. Jenkins, Director of the Department of Anesthesia, and Doctors Giesecke and Hunt, two other Staff Anesthesiologists, arrived. The endotracheal tube had been connected to a Bennett respirator to assist the President's breathing. An Anesthesia machine was substituted for this by Dr. Jenkins. Only 100% oxygen was administered.
A cutdown was performed in the right ankle, and a polyethylene catheter inserted in the vein. An infusion of lactated Ringer's solution was begun. Blood was drawn for type and crossmatch, but unmatched type "O" RH negative blood was immediately obtained and begun. Hydrocortisone 300 mgms was added to the intravenous fluids.
Dr. Robert McClelland, Attending Surgeon, arrived to help in the President's care. Doctors Perry, Baxter, and McClelland began a tracheostomy, as considerable quantities of blood were present from the President's oral pharynx. At this time, Dr. Paul Peters, Attending Urological Surgeon, and Dr. Kemp Clark, Director of Neurological Surgery arrived. Because of the lacerated trachea, anterior chest tubes were place in both pleural spaces. These were connected to sealed underwater drainage.
Neurological examination revealed the President's pupils to be widely dialted and fixed to light. His eyes were divergent, being deviated outward; a skew deviation from the horizontal was present. Not deep tendon reflexes or spontaneous movements were found.
There was a large wound in the right occipito-parietal region, from which profuse bleeding was occurring. 1500 cc. of blood were estimated on the drapes and floor of the Emergency Operating Room. There was considerable loss of scalp and bone tissue. Both cerebral and cerebellar tissue were extruding from the wound.
Further examination was not possible as cardiac arrest occurred at this point. Closed chest cardiac massage was begun by Dr. Clark. A pulse palpable in both the carotid and femoral arteries was obtained. Dr. Perry relieved on the cardiac massage while a cardiotachioscope was connected. Dr. Fouad Bashour, Attending Physician, arrived as this was being connected. There was electrical silence of the President's heart.
President Kennedy was pronounced dead at 1300 hours by Dr. Clark
Kemp Clark, M. D.
Director
Service of Neurological Surgery
KC:aacc to Dean's Office, Southwestern Medical School
cc to Medical Records, Parkland Memorial Hospital______________________________________________________________________________________
PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
ADMISSION NOTE
J. F. KENNEDY
DATE AND HOUR 11/22/63 1620 DOCTOR: Carrico
When patient entered Emergency room on ambulance carriage had slow agonal respiratory efforts and scant cardiac beats by auscultation. Two external wounds were noted. One small penetrating wound of ant. neck in lower 1/3. The other wound had avulsed the calvarium and shredded brain tissue present with profuse oozing. No pulse or blood pressure were present. Pupils were dilated and fixed. A cuffed endotracheal tube was inserted and through the laryngoscope a ragged wound of the trachea was seen immediately below the larynx. The tube was passed past the laceration and the cuff inflated. Respiration using the resp assistor on auto-matic were instituted. Concurrently an IV infusion of lactated Ringer solution was begun via catheter placed in right leg and blood was drawn for type and crossmatch. Type O Rh negative blood was obtained as well as hydrocortisone.
In view of tracheal injury and decreased BS an tracheostomy was performed by Dr. Perry and Bilat. chest tubes inserted. A 2nd bld infusion was begun in left arm. In addition Dr. Jenkins began resp with anethesia machine, cardiac monitor, and stimulator attached. Solu cortef IV given (300mg), attempt to control slow oozing from cerebral and cerebellar tissue via packs instituted. Despite these measures as well as external cardiac massage, BP never returned and EKG evidence of cardiac activity was never obtained.
Charles J. Carrico M.D.
PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
ADMISSION NOTE
J. F. KENNEDY
DATE AND HOUR 22 Nov 1963 DOCTOR: PERRY
Staff Note
At the time of initial examination, the pt. was noted as non-responsive. The eyes were deviated and the pupils were dilated. A considerable quantity of blood was noted on the patient, the carriage and the floor. A small wound was noted in the midline of the neck, in the lower third anteriorly. It was exuding blood slowly. A large wound of the right posterior cranium was noted, exposing severely lacerated brain. Brain tissue was noted in the blood at the head of the carriage.
Pulse or heartbeat were not detectable but slow spasmodic respiration was noted. An endotracheal tube was in place and respiration was being assisted. An intravenous infusion was being placed in the leg.
At this point I noted that respiration was ineffective and while additional venisections were done to administer fluids and blood, a tracheostomy was effected. A right lateral injury to the trachea was noted. The tracheostomy tube was put in place and the cuff inflated and respiration assisted. Closed chest cardiac massage was instituted after placement of sealed drainage chest tubes, but without benefit. Electrocardiographic evaluation revealed that no detectable electrical activity existed in the heart. Resuscitation attempts were abandoned after the team of physicians determined that the patient had expired.
Malcolm O. Perry, M.D.
1630 hr 22 Nov 1963
PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
ADMISSION NOTE
DATE AND HOUR NOV 22, 1963 DOCTOR: BAXTER
Note of Attendance to President Kennedy.
I was contacted at approx 12:40 that the President was on the way to the emergency room having been shot. On arrival there, I found an endotracheal tube in place with assisted respirations, a left chest tube being inserted and cut downs going in one leg and in the left arm. The President had a wound in the mid-line of the neck. On first observation of the remaining wounds the rt temporal and occipital bones were missing and the brain was lying on the table, with .extensive lacerations and contusions. The pupils were fixed and deviated lateral and dilated. No pulse was detectable and respirations were (as noted) being supplied. A tracheotomy was performed by Dr. Perry and I and a chest tube inserted into the right chest (2nd intercostal space anteriorally). Meanwhile, 2 pts of O neg blood were administered by pump without response. When all of these measures were complete, no heart beat could be detected. Close chest message was performed until a cardioscope could be attached which revealed no cardiac activity was obtained. Due to the excessive and irreparable brain damage which was lethal, no further attempt to resuscitate the heart was made.
Charles R. Baxter M.D.
Associate Prof of Surgery
Southwestern Medical School
PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
ADMISSION NOTE
JOHN F. KENNEDY
DATE AND HOUR 22 Nov 1963 DOCTOR: [KEMP CLARK]
12:20pm to 13:00 hrs
Called by EOR while standing in (illegible) Laboratory at SWMS. Told that the President had been shot. I arrived at the EOR at 1220 - 1225
and.The President was bleeding profusely from the back of the head. There was a large (3 x 3cm) amount of cerebral tissue present on the cart. There was a smaller amount of cerebellar tissue present also.A tracheostomy was being performed by Drs. Perry, Baxter and McClelland. Exam of the President showed that an endotracheal tube was in place and respiratory assistance was being given by Dr. Akins and Jenkins. The pupils were dilated, fixed to light and his eyes were deviated outward and the right one downward as as well .
The trach was completed and I adjusted the endotracheal tube a little bit. Blood was present in the oral pharynx. Suction was used to remove this. Levine Catheter was passed into the stomach at this time.
He was (illegible) that I (illegible) no carotid pulse. I immediately began closed chest massage. A pulse was obtained at the carotid and femoral pulse levels.
Dr. Perry then took over the cardiac massage so I could evaluate the head wound.
There was a large wound beginning in the right occiput extending into the parietal region. Much of the skull appeared gone at brief examination . The previously described lacerated brain was present.
By this time an EKG was hooked up. There was no electrical activity of the heart and no respiratory effort - He was pronounced dead at 1300 hrs by me.
W. Kemp Clark
22 Nov 1963
1615 hrs -
PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
ADMISSION NOTE
DATE AND HOUR Nov. 22, 1963 4:45 P.M. DOCTOR: Robert N. McClelland
Statement Regarding Assassination of President Kennedy
At approximately 12:45 PM on the above date I was called from the second floor of Parkland Hospital and went immediately to the Emergency Operating Room. When I arrived President Kennedy was being attended by Drs Malcolm Perry, Charles Baxter, James Carrico, and Ronald Jones. The President was at the time comatose from a massive gunshot wound of the head with a fragment wound of the trachea. An endotracheal tube and assisted respiration was started immediately by Dr. Carrico on Duty in the EOR when the President arrived. Drs. Perry, Baxter, and I then performed a tracheotomy for respiratory distress and tracheal injury and Dr. Jones and Paul Peters inserted bilateral anterior chest tubes for pneumothoracis secondary to the tracheomediastinal injury. Simultaneously Dr. Jones had started 3 cut-downs giving blood and fluids immediately, In spite of this, at 12:55 he was pronounced dead by Dr. Kemp Clark the neurosurgeon and professor of neurosurgery who arrived immediately after I did. The cause of death was due to massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple. He was pronounced dead after external cardiac message failed and ECG activity was gone.
Robert N. McClelland M.D.
Asst. Prof. of Surgery
Southwestern Med.
School of Univ of Tex.
Dallas, Texas
PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
ADMISSION NOTE
DATE AND HOUR Nov. 22, 1963 4:45 P.M. DOCTOR: BASHOUR
Statement Regarding Assassination of the President of the U.S.A., President Kennedy.
At 12:50 PM, we were called from the 1st floor of Parkland Hospital and told that President Kennedy was shot. Dr. D ?? and myself went to the emergency room of Parkland. Upon examination, the President had no pulsation, no heartbeat, no blood pressure. The oscilloscope showed a complete standstill. The president was declared dead at 12:55 P.M.
F. Bashour M.D.
Associate Professor of Cardiology
Southwestern Medical School
Dallas, Texas.
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS
SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL SCHOOL
DALLASNovember 22, 1963
1630To: Mr. C.J. Price, Administrator Parkland Memorial Hospital
From: M.T. Jenkins, M.D., Professor and Chairman Department of Anesthesiology
Subject: Statement concerning resusciative efforts for President John F. Kennedy
Upon receiving a stat alarm that this distinguished patient was being brought to the emergency room at Parkland Memorial Hospital, I dispatched Doctors A . H. Giesecke and Jackie H. Hunt with an anesthesia machine and resuscitative equipment to the major surgical emergency room area, and I ran down the stairs . On my arrival in the emergency operating room at approximately 1230 I found that Doctors Carrico and/or Delaney had begun resuscitative efforts by introducing an orotracheal tube, connecting it for controlled ventilation to a Bennett intermittent positive pressure breathing apparatus . Doctors Charles Baxter, Malcolm Perry, and Robert McClelland arrived at the same time and began a tracheostomy and started the insertion of a right chest tube, since there was also obvious tracheal and chest damage . Doctors Paul Peters and Kemp Clark arrived simultaneously and immediately thereafter assisted respectively with the insertion of the right chest tube and with manual closed chest cardiac compression to assure circulation.
For better control of artificial ventilation, I exchanged the intermittent positive pressure breathing apparatus for an anesthesia machine and continued artificial ventilation . Doctors Gene Akin and A . H. Giesecke assisted with the respiratory problems incident to changing from the orotracheal tube to a tracheostomy tube, and Doctors Hunt and Giesecke connected a cardioscope to determine cardiac activity.
During the progress of these activities, the emergency room cart was elevated at the feet in order to provide a Trendelenburg position, a venous cutdown was performed on the right saphenous vein, and additional fluids were begun in a vein in the left forearm while blood was ordered from the blood bank . All of these activities were completed by approximately 1245, at which time external cardiac massage was still being carried out effectively by Doctor Clark as judged by a palpable peripheral pulse. Despite these measures there was no electrocardiographic evidence of cardiac activity .
These described resuscitative activities were indicated as of first importance, and after they were carried out attention was turned to all other evidences of injury . There was a great laceration on the right side of the head (temporal and occipital), causing a great defect in the skull plate so that there was herniation and laceration of great areas of the brain, even to the extent that the cerebellum had protruded from the wound. There were also fragmented sections of brain on the drapes of the emergency room cart . With the institution of adequate cardiac compression, there was a great flow of blood from the cranial cavity, indicating that there was much vascular damage as well as brain tissue damage .
It is my personal feeling that all methods of resuscitation were instituted expeditiously and efficiently . However, this cranial and intracranial damage was of such magnitude as to cause the irreversible damage . President Kennedy was pronounced dead at 1300 .
Sincerely,
/s/ M. T. Jenkins
M. T. Jenkins, M.D .____________
Much to the contrary, what the first day admittance note medical reports of Drs. Kemp Clark, Charles Carrico, Malcolm Perry, Charles Baxter, Robert McClelland and Marion Jenkins support is a large avulsive occipital-parietal wound on the right side of the back of President Kennedy's head with extruding cerebellar brain tissue, and then one of my physician expert witnesses is going to provide testimony and present exhibits demonstrating where the cerebellum is located and where a head wound would have to be in order for there to be extruding cerebellar brain tissue:
____________
Next, one of my pathologist expert witnesses will testify and present the autopsy photographs as evidence to demonstrate that that there was no cantaloupe sized cavernous hole in President Kennedy's forehead at the time of the autopsy at the Bethesda Naval Medical Center:
____________
Thereafter, Dr. Gary Aguilar, testifying as an expert medical witness will present the results of his inquiry which demonstrated that 22 Parkland Hospital witnesses and 21 Bethesda autopsy witnesses reported that President Kennedy's large avulsive head wound was on the right side of the back of his head:
This is a link to Dr. Gary Aguilar's compilation of the earliest testimony of the Parkland AND Bethesda witnesses -- http://www.assassinationweb.com/ag6.htm -- and the following chart is in part based upon the the witness accounts outlined in the article by Dr. Gary Aguilar:
--------------------------------------------------
DR. GARY AGUILAR'S APPENDIX - TABLES AND FIGURES:
https://history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_tabfig.htm
____________
Following Dr. Aguilar, Dr. David Mantik, serving as an expert medical witness, will present the findings of his studies of the JFK assassination evidence demonstrating that President Kennedy's large avulsive head wound was located in the occipital-parietal region of his skull, and that the Harper Fragment is occipital bone:
____________
And concluding my presentation will be professional cinematography witnesses Sydney Wilkinson, Thom Whitehead, Ned Price, Paul Rutan, Jr. and Leo Zahn who will testify regarding crude special effects work they have identified in the Zapruder film in the form of the black patch that has been placed over the large avulsive wound in the back of JFK's head, and the fraudulent head wound imagery in front (the "blob"):
Because Sydney Wilkinson and Thom Whitehead are professionals working within the film industry, they have been able to enlist true Hollywood experts in cinematography and post production who have performed content analysis of the Zapruder film. Among them are genuine cinematography professionals such as Ned Price (https://studentfilmreviews.org/?p=17707 ), Paul Rutan, Jr. (https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0751876/ ) and Leo Zahn (https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0951991/ ). Look them up, they are the real deal.
Smith: .…Now, as to my credibility, thirty-seven years in the movie business, I’m not sure how much lower you can go than that; and [I] just got done with nearly twenty-five years at Paramount, where I basically ran their mastering for most of those years and spent the last few years investigating new digital production technology.
Rutan: [I’ve] been doing this since 1968, I was delivering film in New York City; and then full time from ’74 I got hired to work for my Dad, and I worked for him for 12 years — started out as janitor, and then shipping, and then film cleaning, and then film repair, and then optical lineup, and then optical printing. So, ever since then I’ve worked for a couple of companies, set up a department at COMPAC video, and I had my own company for 14 years doing restoration.
Whitehead: Do you see any signs of alteration?
Rutan: Yes.
Whitehead: Where do you see them?
Rutan: Well [speaking while pointing at frame 313 on a large HD monitor], in the — this explosion right here doesn’t look, it’s, see [pointing] — it’s got defects on it — but it just doesn’t look real, it doesn’t look like blood, it just doesn’t look real….
Rutan: I think you’re looking at a patch, at a photographic patch that they put on the back of his [JFK’s] head. It’s crude, but if you run the film you’ll see that it moves — differently than his head does, as well. So, it’s an optical, some sort of an optical [effect] that they put on there, to not show the back of his head.
Whitehead: In your opinion, what do you think would have been the most likely way this would have been accomplished?
Rutan: With an optical printer, with an aerial optical printer….
Rutan: Well, the only thing I can see really is how predominant the black patch is in this particular frame [pointing]. I mean, it’s clear to me that that is not the back of his head, that that is some kind of a [sic] optical effect, that has been laid on the back of his head by an optical house. And this [pointing at the large pink “blob” on the right side of JFK’s head] is also an optical effect. But the back of his head is what always — what I’m always drawn to, because you — it’s almost like he’s wearing a toupee, because there’s the top of his head [pointing at JFK’s auburn hair on the very top of his head] and that’s basically the color it should be, and then it’s black, it’s just solid black.
Smith: You know, the density doesn’t match — the shoulders don’t match that [meaning that the shadow on the back of JFK’s shoulders does not match the black patch on the back of his head] and [the black patch] doesn’t match the top of his head [pointing to JFK’s auburn colored hair on top]….
Smith: It just seems really obvious that the frames where they’ve matted out the back of the head, and added in the pink splash, the pink water-balloon — whatever it is that’s supposed to be the blood — it’s just not even believable … maybe fifty years ago that might have passed muster, but for anybody — I mean — my impression is if I showed it to a 12-year old kid, they would say it was a cartoon…."https://www.fff.org/2023/08/16/the-evidence-that-convicts-the-cia-of-the-jfk-assassination-part-4/
____________
After listening to opposing counsel sounding like a blathering idiot trying to make the case that "fact supersedes narrative," the Court would grant my motion excluding the Zapruder film from evidence, except to prove fraud.
Sorry Keven! You can say what ever you want but: Narrative is Narrative, Gibberish is Gibberish, and Fact is Fact.
-
6 hours ago, Keven Hofeling said:
@Keyvan Shahrdar I haven't read the new book, but every indication I have had, including from a review of the book I just received from Phil Dragoo yesterday (See below), the data presented by Dr. David Mantik is the same as the data presented in his last two books.
As usual, I don't have the slightest idea what you meant by the following:
I'm certain that Dr. Mantik's stereoscopic testing findings that the back of the head autopsy photographs have a matte insert placed over the occipital-parietal wound on the right side of the back of JFK's head remains a sound and valid citation (as well as all of his other previous findings). If you think that you have some new information indicating that Dr. Mantik has retreated from any of his previous conclusions, then by all means, do present it:
Dr. David Mantik wrote: "...While at the National Archives, I performed stereo viewing of the autopsy photographs [8]. This is possible because each view is represented by two separate photographs, taken close together in time and space. Such a pair is what makes stereo viewing possible. I performed this procedure for the original generation of photographs (4” x 5” transparencies), for the color prints, and also for the black and white copies. I did this for many of the distinct views in the collection. But the bottom line is this: the only abnormal site was the back of the head—it always yielded a 2D image, as if each eye had viewed precisely the same image. Of course, that would have been expected if someone (illicitly in a dark room) had inserted the same image into that anatomic site for each member of the photographic pair. I discussed this issue with Robert Groden, who served as the photographic consultant for the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) during 1976-1979. He concurred with my observations, i.e., only the back of the head looked abnormal during his stereo viewing for the HSCA. Although the large posterior hole is often cited as evidence for a frontal shot, a second issue, perhaps equally as important, should not be overlooked: the severe discrepancy between the photographs and the witnesses—all by itself— strongly suggests manipulation of this photograph. In other words, whoever altered this photograph likely recognized that the large posterior defect loudly proclaimed a frontal shot, so much so in fact, that it became critical to cover that hole. Pathologist J. Boswell (many decades later) speculated that the scalp had merely been stretched so as to cover the hole. In fact, to have done so, and to have succeeded so seamlessly, would have defeated the sole purpose of the photographs, which presumably was to capture reality. If ever a photograph existed of this large defect, then that one has disappeared. Some witnesses do recall seeing such a photograph immediately after the autopsy, and we know (from the autopsy photographer himself) that other autopsy photographs have disappeared. Furthermore, we know from Boswell’s sketch on a skull model, that the bone under this apparently intact scalp was in fact missing [9]. So which is more decisive: missing scalp—or missing bone?Some have argued that the Parkland physicians have authenticated this photograph, and that we should therefore accept its authenticity. However, what they said was more like this: If the scalp had been stretched in this fashion, then they could not take issue with that photograph. Absent such a peculiar maneuver, however, they were dubious. Their doubt was further accentuated in a very recent documentary: “The Parkland Doctors” [10] [THIS WAS RETITLED TO "WHAT THE DOCTORS SAW," AND WAS RECENTLY RELEASED BY PARAMOUNT +]. Seven Parkland physicians met to discuss their recollections. They were profoundly troubled by autopsy images of the posterior scalp. To describe these images, they readily used words like “manipulated” and “altered.”..." 'JFK ASSASSINATION PARADOXES: A PRIMER FOR BEGINNERS' | Journal of Health Science & Education | David W. Mantik, MD, PhD https://escires.com/articles/Health-1-126.pdf | Mantik DW (2018) JFK Assassination Paradoxes: A Primer for Beginners. J Health Sci Educ 2: 126.
Mantik Final Analysis
Phil
Apr 18, 2024, 4:59 PM (16 hours ago)Phil's note: I have just reviewed The Final Analysis by David Mantik and Jerome Corsi on Amazon. Too often Amazon has rejected my review with all the opaque Kafkaesque implacability of Facebook's android terminator. As Marcus Aurelius advised, we concern ourselves with that which is within our power:
Worth the waitMy exposure to the assassination of JFK began as a student sent home from an English class lecture on Henry David Thoreau to watch another triple-named man's assassination before sixty Dallas police officers.
The presidential commission relied upon a military autopsy with unprecedented anomalies, successive reports with initial efforts burned, x-ray films demonstrably false, photographs contradicting dozens of professional medical witnesses.
The record was corrupted, but it would be six decades of doubt and speculation before this thorough scientific correction. The finality of this ultimate analysis is worth the wait.
Dr. David Mantik, a radiologist with physics doctorate, has demonstrated through the optical density tool of his profession that the president was hit by three head shots: occipital, right forehead, right temple.
Extraordinary claims backed by extraordinary research, nine visits to the Archives, hundreds of individual optical density measurements of the extant frontal (AP) and side (lateral) x-rays showing a fabricated 6.5 mm artifact not noted by the autopsists (Humes, Boswell, Fincke) or the original radiologist (Ebersole).
Evidence of a forehead entry is seen in the skull and the particle stream, a stream which is separate from the occipital and temporal wounds.
The Harper Fragment proves to be the Rosetta Stone of the analysis as it bears metallic traces of entry as well as proves a frontal shot by its forcible expulsion to the rear.
The introduction by Douglas Horne the ARRB military medical records specialist places the x-rays in perspective with the presentation of multiple casket arrivals, pre-autopsy surgery, two brains and two brain exams.
In an era when the call to follow the science is foremost we need look no further than this volume.
___________
I know that Mantik's book completely destroys your long lengthy narratives, that by the way, I will never read. It is all gibberish to me. Read the book title in Amazon, I know you will be in disbelieve, but try to accept fact, it won't hurt you any. Facts over narrative, always!
-
14 hours ago, Pat Speer said:
I am not sure what you mean here, Keyvan. I am not aware of Mantik's changing his opinions on anything for this book. Isn't it the same stuff he's been saying for years?
David W. Mantik's Earlier Beliefs:
- Frontal Shots: Mantik strongly argued that forensic evidence supported shots to JFK's head from the front. This was primarily based on his detailed analysis of the Zapruder film and autopsy records.
- X-ray Manipulation: He believed that the X-rays of JFK's head were altered to support the single-gunman theory. Mantik suggested that inconsistencies in the optical densities indicated manipulation, aimed at obscuring evidence of frontal shots.
Beliefs in "The Final Analysis":
- Multiple Headshots: In his 2024 book, co-authored with Jerome Corsi, Mantik presents forensic evidence that JFK was hit by two headshots from the right front and one from the rear, indicating multiple shooters.
- Forensic Collaboration: This new book includes collaborative forensic analysis, likely integrating more modern techniques or reevaluated evidence to support claims of shots from multiple directions.
-
On 4/15/2024 at 8:49 PM, Vince Palamara said:
I hate to be negative toward any (pro-conspiracy) author trying their best out there (and I have big respect for Gary Shaw and Brian Edwards), but their attempt to rehabilitate the (yikes) Roscoe White story is, with all due respect, an epic fail. Ricky White is back from the pre-internet "dead" and is back with a pretty lame 'scrapbook' that is really much ado about nothing---a bunch of unintelligible scribbles and some pretty nothing-special newspaper cut outs. Quite frankly, my first thought was "Hmmm- how do we know this wasn't RICKY or GENEVA trying to put something together to 'replace' the conveniently stolen-by-the-FBI "diary." The book kind of feels like good ole Texas boys sticking up for their friend, who they say is a good "family man" who wouldn't make stuff up.
I WILL concede these points- it is intriguing that Roscoe joined the Dallas Police Department in October 1963 [he is even mentioned in the Warren Commission volumes: 19 H 148], his wife Geneva worked for Ruby (and there is a photo of them together), and the third backyard photo (as noted by the HSCA) was in the hands of Geneva/Roscoe. However, just as Beverly Oliver (NOT the Babushka Lady) was definitely a stripper at the Ruby-rival Colony Club (captioned photos of her from the night of 11/22/63 at the Colony Club are on the Sixth Floor Museum website via the Dallas Times Herald), these kernels of truth do not vouch for the rest of the tale(s).
In addition to the conveniently-missing diary, the so-called cables reek of fakery (sorry). "Mandarin"...yeah, right.
As for Dr. Mantik's latest book, it is a best-seller and selling like wildfire! It is also his very best (in fact, you don't even need his other two, as everything good from those books is included herein):
@Keven Hofeling I guess you can't reference Mantik on your lengthy narratives any more. Mantik seems to have seen the light of day and started to write factual data. I am so sorry for you loss of citation.
-
52 minutes ago, Keven Hofeling said:
Thank you for the input. I was unaware that long posts cause such difficulties for cell phone reception.
I agree, since I like reading your posts Kevin, the shorter they are the better. But I would not expect short posts from a lawyer!
-
You are awesome!
You just created a narrative for a narrative.
You are a good lawyer!
But the basic tenet holds true: fact takes precedence over narrative.
Sorry, Kevin!
-
Documentary Evidence (Fact) vs. Testimonial Evidence (Narrative)
Tangible, unaltered representation of a fact (e.g., The Nix Film) versus testimonial evidence fraught with biases, perceptions, and memory issues (e.g., accounts from wayward doctors and people with a narrative).
Who wins? The Nix Film!
All the narrative in the world that is posted does not beat fact! Sorry Kevin!
-
Narrative never trumps fact!
-
5 hours ago, Pat Speer said:
I agree. Perry clearly THOUGHT it was an entrance wound. And his recollections of its size strongly suggest it was either an entrance wound, or the exit wound of a slowly moving object. I just don't believe there was a concerted effort to get him to change his and others' opinion it looked like an entrance wound. And if there was, it failed. Because pretty much everyone at Parkland who saw the wound prior to the tracheotomy said it was small and appeared to be an entrance wound.
FWIW - Fight the battle, never give up!
-
There is only one way to interpret the X-ray of JFK's skull. No other way, period. You guys are making up alternative facts to fit your narrative. Fact is fact!
When a bullet enter a skull, the bullet will create concentric radial lines on the skull from the point of entry. That is why JFK's skull x-ray looks the way it looks. He was shot in the back of his head, you can see the entry in the circle, generating the concentric radial lines toward the front of the skull. [1] "...Although multiple gunshot wounds of the skull are much more difficult to analyze than wounds from blunt-force wounds, the pattern of radial fracture lines sometimes allows the determination of the sequence of the shots. If a fracture related to an entrance hole passes another entrance hole and is not terminated, the entrance hole causing that fracture must have been inflicted first." Then a couple of seconds later, he was hit by a bullet from the right side causing a tangential injury from right to left entering above his ear and exiting the top of the head [2]. There is no other way to interpret this x-ray. You may want to make it fit your narrative, but as I always say, fact is fact and narrative is narrative and you guys are full of narratives without any basis of fact. People can testify all they want, they can say a bullet entered the front of JFK's head all they want, but facts don't change no matter what anyone says, wrote 60 years ago, or testified to. Facts are facts!
Reference:
[1] U.S. Department of Justine: Justice Program - Determination of the Sequence of Gunshot Wounds of the Skull
[2] Anglin D, et al. Intracranial hemorrhage associated with tangential gunshot wounds to the head - Tangential Gun-Shot Wound to the Head: A Serious Injury
Pat Speer image from his website:
-
General Maxwell Taylor’s son is still alive.
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted · Edited by Keyvan Shahrdar
General Maxwell Taylor who was the hand picked chairman of the JCS by JFK to replace General Lyman Leminzter during his administration, and who was instrumental in keeping advisors and who was the ambassador to Saigon during LBJ administration.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1987/04/21/gen-maxwell-taylor-dies-here-at-age-85/073cd474-c10f-4652-98c5-6067e705623e/
His son whose name is John Maxwell Taylor served in the military during the JFK administration. He was born in 1930, is 94 years old and is alive living in McLean Virginia.
Any researcher out there should contact him. He may tell you how JFK was killed.