The Difference

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Dp not know exactly what is going on with the (attempted) posting of responses.

However, the latest response is as follows:

If what you say is true, Gary Mack, it would seem would have produced his argument long ago,

Since he only received the information a short while back, this too would be unlikely.

And, since (hopefully) the Sixth Floor Museum is ultimately going to present ALL of the factual evidence in a single presentation, exactly why would one want to merely let one cat out of the bag when one just may have a bag that is full of cats?

By the way, "newspaper writeup?" I would expect a scholarly journal

When taken into consideration that you quite apparantly believe the "fictional" tale of body snatchers and wound alteration specialists, then one could be lead to believe that you would believe anything that is "conspiracy" oriented.

Perhaps even if written on a well-used after dinner napkin!

And,by the way, were I so naive of the actually facts that I "world-wide" inserted my foot into my mouth by posting that I actually believed ANY of the "body snatch/wound alteration" theory, then rest assured that I too would go to my grave claiming the factuality of this (completely assinine) theory.

Prove to me the autopsy pictures accurately depict the trach incision Perry made and who told Lifton early on that its width was 2-3 cm

Since the autopsy photograph does not in fact demonstrate the "trach incision Perry made", then it would be most difficult to prove something which is factually "not factual".

Tom

P.S. In order to get the correct answer, it always helps if one actually ask's the correct question!

Tom, I am quite weary of all this, but am glad at least you agree with me that the autopsy photo on the neck does not represent Perry's incision. I consider that a major concession, and thank you for it.Best, Daniel

but am glad at least you agree with me that the autopsy photo on the neck does not represent Perry's incision. I consider that a major concession, and thank you for it.Best

You will most likely want to publish a "retraction" on that thank you.

I do believe the statement was that the autopsy photograph did not demonstrate the tracheotomy incision that Dr. Perry made.

Which stands as correct.

The initial tracheotomy incision (attempt) was a relatively small cut.

Other than that, one can be assured that Dr. Perry was ultimately responsible for and created the anterior throat incision as seen in the "stare of death" autopsy photograph.

No "boogymen; body snatchers; and/or wound alteration specialists.

Along with, I might add, no falsified/altered, etc; autopsy photographs.

Tom, in the previous post, I said I was weary of all this. Well I was very tired last night; I have been working on math problems today strangely as a result feel quite energetic at the moment. So I amend my statement: "..this appears to be a major concession..." You are a hard one to pin down, and enjoy playing a kind of cat and mouse game. Fine with me. Logically, if the autopsy photos have not been altered, then either the body was, or Perry made the large incision we see in the stare of death photo. There are no other alternatives. So it is not difficult to see why you think it was the work of Perry. I think later in his life Perry said it was the work of Perry. There you have it, QED as we say in mathematics. Where's the beef? etc. But as you well know, this is not a retraction, but a veiled challenge to prove your point. May I say, that your claim that the initial incision was a relatively small cut, is to me a major concession, and I thank you for it. Best, Daniel

"or Perry made the large incision we see in the stare of death photo."

If one looks hard enough, they just may find a "factual truth" in what is often a confusing question and/or answer.

The initial "trach" incision was, as one would expect, a relatively small incision.

Unfortunately, this did not resolve the problem of the "foamy" blood which appeared around the initial wound area.

Those whom are/were on the "distribution list" for the newspaper publishing relative to "THE ANTERIOR THROAT WOUND", may (or may not) wish to have additional input into this subject matter.

However, since I long ago explained the majority of it here on this forum, and am tired of repetitive answering of questions relative to this subject, might I recommend a trip to The Sixth Floor Museum, if, and when, the Museum gets around to posting the facts for all to see; evaluate; and pick apart if they so wish.

Tom

P.S. In event that it is of consolation, Dr. Humes also questioned the rationale/reasoning for the large (gutted) incision of the anterior throat.

And, since the answer sufficiently satisfied him, one can rest assured that I too am willing to accept it as factually correct.