Why CBS Covered up the JFK Case (pt1)

[Ray Mitcham]

Lot of verbal diarrhoea, which didn't answer the question. Do you think the BOH witnesses (not just the Parkland medicos, but the others mentioned above) were right or mistaken?

[Ray Mitcham]

Lot of verbal diarrhoea, which didn't answer the question. Do you think the BOH witnesses (not just the Parkland medicos, but the others mentioned above) were right or mistaken?

[Ray Mitcham]

Lot of written diarrhoea, which didn't answer the question. Do you think the BOH witnesses (not just the Parkland medicos, but the others mentioned above) were right or mistaken?

[David Von Pein]

Why can't you read, Ray? Within my "verbal diarrhea", I answered your question (repeated again below). (As if you didn't know the answer already. Geez. What the heck did you think I was going to say?)

"I still wonder how so many medical professionals could ALL get it totally wrong. But there is BETTER evidence that proves (beyond a reasonable doubt, IMO) that those "BOH wound" witnesses WERE, indeed, incorrect when they claimed the only large wound on the head of John F. Kennedy was located in the occipital area (far-right-rear) of his head. And that "better evidence" is the photographic record of JFK's head wounds, including the autopsy photos, the autopsy X-rays, and the Zapruder Film." -- DVP; May 21, 2009

Edited April 11, 2016 by David Von Pein

[Ray Mitcham]

Why can't you read, Ray? Within my "verbal diarrhea", I answered your question (repeated again below). (As if you didn't know the answer already. Geez. What the heck did you think I was going to say?)

"I still wonder how so many medical professionals could ALL get it totally wrong. But there is BETTER evidence that proves (beyond a reasonable doubt, IMO) that those "BOH wound" witnesses WERE, indeed, incorrect when they claimed the only large wound on the head of John F. Kennedy was located in the occipital area (far-right-rear) of his head. And that "better evidence" is the photographic record of JFK's head wounds, including the autopsy photos, the autopsy X-rays, and the Zapruder Film." -- DVP; May 21, 2009

But it wasn't only the medical professionals that got it "wrong", David.

Clint Hill (the nearest to the President after the shooting.)

"The right rear of his head was missing. It was lying on the rear seat of the car... there was so much blood you could not tell if there had been another wound or not, except for the one gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.

Greer "His head was all shot, this whole part (pointing) was a matter of blood like he had been hit."

Spector : " Indicating the top right rear of the head?

Greer "Yes sir, it loose like that was all blown off."

Kellerman. "He had a large wound this size"

Specter "Indicating with your finger the diameter of 5 inches: would that be approximately correct?"

Kellerman " Indicating the rear portion of the head"

Kellerman " Yes"

Specter "More to the right of the head?"

Kellerman "Right. This was removed... the skull part was removed."

To the ARRB, described a “blow out “ which consisted of a flap of skin in the right temple of the President’s head, which he believed two be an exit wound based on conversations he heard in the morgue amongst the pathologists (and executed two drawings of this right temporal defect on both a photocopy of a right lateral photograph of the President and on a right lateral anatomy diagram of the human skull.

He described ` large open head wound in the back of the Presidents head, centrally located right between the ears, where the bone was gone as well as some scalp.

He described ` large open head wound in the back of the Presidents head, centrally located right between the ears, where the bone was gone as well as some scalp.

Tom Robinson.

"Well, we all worked on-it.arterially and they brought a piece of heavy duty rubber, again to fill this area (area in the back of the head)I remember treating the . . . organs, like I said, we all tried to help one another

JERROL CUSTER: the other X-ray technician told David Lifton that the wound in the skull was posterior in the skull and said that "he exposed, and returned to the morgue, X- rays showing that the rear of the President's head was blown off." ( Best Evidence , p. 620) The extant X-rays show no such thing. In May 29, 1992 and November 18, 1993 press conferences Custer repeated his consistent claim that the

current X-rays are forgeries

Note the last statement of Custer.

"The current x-rays are forgeries."

Edited April 11, 2016 by Ray Mitcham

[David Von Pein]

Note the last statement of Custer.

"The current x-rays are forgeries."

And 7 HSCA 41 is something I'm supposed to totally ignore, right Ray?

"The evidence indicates that the autopsy photographs and X-rays were taken of President Kennedy at the time of his autopsy and that they had not been altered in any manner." -- 7 HSCA 41

And the Z-Film is fake too, right Ray?

[Ray Mitcham]

Note the last statement of Custer.

"The current x-rays are forgeries."

And 7 HSCA 41 is something I'm supposed to totally ignore, right Ray?

"The evidence indicates that the autopsy photographs and X-rays were taken of President Kennedy at the time of his autopsy and that they had not been altered in any manner." -- 7 HSCA 41

And the Z-Film is fake too, right Ray?

"The evidence [that they had] indicates that the photographs and ex-rays........."

Note the verb "indicates" -not proves.

I note you say nothing about the witnesses, apart from the Parkland medicos, who saw the rear head wound.

They were all mistaken, David?

Hold the faith, Dave, otherwise you are lost.

I'll ask you just on more question. Do you think it is at all possible that the photos and the X-rays could have been faked?

Edited April 11, 2016 by Ray Mitcham

[Myra Bronstein]

The media and the Kennedy assassination: the social construction of reality

Ross Frank Ralston, Iowa State University

"Abstract

The research problem was to take a major political event in American history---the John F. Kennedy assassination---explore major media coverage of the event, and then examine media construction of social issues;The assassination of President John F. Kennedy has two official versions in our nation's history. The Warren-Ford-Dulles Commission came to the conclusion that, without assistance, a man in a building shot a man in a car. In 1979, pursuant to post-Watergate cynicism in government, the House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded there was a conspiracy and a second gunman fired from a different direction. However, high school textbooks have reified only the first version of history---that of a single lone assassin;A content analysis of CBS and Time-Life coverage is made using Lasswell's methodology of surveillance, correlation, and transmission.

CBS produced the most television assassination documentaries and Time-Life owned the Zapruder film which was crucial evidence. Of the four perspectives on media coverage (the Fourth Estate, Mirror Approach, Marketing, and Hegemony), only hegemony fits the consistent pattern of the media coverage;Berger and Luckman's (1967) social construction of reality involves reification, legitimization, and institutionalization. As Kuhn (1962) notes in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, normally when the number of anomalies to a theory becomes too great, we are forced to switch to another explanation. However, this did not happen with the Kennedy Assassination. We must ask why. The Fourth Estate would predict the media pursue the story with a check and a balance of government by responsible investigative reporting, as the Marketing Approach would give the consumers what they want. The Mirror Approach is where the media represents a neutral transmission of information while with Hegemony, the major media would dissipate the greatest possible doubt of a conspiracy in order to create the impression that the political structure was secure and legitimate to create an image of the stable institution of government. The study concludes that hegemony best explains media coverage of the event."

Recommended Citation

Ralston, Ross Frank, "The media and the Kennedy assassination: the social construction of reality " (1999). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. Paper 12478.
http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/12478

http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/12478/

Edited April 11, 2016 by Myra Bronstein

[David Von Pein]

Do you think it is at all possible that the photos and the X-rays could have been faked?

No. Of course not. The pictures show JFK. No one else. That, too, was established by the HSCA's Photo Panel.

And, yes, the "other" BOH witnesses were wrong too. And, FWIW, Clint Hill is on record on numerous occasions saying the wound was actually above JFK's right ear---as opposed to being in the very BACK of the head.

And what about the Z-Film, Ray? It shows the wound just where the photos do---the right side of the head above the ear. Is it fake too?

There are also the Elm Street witnesses who place the wound just where we see it in the pics and the Z-Film.....

----

Edited April 11, 2016 by David Von Pein

[Ray Mitcham]

Do you think it is at all possible that the photos and the X-rays could have been faked?

No. Of course not. The pictures show JFK. No one else. That, too, was established by the HSCA's Photo Panel.

And, yes, the "other" BOH witnesses were wrong too. And, FWIW, Clint Hill is on record on numerous occasions saying the wound was actually above JFK's right ear---as opposed to being in the very BACK of the head.

And what about the Z-Film, Ray? It shows the wound just where the photos do---the right side of the head above the ear. Is it fake too?

There are also the Elm Street witnesses who place the wound just where we see it in the pics and the Z-Film.....

----

There's your problem David. There is no alternative. A true believer.

Hill said this to W.C. Was he telling lies to the Commission?

Mr. HILL. "The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head."

By the way,the videos you show above, Zapruder said the shot came from behind him, and The Newmans said the shots came from the garden behind them to their right.

Glad to see you believe what they said.

Wanna buy a bridge?

Edited April 11, 2016 by Ray Mitcham

[James DiEugenio]

Exactly right Myra:

Hegemony, the major media would dissipate the greatest possible doubt of a conspiracy in order to create the impression that the political structure was secure and legitimate to create an image of the stable institution of government. The study concludes that hegemony best explains media coverage of the event.

Thanks for trying to get the thread back on track. This is what the essay is supposed to be about.

There are so many instances in the essay and in the four part documentary that illustrate this. I don't know why we have to talk about BOH witnesses, which are not in it.

I mean, Humes lied on camera about the location of the back wound. Rather helped him lie. And the whole phony conversation was scripted by the Justice Department. That's not important?

Humes told CBS that he was constricted in his autopsy practice on JFK, but it was not by Bobby Kennedy. CBS knew that and then ignored and distorted it. That's not important?

CBS knew that Humes said there was an x ray he saw that was now not there. It was gone. That's not important?

McCloy said in his interview with Cronkite, the Kennedy family controlled the autopsy materials in 1964. Not true. Cronkite accepted it. That's not important?

McCloy then said that the WC had no access to the medical evidence during its investigation. Not true. Cronkite accepted it. That's not important?

Weston and Lattimer never mentioned the new location for the posterior skull wound or how it got there. That's not important?

Weston and Lattimer never mentioned the particle trail linking the low posterior wound to the upper trail of fragments had disappeared in 1975? That's not important?

CBS cut out the part of the Wyckoff interview that contravened the whole Alvarez idea about three jiggles meaning three shots? That's not important?

Wyckoff then tried to say the fourth jiggle was a response to a siren? On a silent 8 mm film? That's not important?

CBS hid from the public that John McCloy, a Warren Commissioner, was a consultant on their "inquiry" into the Warren Report. That's not important?

Richard Salant, McCloy and Midgley then lied about this when Roger Feinman began to probe just how bad the show was. That's not important?

​Feinman then lost his job at CBS when he tried to do the right thing about this mendacious "inquiry" into the Warren Report. That's not important?

If all this is not important, then what is?

[James DiEugenio]

My point is this:

The whole CBS four night special was an utter fraud. In just about every aspect.

CBS executives had to know this, and the people who worked on it had to know it.

But they did it anyway.

And then they shut up about it. Even worse, Salant lied about it and said he did not recall McCloy being in on the production. And then McCloy lied about it himself.

Roger's incredible cache of documents nails them on this. And we now have it in front of us.

As far as I know, Roger's work on this was a milestone in the field. It shows, with internal documents, how CBS covered up for McCloy. Does it get better than that?

As Myra noted in that article, it shows the media in its role of enforcing hegemony of the power structure. In this case, the mythology that the WR started about that Krazy Kid Oswald crap.

Edited April 11, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Pat Speer]

My point is this:

The whole CBS four night special was an utter fraud. In just about every aspect.

CBS executives had to know this, and the people who worked on it had to know it.

But they did it anyway.

And then they shut up about it. Even worse, Salant lied about it and said he did not recall McCloy being in on the production. And then McCloy lied about it himself.

Roger's incredible cache of documents nails them on this. And we now have it in front of us.

As far as I know, Roger's work on this was a milestone in the field. It shows, with internal documents, how CBS covered up for McCloy. Does it get better than that?

As Myra noted in that article, it shows the media in its role of enforcing hegemony of the power structure. In this case, the mythology that the WR started about that Krazy Kid Oswald crap.

To get back to my earlier question, Jim... Are Roger's documents available? I ask because I screen-grabbed some of them. If these are all that's available, I can put them up somewhere.

[James DiEugenio]

Pat:

To my knowledge, they are not available.

Do you want to post them here?

Or do you want to get in contact with the web master and post them as an appendix?

[Michael Walton]

Myra,

This is a great link. Thanks for posting it here. And I take this quote from the document:

"We must ask why. The only hypothesis capable of explaining the media persistence of the "Single-Bullet Theory" and lone assassin is a hegemony between the media and government."

And there you have it...