Arlen Specter dies - alt.assassination.jfk

The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
alt.assassination.jfk
Message from discussion Arlen Specter dies
From: "pjspe...@AOL.COM" <pjspe...@aol.com>
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
Subject: Re: Arlen Specter dies
Date: 14 Nov 2012 10:04:12 -0500
Lines: 287
Approved: jmcad...@shell.core.com
Message-ID: <0c1e24f7-b65e-4ab6-bb85-8f98b2b43ccc@googlegroups.com>
References: <abb29e55-4b66-405c-ab93-b99ab5ad8298@u17g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
 <59aa5b35-3faf-4596-bfee-683132387777@googlegroups.com> <d32e62f2-b373-47ff-837f-0a9aea7547f6@k20g2000vbj.googlegroups.com>
 <540f5eb1-b46a-45d6-8442-f1533eb47b7e@googlegroups.com> <50a29b56@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>
In-Reply-To: <50a29b56@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=76.87.119.34; posting-account=qDxz-AoAAAAGHKb10gUasuGMD77QXJ74
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Injection-Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 07:03:30 +0000
NNTP-Posting-Host: 166.84.1.1
Path: q13ni3721wii.0!nntp.google.com!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!216.196.110.146.MISMATCH!border3.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border4.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!backlog2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news.albasani.net!mcadams.posc.mu.edu!panix1.panix.com!not-for-mail
Bytes: 13310
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tuesday, November 13, 2012 2:26:33 PM UTC-8, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 11/13/2012 11:13 AM, pjspe...@AOL.COM wrote:
>=20
> > On Monday, November 12, 2012 5:46:03 PM UTC-8, claviger wrote:
>=20
> >> On Oct 25, 3:12 pm, "pjspe...@AOL.COM" <pjspe...@aol.com> wrote:
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>> On Wednesday, October 24, 2012 7:26:59 PM UTC-7, claviger wrote:
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>>> It doesn't take a genius to figure out the SBT.  Any hunter, cop, or
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>>
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>>> combat veteran could have told Specter what happened. Through-and-th=
rough
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>>
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>>> wounds are nothing new.  The SBT has been proved conclusively using =
the
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>>
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>>> Scientific Method in high tech field testing. CTs lost this argument=
 a
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>>
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>>> long time ago.
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>>
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>> Nonsense. Find us a case history in which a high-velocity bullet ente=
red the back and exited from the middle of the throat in which no bones wer=
e struck and no blood vessels torn. I've looked. I've studied the wound bal=
listics. This doesn't happen.
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> Pat,
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> Do you think it nonsense an aerodynamic missile made of lead weighing =
160
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> grains moving over 2000 feet per second can penetrate a bag of water
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> inside a soft outer lining only 0.07 inches (2 mm) thick?  The human b=
ody
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> is basically a bag of fluid with a skeleton inside to act as a coat
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> hanger. Lead is over 10 times more dense than water and the adult huma=
n
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> body is 60% water.  If the missile mentioned above misses any hard
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> structure there is little to impede its progress.  It may slow down th=
e
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> missile somewhat but not prevent it from puncturing all the way
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> approximately 8" of this liquid filled balloon.  This is why I find it
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> amazing so many CTs think it impossible for a military FMJ missile to
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> penetrate two human being sitting closely together in tandem.
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> Water properties: The water in you (Water Science for Schools)
>=20
> >>
>=20
> >> http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/propertyyou.html
>=20
> >
>=20
> > That's not the problem. The problem is that the internal damage to the =
neck makes no sense. When a high velocity FMJ bullet tears through a neck i=
t creates a lot more damage than was done to Kennedy's neck.
>=20
> >
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> What high velocity bullet? The Carcano was not high velocity. The FMJ is=
=20
>=20
> designed to not cause horrific wounds.

If you read books and articles about wound ballistics circa 1963 you'll fin=
d that they routinely describe all super-sonic rifle bullets as high veloci=
ty and handgun bullets as low velocity. In this dichotomy, the Carcano fire=
d a high velocity projectile.

Years later, some but not all writers on wound ballistics started referring=
 to super-sonic rifle bullets with a muzzle velocity below 2200 fps or so a=
s middle velocity. But I've found numerous articles and books on gunshot wo=
unds from recent years in which the earlier definition is still presented.=
=20

As far as the FMJ bullet's wounding capacity, it appears you've missed out =
on some important stuff.=20

From patspeer.com, chapter 11:=20

The testimony of the HSCA's wound ballistics expert, Larry Sturdivan, is th=
at the first bullet to strike Kennedy was traveling over 1700 feet/second a=
s it passed through his neck. Later, in his 2005 book, The JFK Myths, he in=
creased this "probable velocity" to somewhere between 2045 feet/second and =
1780 feet/second. This bullet was purported to have struck only soft tissue=
, and done little damage to the neck. And yet, Dr. Gary Ordog, in his book =
Management of Gunshot Wounds, notes that the mortality rate for high-veloci=
ty gunshot wounds to the neck is over 50%. He explains: =93Vascular injury =
caused by missile wounds from bullets moving faster than 1,000 feet/second =
has been shown to occur by neat shearing of the vessel without stretching i=
t first, as occurs with low-velocity missiles. This is followed by cavitati=
on that damages a more extensive area of the blood vessel, possibly extendi=
ng for at least 20 mm on each side of the bullet=92s path.=94 He further ex=
plains that =93Cavitation stretches the smaller blood vessels, shearing and=
 rupturing them as well as nerves and even bone.=94  He later concludes: "I=
n the author's experience, up to 100% of patients with high-velocity bullet=
 wounds of the neck have major structural damage requiring surgery."

Should one think that Ordog was some ill-informed civilian spouting his per=
sonal impressions, one should know that his statements are built upon a stu=
dy performed by Sturdivan's employer, Edgewood Arsenal, and published in th=
e Archives of Surgery in August 1970. This study concludes "The high veloci=
ty missile neatly shears the arterial wall, but the apparent explosive effe=
ct of the temporary cavity causes 'blunt' trauma in a crushing manner." A c=
hart prepared for this study, moreover, shows that a high-velocity bullet j=
ust missing an artery will nevertheless cause breaks in the artery, even wh=
en traveling as slow as 1,000 fps.

Now compare those descriptions of the damage one might expect to find with =
what Kennedy's autopsist, Dr. James J. Humes, told the Warren Commission he=
 actually found. From his March 16, 1964 testimony: "We examined in the reg=
ion of this incised surgical wound which was the tracheotomy wound and we s=
aw 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...it is our opin=
ion 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 hemorr=
hage or other massive injury in this portion of the neck."

While high-velocity bullets "shear" and "rupture" blood vessels in the neck=
, the bullet traversing Kennedy's neck was reported to have only "slid betw=
een" these vessels. While Dr. Ordog noted that up to 100% of those receivin=
g a high-velocity gunshot wound to the neck have "major structural damage r=
equiring surgery" Dr. Humes claimed there was "no massive hemorrhage or oth=
er massive injury" to Kennedy's neck. Hmmm... =20

Okay, you might be thinking, this was just the opinion of one of the autops=
ists, Dr. Humes. Perhaps Dr. Humes had missed something, and the other doct=
ors disagreed and hadn't bothered to correct him. But this wasn't just Hume=
s' speaking for the others... In 1965, Dr. Finck wrote his superior, Genera=
l Blumberg, and told him not only that "I examined the tracheotomy skin wou=
nd and the trachea and did not find evidence of a bullet wound," but that a=
ll three autopsists had examined the tracheotomy wound and that "None of us=
 noticed a bullet wound along its course." Double hmmm...

And to close the circle, when discussing the throat wound with the HSCA's A=
ndy Purdy on August 17, 1977, Dr. Boswell is reported to have claimed he wa=
s "certain...no major blood vessel (was) damaged by the path of the missile=
."Triple hmmm...

When one considers that Dr. Charles Carrico, the emergency room doctor who =
first examined Kennedy, also noted only minor damage to his throat, telling=
 the HSCA that he'd observed "some modest amount of hematoma in the recesse=
s to the endo right of the trachea" and that Malcolm Perry, the Parkland su=
rgeon who performed Kennedy's tracheotomy, not only confirmed Carrico's con=
clusion there was little damage to the neck, but initially described the ex=
it wound as being only 3-5 mm wide--smaller than the bullets fired by Oswal=
d=92s rifle--well, then it becomes pretty darned clear that something is ju=
st wrong with the supposed single-bullet "fact". It just doesn't add up. Th=
e bullet creating Kennedy's throat wound--if it was a bullet--was almost ce=
rtainly not traveling at a high velocity.

The more one digs, the clearer this becomes. Beyond testifying to his obser=
ving a small hole in the throat, and a lack of damage to the blood vessels,=
 Dr. Perry told the Warren Commission that, before it was obscured by a tra=
cheotomy incision, he had observed a =93small ragged laceration of the trac=
hea on the anterior lateral right side.=94 A small laceration.=20

He later specified just how small. In 1978, when contacted by the HSCA and =
interviewed by its counsel Andy Purdy, he claimed that the laceration "was =
on the right side of the trachea, and that it was incomplete, and I don't r=
emember whether it was a third or a quarter of the circumference..."=20

As you might have guessed, this makes little sense should Kennedy have actu=
ally been hit by a high-velocity bullet. According to Dr. D.F.N. Dixon in M=
anagement of Gunshot Wounds, =93Direct impact on larynx or trachea from bul=
lets fired from high velocity military rifles or carbines will produce seve=
re damage from their high kinetic energy, tumbling, or cavitation effect.=
=94  Furthermore, Dr.s Kenneth and Roy Swan in their book Gunshot Wounds: P=
athophysiology and Management note that "Gunshot injuries of the larynx and=
 trachea are infrequently seen in emergency rooms" due to such injuries usu=
ally being associated with "fatal exsanguination (bleeding) from injured co=
mmon carotid arteries and internal jugular veins." =20

Surgery in World War II, a book released by the Surgeon General of the U.S.=
 Army in 1962, confirms this harsh assessment. A chapter written by a forme=
r surgeon of the Fifth Army, which fought Italian forces in Sicily, reports=
 that when treating neck wounds he needed to effect "Debridement (the remov=
al of dead and damaged tissue) of all structures" as "Multiple involvement =
was the rule because of the anatomy of the area." And it's not as if this u=
nderstanding was restricted to military surgeons;  Earl Ubell, Science Edit=
or of the New York Herald-Tribune, described Kennedy's wounds on 11-23-63 i=
n a manner suggesting he knew something of the destruction brought by a hig=
h-velocity bullet's slicing through a neck. He wrote "The bullet that crash=
ed through President Kennedy's neck and head probably took with it blood ve=
ssels and nerves leaving his entire body stunned and helpless."=20

From this it seems likely there are many military and emergency room doctor=
s, and even science editors for daily newspapers, who are aware of the sing=
le-bullet theory's speeding problem, who opt to say nothing.

It seems possible, however, that there are many other doctors, including ex=
perienced forensic pathologists such as Michael Baden, who are simply unawa=
re of this problem. In 1980, during a seminar on forensic pathology and hom=
icide investigation in Toronto, Ontario, Dr. Baden admitted that "less than=
 a tenth of 1%  of the gunshot wounds studied by his New York coroner's off=
ice were by "military rifles," and that almost all the rest came from handg=
uns or shotguns.  He admitted further that Kennedy was killed "by rifle typ=
e ammunition which we know very little about." =20
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
Account Options
