DVP, We’ve cluttered up the group’s board long enough with this so-called exchange-here is my closing argument.
John Canal
only the portions of an opponent’s post you chose to address), I’m just
going to ask you some “yes” or “no” answerable questions, which I’m going
to number, and this will constitute what will probably be my closing
argument.
Prefacing each question with, “Isn’t it true that…”
1. You cannot name one single doctor who was either among the team of
doctors who tried to save JFK’s life at PH, or on the autopsy team, who
you think accurately described his head wounds?
2. You believe the autopsy report incorrectly states that the large wound
extended somewhat into the occipital?
3. You believe Humes was wrong when he said they saw that part of the
cerebellum was severely lacerated?
4. You believe that Humes, Boswell, and Finck grossly misidentified the
location of the entry wound to the back of JFK’s head?
5. You believe Humes was mistaken about his recollection that when they
reflected the scalp, pieces of bone fell/came out?
6. You believe Dr. Zimmerman, who reads X-rays on a daily basis and has
examined the original photos and X-rays in the NA, was wrong when he said
that it was possible that some of the pieces of rear skull could have come
“unlatched”, resulting in the type of wound the PH doctors described?
7. You futilely tried to find the trail of opacities (that I told you was
seen on the original lateral X-ray extending anteriorly from near the EOP)
on the published copies that have the EOP area cropped?
8. You have told us that you can tell from what you see on the published
copies of the lateral X-ray that the BOH fractures are only “surface
fractures”?
9. Regarding the statement in the autopsy report that reads, “Upon
reflecting the scalp multiple complete fracture lines are seen to radiate
from both the large defect at the vertex and the smaller wound at the
occiput. These vary greatly in length and direction….These result in the
production of numerous fragments which vary in size…”, you think that they
didn’t intend on giving the impression that numerous fragments were
produced by the complete fracture lines radiating from the wound in the
occiput…evidently, just from the wound at the vertex?
10. You have said that you don’t care about understanding F8 (or words to
that effect)?
11. You are positively certain that the autopsy photos showing a virtually
undamaged BOH were taken before any repair could have been done to the BOH
scalp in preparation for an open-casket funeral?
12. You think that you’d be able to tell from the copies of the photos
that show a virtually undamaged BOH whether or not any tears in the BOH
scalp had been effected as part of the process to prepare the body for an
open casket funeral?
13. You don’t think that it’s important that high entry theorists
reasonably explain the trail of opacities (bone chips from the skull’s
beveled out inner table around the entry) seen on the original lateral
X-ray extending anteriorly from near the EOP?
14. You are 100% certain that Boswell (or Humes) did not push any
previously out-of-place BOH skull pieces (still adhered to the scalp) back
into place before the X-rays were taken….even though Boswell testified he
did replace pieces of skull prior to some X-rays or photos being taken?
15. You are sure that the entry hole in the scalp in the BOH photos is
directly over the entry hole in the skull….even though prior to the BOH
photos being taken, the scalp had been reflected, pieces of bone came/fell
out, the brain was removed, and the scalp held back up….and even though
the entry appears to be at midline (in the photos) and it has not been
disputed by “any” of the experts that the entry wound was 2.5 cm right of
midline?
16. You prefer to use the photos showing the entry in the BOH SCALP
instead of the photo showing the entry in the SKULL to determine where the
entry in the SKULL was?
17. You believe FBI Agents, O’Neill and Siebert, as well as SSA Clint
Hill, were either lying or grossly mistaken about seeing a BOH wound?
18. You believe Dr. Ebersole was mistaken when he recollected seeing a
right rear gaping wound….even though he said he held the President’s head
in his hands?
Enough’s enough…this silliness has taken up too much of the moderator’s
time already.
BTW, the reason I numbered those questions is to make it clear which ones
you chose to clip and answer (if any) and which you ignored.
While it’s unlikely, IMO, that it will happen, if, by chance, you answer
each question in good faith AND have some NEW arguments for a high entry
and/or no-BOH wound scenario…..****BESIDES**** posting ad nauseam a copy
of the BOH photos and lateral X-ray, I’ll consider replying to your future
posts. Otherwise, we are done.
John Canal
Robert Harris
You're getting there John - slowly, but you are getting there. This will
help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVfIh-8nXyQ
Robert Harris
In article <g84lk...@drn.newsguy.com>,
David Von Pein
FOOTNOTE/ADDENDUM TO MY RESPONSE TO JOHN'S 9TH QUESTION IN THIS THREAD:
Even if a few very small pieces of skull near the entry wound DID fall out
of JFK's head upon reflection of the scalp during the autopsy, it would
mean (from my POV re. that wound's REAL location--i.e., near the cowlick)
that any such pieces of bone/skull fell out HIGH up on Kennedy's head, at
the cowlick region, and not LOW on the head, which is where YOU need the
pieces of bone to have fallen out in order for your particular "BOH/LN"
theory to be true.
Plus, of course, since these pieces of bone didn't even "fall out" of the
President's head until THE AUTOPSY (i.e., after 8:00 PM EST on the night
of 11/22/63), John C. has another very big problem with his BOH/ LN theory
as well. And that problem is:
HOW COULD THE PARKLAND WITNESSES HAVE POSSIBLY SEEN SOMETHING (A LARGE
HOLE IN THE OCCIPITAL REGION OF JFK'S HEAD) THAT WASN'T EVEN CREATED UNTIL
MANY HOURS LATER AT BETHESDA, MARYLAND, WHEN THE AUTOPSISTS REFLECTED THE
SCALP OF THE PRESIDENT IN ORDER FOR *ANY* LOOSES PIECES TO FALL FREE FROM
HIS HEAD?
(That last emphasized question should make John Canal scratch his head in
bewilderment. Whether it will or not -- who knows.)
John Canal
David Von Pein says...
>
>
>FOOTNOTE/ADDENDUM TO MY RESPONSE TO JOHN'S 9TH QUESTION IN THIS THREAD:
>
>Even if a few very small pieces of skull near the entry wound DID fall out
>of JFK's head upon reflection of the scalp during the autopsy,
Small sign here you're starting to wake up.
>it would
>mean (from my POV re. that wound's REAL location--i.e., near the cowlick)
>that any such pieces of bone/skull fell out HIGH up on Kennedy's head, at
>the cowlick region, and not LOW on the head, which is where YOU need the
>pieces of bone to have fallen out in order for your particular "BOH/LN"
>theory to be true.
That's why it's important to understand F8 and the replications thereof. Among
other things critical to these discussions, they scientifically prove the entry
was near (at the furthest, less than an inch higher) the EOP. Add to that the
trail of opacities (bone chips) on the lateral, which Davis, Zimmerman, and
Sturdivan placed near the EOP, the channel-like laceration through the brain
that began at the tip of the occipital lobe, the undefendable (See Myers' site)
trajectory problems for a high entry, the lack of an opacity trail (bone chips)
at the high site, and the fact that the only place that eyewitnesses, inclding
the autopsists, said they saw the entry wound was near the EOP, and it would
take a prety dumb person (or some people afraid, unnecessarily, that a low entry
had to spell 2nd gunman), IMHO, to say the entry was in the cowlick.
>Plus, of course, since these pieces of bone didn't even "fall out" of the
>President's head until THE AUTOPSY (i.e., after 8:00 PM EST on the night
>of 11/22/63),
Duh, that's because the bullet that fragmented the BOH skull entered rom the
rear--IOW, those pieces weren't BLOWN-OUT...they were pushed in and/or somewhat
to the side by the bullet.
>John C. has another very big problem with his BOH/ LN theory
>as well.
In your mind!
>And that problem is:
>
>HOW COULD THE PARKLAND WITNESSES HAVE POSSIBLY SEEN SOMETHING (A LARGE
>HOLE IN THE OCCIPITAL REGION OF JFK'S HEAD) THAT WASN'T EVEN CREATED UNTIL
>MANY HOURS LATER AT BETHESDA, MARYLAND, WHEN THE AUTOPSISTS REFLECTED THE
>SCALP OF THE PRESIDENT IN ORDER FOR *ANY* LOOSES PIECES TO FALL FREE FROM
>HIS HEAD?
Huh? For the seemingly millionth time, in DP, the bullet fragmented the rear
skull, made a scalp tear there, and forced one or two pieces to move in and/or
laterally...all the pieces remained adhered to the scalp until it was reflected
at Bethesda....but as soon as those pieces were moved out of posiion in DP,
brain tissue, under force, exuded out the gaps between the pieces that
moved....al la a BOH wound. Now, again, the fact that those pieces that moved
were still adhered to the scalp made it easy for Boswell to push ["smooth"] them
back into place before the x-rays.
>(That last emphasized question should make John Canal scratch his head in
>bewilderment. Whether it will or not -- who knows.)
The only thing I'm bewildered about is how a supposedly intelligent person like
yourself can't see that these issues have been investigated to death since Baden
started this no-BOH wound, low-entry crap.....and that, as a result, a wealth of
information has come to the forefront that Baden never was aware of or probably
wanted to be aware of....meaning that those many, often highly credentialed,
individuals and authors who trusted and parroted Baden shouldn't have.
For example, like you, Baden had a great deal of difficulty with F8.
Barb tells the story about how she and a few others were sitting years ago at
the same table as him [Baden] and she asked him to tell them what he saw in that
photo [F8]. According to Barb, Baden kept rotating the photo and didn't even
have a clue how it was supposed to be orientated.
Now, I' not the only one who thinks that photo yields information crtical to
resolving these issues. Once Sturdivan was a high entry theorist. I located him
and we debated the issue. When I emailed him a good copy of F8 (alnog with my
replication of it) that he hadn't seen before, after about five minutes, he
emailed me back saying I was right and that he made an error when he testiied
the entry was high. Furthermore, he was upset because the HSCA didn't show him
good copies of that photo.
He [Studivan] said he wanted to see the originals just to be absolutely certain
before he wrote his book, He did so and took Zimmermnan along with him. After
examining the originals, they both agreed that the entry was low....and
Zimmerman had been undecided on that issue prior to his trip there.
Remember, neither Posner nor VB have had F8 explained to them....all because of
Baden.
John Canal