On Tuesday, October 14, 2014 9:08:47 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
> On Monday, October 13, 2014 9:00:36 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> > LOL! So now you've also taken on the mantle of lawyer for DVP...:) Is
>
> > he incapable of defending himself and his nasty comments to others? Is
>
> > there any job you can't do? Or are you reminded of your own comments that
>
> > you make on various people that disagree with you? :)
>
>
>
> DVP needs no help from me especially when he is dealing with the likes of
>
> you. I do this for amusement only and didn't want to let him have all the
>
> fun.
>
When he is proven wrong, like you often are, he'll be just as
embarrassed as you are when it keeps happening to you.
>
>
> >
>
> > People can look at anything they want in reaching information and then
>
> > possibly conclusions.
>
>
>
> As you have demonstrated on countless occasions.
>
You know what the comment meant, so don't bother trying to twist it into
your propaganda.
>
>
> > When you've seen the overview and it points clearly
>
> > to conspiracy,
>
>
>
> They'll be throwing snowballs in hell before that happens.
>
Nope. Won't do. Many, many people have found that this was a
conspiracy, myself among them after looking into it.
>
>
> > then you need to be careful what you read by factors in the
>
> > case.
>
>
>
> It isn't that you need to be careful what you read. You need to be careful
>
> about what you buy into. You seem to have thrown caution to the wind in
>
> that regard.
>
Nope, won't do. I think more carefully about what I read than you do.
After all, you read the WC story and believe it still!
>
>
> > Final conclusions will always carry the ordered or demanded
>
> > results, and so are suspect.
>
> >
>
>
>
> Conspiracy hobbyists have been demanding conclusions that somebody other
>
> than Oswald did it. That conclusion is more than suspect. It is downright
>
> wacky.
>
You know again what was said, but your fear of getting into real debate
or discussion on parts of the case keeps you playing your old song of
insult and ad hominem attacks. All in an effort to avoid the questions or
points being discussed at the moment. One of your many stalls to keep
from being seen running away from many of the discussions and proofs that
have been given to you.
>
>
> >
>
> > During the process some people might let out some truth, especially if
>
> > they think that nothing of what was said will ever reach the public, and
>
> > that's the case here. The prosectors were not trained for all this
>
> > skullduggery and trying to do things at the spur of the moment besides,
>
> > just made it all the more difficult for them.
>
> >
>
>
>
> You started with the assumption that they were part of the cover up. A
>
> ridiculous idea with zero evidence to support it. Somebody got an idea
>
> early on in the process, an idea that was later discarded as more
>
> information was obtained. In typical conspiracy hobbyist fashion, you
>
> latched on to that erroneous idea and tried to set it in stone. The idea
>
> that a bullet only made a shallow entry is just plain wrong but you just
>
> won't let it go no matter how much information there is to the contrary.
>
> You used it as a starting point for imagining all kinds of sinister
>
> activity at the autopsy for which you have no evidence.
>
Wrong yet again! I started with the notion that this case was one of
conspiracy, and then reviewed each person's ability to be a witness. Or
to be used by the conspirators. When I put together the extreme
importance exhibited by Kellerman of the SS, and the stealing of the body
and limousine from Dallas, the legal venue they should have remained in,
it became a consideration as to why would all that effort and illegality
be done publicly to get the body and the limo.
From there it was an easy move to the fact that Bethesda was military
and under complete control of the administration. That military leaders
could be easily threatened with following orders or being imprisoned.
Careers and reputations could be threatened, but imprisonment could be
worse for military physicians and pathologists.
Another wrong of yours (that keeps happening) was that I "assumed they
were part of the cover up." That was patently false! You have a way of
going off half cocked and falling into a trap every time. There were many
people that were of help during the cover up stage of the conspiracy, and
they had to have been given a story they could believe so that they could
be enlisted in the work of the cover up. The threat of WW3 was used by
LBJ on occasion, though he knew that was foolish, but it wasn't to many
others. Then there was 'national security' and 'rioting in the streets',
and any number of other excuses for making someone help doing things
necessary. No doubt many of the FBI agents that lied, intimidated
witnesses, changed witness stories, and flat threats to shut up to others
were told some story to make them operate in that fashion.
>
>
> >
>
> > And so during their search for bullets and fragments (which was of
>
> > utmost importance to them) they spoke truly at a point of bafflement.
>
>
>
> No, they floated ideas that were later determined not to be true. That is
>
> the normal part of any fact finding process. Ideas are developed and are
>
> either validated or invalidated. The shallow penetrating bullet idea was
>
> invalidated by what was learned later on in the process but for some silly
>
> reason, you want to cling to an idea that was invalidated because a guy
>
> named Horne told you to believe that.
>
Bull! Give up the phony attempts to fool everyone! The prosectors
were trying to find the path of the bullet legitimately, and when they
discovered that the track stopped, they said what they learned, that
"There's NO EXIT" for that bullet from the body of JFK. You're going to
wiggle on that hook for a long time, but it won't do you a bit of good.
You'll probably take poor DVP with you. They WEREN'T "floating an idea",
they were stating a finding! What a to of nerve to try that ploy!
Anything to run away from serious discussion! Fortunately, anyone can
read the story of the situation abnd see that it was not the "floating of
ideas" that was going on, there was talk of what was being discovered!
Now let's show up that baloney. There was also a Bethesda technologist
named James Jenkins who was assisting at the autopsy. When they raised
the body up into more of a sitting position, he could see inside of the
body cavity, and he saw the probing that was being done from the outside
of the wound, and he saw that it was blocked by the pleura, a protective
tissue around the lungs. Earlier he also saw a bruise on the lung from
being hit by bullet (but NOT penetrated). So we know why the probing was
not able to go past a certain point. It was seen from the other side!
Not just the outside where the prosectors were probing.
So you knew that from before, but seemed to have conveniently forgotten
it.
>
>
> >
>
> > They couldn't find a bullet that they KNEW had to be in the body, but
>
> > wasn't. They commented that "There's NO EXIT" without thinking that the
>
> > public and everyone else would know what they had decided. They knew
>
> > there would be a final report that would be looked at, and weren't worried
>
> > along the way what would be made of their decision.
>
> >
>
>
>
> They couldn't find a bullet they though was in the body. Either the bullet
>
> exited or it should still be in the body. When they disected the body and
>
> saw the track of the bullet which pointed to the tracheotomy incision,
>
> they began to suspect the bullet had exited from the throat where the
>
> incision had been made. That was confirmed the following day. For some
>
> silly reason, people like you and Horne won't let got of an idea that was
>
> later proved to be false. Horne may very well know it is false but why
>
> kill the goose that is laying golden eggs for him.
>
False yet again! Now you're trying to read the minds of long gone
prosectors as they were doing their work! You'll say just anything to
make your story look legitimate! Your talk of dissection is at the wrong
place in the events. There wasn't enough of the path to bother with
dissection of the track, since the track was only an inch or two long
before it hit the pleura. And IT WAS SEEN TO BE STOPPED AT THE PLEURA.
They knew there was no need to look further, since Jenkins saw the other
side of the probing and knew what had stopped that probe.
>
>
> >
>
> > > There is zero evidence the autopsy team falsified their final report or
>
> > > perjured themselves before the Warren Commision. Their work has been
>
> > > reviewed by several panels of highly qualified forensic pathologists who
>
> > > confirmed their finding that the bullet did indeed transit through JFK's
>
> > > upper torso and exit form his neck. But of course, that isn't the
>
> > > conclusion you want to reach, so instead you back track to an off handed
>
> > > comment made early on in the data gathering process and completely ignore
>
> > > everything else that was learned throughout the course of the evening.
>
> > > This is SOP for conspiracy hobbyists. Cherry pick a few tidbits of
>
> > > information that seem favorable to your pet theory and completely ignore
>
> > > the body of evidence which indicates a completely opposite conclusion.
>
> >
>
> > Nope, won't do. Try as you may, you won't get far with that line. In
>
> > reality Humes was already caught changing his testimony from one panel to
>
> > another. They were told to lie and convince everyone that the falsehood
>
> > was the facts of the body.
>
>
>
> Really? Who told them to do that? What is your evidence that they were
>
> told to do that?
>
That is my own decision given the circumstances. The evidence for it
is: Since they had found that the bullet did NOT EXIT, yet said it did in
a report, there is only 2 possibilities; One, that they all made a
mistake of the same exact kind, and two, that they lied, and there is only
one reason I can think of for them to lie and get away with it, and that's
because they were told to. Knowing much of the case, and that it was
indeed a conspiracy, it is obvious to me that they had to lie about that
finding. We don't know what was in the report or notes that Humes burned
up in his fireplace, but it would be nice to know at this time.
>
>
> > Once the body was in the ground, NO ONE was
>
> > going to disprove their words. No panel would EVER be able to see the
>
> > body, no panel would ever be able to dissect a bullet path, no panel would
>
> > be able to section the brain to determine path and direction of bullets,
>
> > and no panel EVER got to see all the related material to do with the
>
> > 'order of silence' and the difference between the body at Parkland and at
>
> > Bethesda after Humes and Boswell got at it.
>
>
>
> No panel would need to see the body. There were ample photographs and
>
> x-rays taken that showed them the damage to the body. Those panels could
>
> see with their own eyes the bullet track and the damage that transiting
>
> bullet had done. If they didn't have that clear evidence, why would they
>
> confirm the report of the original autopsy team. Do you think those panels
>
> were part of the cover up too?
>
There was NOT ample photos and X-rays. Many were missing, and some of
those were important to the case. It's already been proven that some
photos and X-rays were altered, so who knows what the panels were shown.
No decision could be made under those circumstances. Show me the photos
of the "the bullet track and the damage that transiting bullet had done",
though I believe that's just more made up fantasy you need to try and get
away with the wild stories you're telling here.
The original autopsy 'team' (in my opinion) reported what they were
supposed to, which was that the bullet came out the throat even though
Perry and some others said it looked like an entrance. The panels, with
the altered photos and lack of full information, went along with that.
It changes nothing, except what the panels thought. What WE KNOW is that
they found that the bullet had NOT gone further and they said "There's NO
EXIT", and even Pierre Finck, the experienced person of the group, said
"There's NO EXIT".
I hope DVP is happy with his lawyer, because you have led a merry chase
through fantasy on the road to Wonderland. You've tried inventing more
here than ever, so I have to assume this is an important finding of the
prosectors, since you're so adamant in defending DVP and yourself and
saying "it ain't so...:)
Chris