Dr. George D. Lundberg

[Robert Caprio]

In 1992 Dr. Lundberg, editor of The Journal of the American Medical
Association (JAMA), published an article on this topic.

Here is what Dr. Lundberg said at his press conference announcing the
publication of these articles:

"I can state without concern or question that President Kennedy was
struck and killed by two, and only two bullets, fired from one HIGH-
VELOCITY RIFLE. NO other bullets struck the President. A SINGLE
assassin fired both." -- LA Times, 5/20/92, emphasis mine

This sounds pretty good for the LNers, huh? Two and only two bullets
killed JFK and they were fired from the same rifle! He went on:

"The main conspiracy theory rests on there being more than one gun and
the bullets hitting the President in more than one direction. We can
CATEGORICALLY STATE THAT TO BE UNTRUE." -- LA Times, 5/20/92, emphasis
mine

Do you see the what is NOT being said? He is constantly referring to
the President and what hit him, but he is NOT referring to or
mentioning the possibility of OTHER SHOTS THAT DID NOT HIT THE
PRESIDENT!

Why is he limiting the action to the President and the President
alone? Surely one can't show other shots were NOT fired that did NOT
hit the President, right?

The FBI was presented with other bullets, fragments and casings, but
they did the ONLY thing they could do -- they denied them by saying
they did NOT fit LHO's M-C, thus, they could NOT be relevant to the
JFK assassination! (OF course they never showed via evidence that LHO
owned or used a M-C on 11/22/63 either!)

This sums up the whole OFFICIAL CASE in a nutshell! To paraphrase
Johnny Cochran (O.J.'s lawyer) -- if it DON'T FIT, YOU MUST OMIT!

In Never Again! by Harold Weisberg he discusses the appearance of Dr.
Lundberg on the The MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour (US show on Public
Television) and what the host, Jim Lehrer, knew about this.

Quote on

Jim Lehrer of The MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour knew that there had been at
least a THIRD shot because he reported it when he worked for the
Dallas Times Herald. He had interviewed James Tague, who was wounded
by a spray of concrete from a curbstone that had been struck by a
bullet during the assassination. On the Lundberg broadcast Lehrer
made NO mention of his personal knowledge of this "missed" shot, which
could NOT have come from where Oswald was allegedly shooting.

MacNeil, saying he would "play devil's advocate", said that JAMA was
"NOT capable of saying that those were the ONLY bullets fired at the
President."

(On November 22, 1963, MacNeil, then a NBC reporter in the motorcade,
heard three shots and said that when he rushed in to the TSBD looking
for a phone, OSWALD DIRECTED HIM TO ONE ON THE FIRST FLOOR when Oswald
was allegedly on the SIXTH FLOOR. So, naturally, the Commission did
NOT call him to testify. He did NOT recall this when interviewing
Lundberg [See Manchester's The Death of A President, page 229]

Lundberg's reply was: "No. There may have been MANY OTHER
GUNSHOTS...BUT NONE OF THEM HIT THE PRESIDENT."

MacNeil then said, "The evidence they've (Humes and Boswell) given you
is NOT conclusive PROOF that there WASN'T somebody firing from OTHER
directions who missed."

Lundberg EVADED response by referring to his favorite two-bullets-only
theory.

Lundberg's saying that "there may have been many other gunshots" means
that the Warren Report is WRONG in NOT eliminating that possibility--
which it NEVER addressed despite the AMPLE relevant evidence in its
files and testimony.

Lundberg's admission that "there may have been many other gunshots,"
ENTIRELY MISSING IN ANYTHING HE PUBLISHED, is also an admission that
he had NO right to say there had been ONLY Oswald firing or that the
Report was correct. Yet this is PRECISELY what he did in JAMA.

Lundberg's knowledge that there could have been "many" other shots
fired during the assassination, while SUPPRESSING that from ALL the
many thousands of partisan words he published, is also an ADMISSION
that he KNEW before publishing them that he could have been ENTIRELY
WRONG in what he did publish.

The editor of JAMA's deliberate excising of his OWN KNOWLEDGE of the
possibility of MORE THAN THREE SHOTS from the article, form his press
releases, and from his press conference is more than mere blind
partisanship, ALTHOUGH IT IS BLIND AND PARTISAN. It raises serious
questions about Lundberg's personal and professional INTEGRITY and the
INTEGRITY of the Journal of the American Medical Association.

But, if there had been vestige of professionalism in Lundberg, he he
never would have said what neither he nor the prosectors had any way
of knowing, that the two bullets that he spoke of at his press
conference were both "fired from ONE high-velocity rifle." It was
IMPOSSIBLE for them to know this, and they had NO factual basis for
assuming it. Yet Lundberg announced it "without concern or question.""

Of all many indications that there were, and there had to have been
more than three shots reported in this book, none is, I believe, more
important than SPECTER'S cop, that IMPOSSIBLE single-bullet theory.
The JAMA gang treated this with ignorance, incompetence, and
STAGGERING, OVERT DISHONESTY, as we have also seen.

The Commission's OWN EVIDENCE, so openly misrepresented in its Report,
DISPROVED THE MAGIC-BULLET THEORY LONG BEFORE THE REPORT WAS WRITTEN.
(For how early this was apparent see Whitewash, chapters "The Doctors
and the Autopsy" and "The Number of Shots")

What I did NOT know when I wrote my first book in which this brought
to light for the first time is that three authorities, who were
intimately involved, ALSO DID NOT BELIEVE IT. They are Richard
Russell, Commission member and Senator; Jesse Curry, the Dallas Chief
of Police; and Henry Wade, Dallas District Attorney, who would have
prosecuted Oswald.

Wade wrote me on October 10, 1968, "I have always felt THERE WAS AN
ACCOMPLICE OF SOMEONE ELSE INVOLVED in this matter with Oswald..."
Based on what he had been told by the police, particularly homicide
Captain Will Fritz, Wade did NOT believe that Oswald was an assassin.
But with an accomplice, that meant there was a conspiracy.

Harold Weisberg, Never Again!, Carroll & Graf, 1995, pp. 324-26
(emphasis mine)

Quote off

Wow! So we see the editor of JAMA told us things he knew were NOT
true and staked his reputation on it. Do you think he would have
survived, let alone flourished, in any other topic than this one for
doing something so DISHONEST? NO is the correct answer. It seems only
in the JFK case (and some of the other things the powers that be want
to be kept hidden) can you OPENLY lie and misrepresent the evidence
and NOTHING happen to you.

As we have seen, more than three shots CANNOT be shown to NOT have
occurred, thus, to claim otherwise is false and misleading.
Furthermore, we see that many of those who were intimately involved in
the case ALL BELIEVE LHO EITHER HAD HELP OR DID NOT do it based on the
evidence!

So, exactly what evidence are the LNers using again? Why are folks
turning from conspiracy, which is what the evidence shows,to a LNer
position, that has NO supporting evidence, IF NOT for money or career
advancement?

I'll leave that up to you. Once again we owe Harold Weisberg a BIG
thanks for making this all so obvious and clear to see -- THERE WAS A
CONSPIRACY IN THE MURDER OF JFK!

Oh, and before I forget, when was the alleged murder weapon EVER
PROVEN TO BE A HIGH-VELOCITY RIFLE AGAIN?