Deep Politics Forum

Full Version: Dotting the Eye
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Gordon Gray Wrote:I explained hpw the wound appeared smaller to the Parkland Doctors and how the actual wound in the Skull(not the scalp) was measured by the Bethesda doctors to be larger. But perhaps you should read Gary Aguilar he does a much better job with the medical evidence. http://www.history-matters.com/essays/jf...tWrong.htm Like him I don't completely discount the autopsy evidence. The problem with this case is that almost all of the evidence gathered is so tainted it could be dismissed. One has to use their best judgement is choosing what to believe to credible. I am not sold on the best evidence theory, though I don't rule it out. BTW I have been at this now for 40 years so don't assume I haven't read a lot of the material you cite. I may not be able to keep it all in my head at one time. I doubt anyone can. And I also know how to use Google.

I make no such assumption Gordon... I would like though, from time to time, for you to address what I've posted.

The "wound" was not noted at all by Parkland personnel and again, based on the xrays, there is no bone there to measure.


I, in fact, do have much of that information in my head at one time and keep gigs of information at my fingertips to help me confirm what I remember before I post it.
If you've read my posts over the last 10 years you'd know that I go out of my way to illustrate what I'm saying under the assumption that someone may be reading these threads who does NOT have the kind of vast references we do.
I almost always include links to the source materials I post... I've always treated these discussions as reference materials for anyone wanting to look further...
I try not to assume that whoever I'm talking to knows exactly what I refer to... instead of just showing them and letting them read the source material and decide for themselves.

The arguments we make come from source materials... if the source materials are questionable, one's argument is questionable... Would you make an argument about JFK using Sy Hersh as your source and expect to be taken seriously?

I went thru the entirety of the "How 5 investigations" series at History-Matters and find that there is no mention of a circular wound to the temple - It does not even mention Robinson's comments about filling a small hole in the right temple yet it was written in 2003.

I've read and researched Aguilar and he also confirms that no one reports a hole in that spot. For those who wish to, here are excerpts and a link to the entire article.

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/marsh/jfk-consp...ontro.html
Philip C. Wehle--then Commanding officer of the military District of Washington,
DC, described the head wound to the HSCA's Andy Purdy on 8-19-77, who reported,
"(Wehle) noticed a slight bruise over the right temple of the President but did
not see any significant damage to any other part of the head
. He noted that the
wound was in the back of the head so he would not see it because the President
was lying face up; he also said he did not see an damage to the top of the head,
but said the President had a lot of hair which could have hidden that...." The
author is unaware of any diagram Wehle might have prepared for the HSCA.

Ronald C. Jones, MD, Parkland witness, told the WC there was a "large defect in
the back side of the head..." and "(there) appeared to be an exit wound in the
posterior portion of the skull." Jones told David Lifton, "If you brought him in
here today, I'd still say he was shot from the front."
Jones repeated this to
student Brad Parker on 8/10/92, "...if they brought him in today, I would
tend--seeing what I saw, I would say that he was shot from the front." Jones
told Parker that he fundamentally agreed with McClelland's drawing of the back
of the head as seen in Six Seconds. Jones specifically denied to
Parker that he had seen a right anterior skull defect. He said, "Yeah. I didn't
think that there was any wound--I didn't appreciate any wound, anyway, in the
right temporal area or on the right side of the upper part of the head,
you
know, over the--in front of the ear, say, or anything like that."



The hole in question is located in the FRONTAL BONE directly above the corner of the right eye. If you can post where Gary describes this hole - please do.
I am currently in the process of looking myself as well.


I bring to your attention that there does not exist a single diagram created by either Dallas personnel or Bethesda in which a wound at that location is marked.

I post an overlay of JFK and the xray to illustrate that a HOLE in that location in photos does not reconcile with the xrays of that area of the skull.

Example after example via the available evidence and not a single ackowledgement, not a single comment related to any single point I make.

If we are going to have a conversation - isn't part of that acknowledgement of the other's points to give the sense you're actually reading what I've posted....



Simple question...

With a hole of exit or entry where we see it in F6/7... why do we not have a single person putting a circle there?
Would you say the forehead hole was more noticeable than the 3-5mm hole in the throat which the Parkland personnel saw, marked and described repeatedly?



I don't know what that anomolie in those two photos is... The color Groden showing the "V" cut out in that area was also not noticed or noted by anyone.
The hinged opening was not noticed or noted by Dallas personnel... Looking at F6/7, do you suppose it possible not to notice, in addition to a hole in the right rear, a cracked open skull above the ear if you were an ER doctor in a major city and you're standing a foot from the man's head?

It sure would be helpful for you to post some imagery or testimony or evidence in support of your speculation... I have no doubt your knowledge is very extensive
Dal-Tex as a shot location is VERY possible.

If you're to claim a shot with an exit (or entry) at that "hole"...

I don't think it is too much to ask that it be supported with some source material from the assassination evidence itself, which, when read, leads one to the same conclusion.
or refute what I've offered using the same process...
Perhaps a little basic anatomy will do. The Black Spot is in the frontal bone. It has nothing to do with a wound in the temple, which of course is really the temporal bone.[Image: external-anatomy-of-the-lateral-skull-right-side.png]
Perhaps you should actually READ my post, sir.

My last post Wrote:The hole in question is located in the FRONTAL BONE directly above the corner of the right eye. If you can post where Gary describes this hole - please do. I am currently in the process of looking myself as well.

Can you do this or not GG?

and one could just as easily prove that the temple is directly above the coronoid process and in the Sphenoid bone...

Peace out...
DJ
The OP question was: Please direct your attention to the black "dot" -- a near-perfect circle -- situated in the right eyebrow area.

What is this object? Your response was:
Uh... it was where the bullet went thru his head and out the back leaving the trail of particles well above the WCR entry point.... blowing open the back of his head.
Accompanied by this photo: The man is pointing to his sphenoid bone, more commonly referred to as the temple.[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=4465&d=1363902043]
The man is pointing to the Frontal Bone...

THIS is the temple, on the side of the head in front of the ear... not in the forehead where Kilduff is pointing - where the hole in F6/7 is (actually a bit higher but in line with the corner of the right eye)
which is about 2 inches forward and above the temple

http://integrativeworks.com/understandin...ur-temple/

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4509[/ATTACH]



The hole we are discussing was created from a shot above and to the right of JFK
The angle of the shot leads out the back right occipital bone leaving cerebellum exposed

The point I've tried to make remains... While I did post that that was the hole from the front, the arrow is not on enough of an agle downward...
I;ve also said that much of what we see in the Bethesda photos/xrays was done to him in Bethesda...

I have no idea how Parkland misses that wound unless blood and hair obscured it.... but they washed him and STILL do not mention a hole there... so IDK.

What I do know is that the official report does not work... nor does the description of the wounds in the autopsy match the lateral xray

"In this region there is an actual
absence of scalp and bone producing a defect which measures
approximately 13 cm. in greatest diameter.
"

Not once in the entire Autopsy do they mention the FRONTAL BONE, only FRONTAL LOBES of the brain....





[ATTACH=CONFIG]4510[/ATTACH]



[ATTACH=CONFIG]4511[/ATTACH]

Does this not look to you as if a good chunk of the FRONTAL BONE is gone?


GG, that hole is something I simply do not understand... No one saw it yet there it is right where a shot seems to have hit him.

There is no evidence that suggests it was an exit wound other than the forged xrays...
There is plenty of evidence that a shot was fired from a location that could have hit that spot and was deflected down and to the left, out the right rear of his head.

The massive hole described only occurs AFTER the body leaves Dallas...

If you have something to offer in the way of evidence that suggests otherwise... or more info from Aguilar, or the answers to ANY of the questions posed
I look forward to it.
Kilduff is pointing to his sphinoid bone, which is situated right behind the vertical ridge formed by the juncture of the frontal bone and the zygamatic bone. If you look carefully you can even see the indentation in front of his finger. It is soft in that region, that's where one can feel a pulse. The frontal bone where your spot( which you now seem certain is a bullet hole,) is quite hard.
Whatever you say GG.

Now... why again does no one note this either at Parkland or Bethesda? and why refer me to Aguilar when he has nothing to say on the subject?

Just answer the questions this time GG... I think we've beat anatomy to death

Cheers
DJ
David Josephs Wrote:Whatever you say GG.

Now... why again does no one note this either at Parkland or Bethesda? and why refer me to Aguilar when he has nothing to say on the subject?

Just answer the questions this time GG... I think we've beat anatomy to death

Cheers
DJ
"No Parkland observer placed the wound solely anteriorly on the right side. (Adolph Giesecke, MD felt the wound extended from occiput to the front, but on the left side.) Given Mrs. Kennedy's recollection of "holding the top of his head down" it may well be that the wound did extend more anteriorly than was apparent to Parkland witnesses. This might be explained by a blood clot forming en route from Dealey Plaza to Parkland while Mrs. Kennedy held "the top" of JFK's "head down" causing the more anterior extent of the wound to be unappreciated by the emergency personnel" Aguilar: http://www.assassinationweb.com/ag6.htm In addition there's Robinson's testimony: Robinson was also one of the several witnesses who Horne names who saw a wound in the temple near the hairline that was small enough to be hidden by hair. This latter description also guarantees this was an entry wound. Robinson said this wound "did not have to be hidden by make-up, and was simply plugged by him with some wax during the reconstruction." http://www.ctka.net/reviews/horne_jd_2.html My question for you : are you claiming that the black spot on his frontal bone is a entrance wound? Sometimes it seems you are and sometimes it doesn't. Which is it?
Gordon Gray Wrote:
David Josephs Wrote:Whatever you say GG.

Now... why again does no one note this either at Parkland or Bethesda? and why refer me to Aguilar when he has nothing to say on the subject?

Just answer the questions this time GG... I think we've beat anatomy to death

Cheers
DJ
"No Parkland observer placed the wound solely anteriorly on the right side. (Adolph Giesecke, MD felt the wound extended from occiput to the front, but on the left side.) Given Mrs. Kennedy's recollection of "holding the top of his head down" it may well be that the wound did extend more anteriorly than was apparent to Parkland witnesses. This might be explained by a blood clot forming en route from Dealey Plaza to Parkland while Mrs. Kennedy held "the top" of JFK's "head down" causing the more anterior extent of the wound to be unappreciated by the emergency personnel" Aguilar: http://www.assassinationweb.com/ag6.htm My question for you : are you claiming that the black spot on his frontal bone is a entrance wound? Sometimes it seem you are and sometimes it doesn't Which is it?

Thanks GG... for some reason the link does not get past our firewall... will have to check it out at home. Unless you'd be so kind as to copy/paste the relevent section right here for all to read...

With regards now to the Bethesda personnel who had more than enough time to look over every inch of JFK... not a soul places a wound where those photos show it...

I am saying that the hole is not an exit wound.
I am saying that the witness evidence corroborates the F6/7 images as to the location where JFK was hit in the head
I am saying that we do not see this hole in Groden's color image
I am saying that there does not exist a single diagram that has a wound there by ANY of the personnel (military, civilian, medical and not) who saw him.

IDK = I don't know... which I wote a number of times... IDK why that wound does not appear anywhere but those 2 photos and in Robinson's comments about the embalming - I can only speculate that the FBI/WCR simple could not allow evidence to be created that showed a hole and only a hole at that location. The Fox photos were not part of the WCR.

IDK what that circular black dot that seems to hover over the image in F6 is... or why in F7 it appears that hair is over the hole which gives the impression there really is a hole there.
We'd have to see the original, untouched negatives to know for sure.... and that aint happening.

So which is it? If your answer to why Parkland didn't see or record that hole bears out... then I can understand Bethesda personnel not including it as they were probably told to forget about the front and concentrate on the back of the head.
Comments by Parkland personnel about a hole there could have been dealt with as Perry was regarding the hole in the throat...

Elmer Fudd would begin hunting those wascily wabbits with a BIG gun...

DJ
Pages: 1 2 3 4