Zapruder. The bitter truth.

[TruthIsAll]

Notes:

1) Was the Zapruder film shown to the Warren Commission in 1963?

2) The film was first shown in public at the Clay Shaw trial in 1969.

3) It was first shown to the American people on March 6, 1975, on Giraldo Rivera's "Good Night America", Whorealdo was a journalist - once.

4) Why did it take 12 years before the public was allowed to see it?

First hit, JFK clutches throat (entrance)


Connally turns around still not hit


Frame before head shot


JFK hit in right front


Falling back to the left


Falling back

[AP]

1. They couldn't release it until they had total control of the media so they

could tell people what to think about it.

That's what ABC just did: total control of the media. Telling people not to believe what they can see with their own eyes.

(Incidentally, see this movie, The Revolution Will Not Be Televised, if you want to see more examples of how this is done.)

[TruthIsAll]

57. Original Parkland Hosp drawing of large EXIT wound in BACK of the head

This is right before the coverup took hold and original recollections were changed (coerced) for Posner's "Case Closed"..

http://grandsubversion.com/atpyspg2.htm

[alfredo]

2. I remember them saying that a person hit by a bullet will not recoil away

but forward. hmmmm. I wonder if they were telling a fib? the splatter on the film could be the exit wound expelling his past present and future.

[RandomUser]

49. Silverhair has a good explanation at post #13 and #44

They were not fibbing. The original poster is in error, and his descriptions of the pictures is inaccurate. Silverhair's refutation and explanation jives with what I remember from an old forensics biology class I took.

[RandomUser]

51. Also see #40 (n/t)

no text

[JohnyCanuck]

3. Why did Dan Rather lie about what the Zapruder film showed?

Dan Rather got his first big break on November 22, 1963, when JFK was shot in Dallas. Rather, a Texan, was right in place to receive his boondoggle: all he had to do was lie. Apparently, that was no problem for Rather, who soon after declared on national television that he had seen the Zapruder Film, and it indeed had shown Kennedy's head snap forward. This is the same story presented in Life Magazine, which showed frames of the Zapruder film in the order that appeared to have JFK's head moving in that direction. Time-Life then bought the film and tried to keep it out of the view of the public. When it was finally released over a decade later, it was revealed that Kennedy's head snapped BACKWARDS. Whoops. This would be strange, since, considering that Lee Harvey Oswald was behind Kennedy at the time of the assassination, it would defy the laws of physics for Kennedy's head to go the direction it did if Oswald was the "lone-nut" gunman. If there is a "smoking gun" on media collaboration in covering up the JFK story, this is it, and Rather is point and center in it. Either he saw the film and lied about what he viewed, or he didn't see it and lied when he said he did, but in either case, Dan Rather has proven himself utterly untrustworthy in the biggest of stories. Instead of being punished for his dishonesty, he has unsurprisingly been rewarded, along the way dismissing as ridiculous any legitimate investigation of the JFK hit, smearing Oliver Stone's JFK along the way as "inaccurate". Has Mr. Rather heard about people living in glass houses?

http://www.konformist.com/botm/volume01/botm0398.htm

[birdman]

4. So ABC and CBS and Dan Rather are all a part of the conspiracy

and the CIA and the FBI and the BFEE ?


Thousands and thousands of people and they've all kept silent
for 40 years.



They're everywhere. Give up.
Resistance is futile.

[AP]

5. See this movie:

[JohnyCanuck]

7. Nice job of avoiding the implications of Rather's lie.

Dan Rather claimed after a private showing of the Zapruder film before it was released to the public that the film showed Kennedy's head being jerked violently forwards (which is what would be expected if the establishment's proposition that Oswald was the lone gunman were true). Yet the Zapruder film shows Kennedy's head being knocked backwards, not forwards. So the question remains. Why did Rather lie?

[birdman]

9. I'm just following the implications you make yourself

that Rather has to be a part of the conspiracy. In fact
if you a habit of reading conspiracy threads you find that
just about everyone who's worked for the government or news
media in the past 40 years was in on whacking Kennedy.

I'm sorry I consider that a little far fetched.

[Eloriel]

17. No, no

You misunderstand "conspiracies." Greatly.

I'll give you an example. Enron. Don't you imagine that there were quite a few people who worked at Enron who had suspicions about their nefarious activities in California, and other bad things they were doing? Not ALL of Enron's employees could have been completely snowed by that company. Why didn't those who suspected come forward? Not one did, until after the revelations started (and then not many).

It doesn't take hundreds or thousands of people to be IN on a conspiracy, it only takes a few. The rest, those who are complicit (like ALL of Enron's employees) only need to "go along to get along." Even if they did come forward, without overwhelming "proof" (which is pretty hard to come by for most unwilling participants), who would believe them? What media, in fact, would even give them any coverage?

Once upon a time I wrote a thread on the issue. Rather than continue here I think I'll try to re-write it as a separate thread, since the promise of being able to access our old bookmarks hasn't, to my knowledge, been fulfilled.

Eloriel

[Solomon]

53. Beautiful. Very nicely

done. :smoke:

[birdman]

58. Enron ? a conspiracy?

Seems to me it was just shady business practices (albeit
not atypical) by big time executives. It's hardly the stuff
of suspicious deaths and intimidated witnesses.

The previous poster indicated that Dan Rather was engaged in
an effort to mislead people about the JFK assassination.

If that is true (and I'm not saying that it is - all one need do is mention JFK on this board to invoke near hysterical claims that are
presented as facts) then are only two possiblities :

a) Rather is involved in the conspiracy that killed Kennedy
and covering for the other conspirators.

or

B) There is a vast network of dark forces that were involved with
the conspiracy and have been dictating what can be said about the assassination to more than two generations of journalists and
broadcast newspeople. And none of the journalists in all
this time has come forward about it.

It has to be one or the other.

Shine even the smallest light on conspiracy theories and they almost always fall apart.

[JohnyCanuck]

26. Check out this video clip with Rather's comments

superimposed over the head shot to Kennedy.


Click this link
http://www.warrencommission.com/home.htm

After it plays the quote by Marshall McLuhan click on a blank area of the screen and it will take you to a page with a little Flash window of the Zapruder film with Kennedy sitting in the car. You can play a clip of the video right there. But better yet, click on the button to the left of the Flash window for the "Next Assignment."

It'll then display a quote from Jefferson. Click again on a blank area of the screen and you'll see a button for "Rather's Report." Click on Rather's Report and watch Kennedy's head being flung back like he had just been kicked in the face while the recording of Dan Rather's voice reassures us, Kennedy head went forward with considerable violence.

[William Seger]

52. You're just not looking very closely.

In the Flash you show and in the detailed analysis that I've now done for myself with enlarged frames, it's quite clear that Kennedy's first head snaps violently forward at the instance of impact, just as Rather said, and then it bounces back much more slowly.

Sorry, you've flunked your own test! :-)

[JohnyCanuck]

61. Balderdash

Note that Rather mentioned a "violent" movement of the head. I'd invite any interested parties to review the film themselves either at www.warrencomission.com or you can download a zip version for RealPlayer from here www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/8339/zapruder.html (608KB)and watch the whole thing and see how many VIOLENT movements of the head Kennedy makes and note whether the movement is backwards or forwards.

[William Seger]

62. Oh, please, give it up, already

Kennedy's head clearly snaps forward for 2 frames when he's hit, as shown in the images below. It couldn't go any farther because his chin was against his chest.



You don't need to be a ballistics expert to see that the front-right blood/brain explosion is clearly an exit wound; all you need is a little common sense. In later frames where we can see the back of the head, there is clearly no exit wound there, as some rumors claimed, and as would be required if the shot was from the front.

Whether the subsequent "back and to the left" movement was because of the "jet" theory, the "compression/recoil" theory, the "muscle reflex" theory, or a combination of all three, it clearly happened after the head was snapped forward, and an exit wound is clearly seen spraying stuff forward. The shot came from behind, Johny.

I'm extremely sorry that the film disproves some of the critical claims of the conspiracists, but it shows what it shows, your refusal to see it notwithstanding.

[TruthIsAll]

63. You can try, but you will not succeed in your lie...

The explosion was in the right front, where the bullet hit. The BACK of his head was blown out.

Let me spell it out for you and destroy your argument right now.

If you were shot in the face, would you expect to see blood on your nose? Or on the back of your head?

Your response?

[TruthIsAll]

64. You can try, but you will not succeed in your feeble explanation ...

The explosion was in the right side of the head, where the bullet hit. The BACK of his head was blown out. Check the Parkland sketches.

Let me spell it out for you and destroy your argument once and for all.

If you were shot in the face, would you intially expect to see the blood on your nose? Or at the back of your head?

Your response?

I thought so.

[William Seger]

66. Uh-huh, I understand perfectly now

The head snaps forward and the bloody cloud shoots forward because he was shot from the front. How stupid of me not to understand the simple physics involved when it's been so well explained by experts like yourself. And we can be sure that the large chunk of scalp and skull hanging out from the right front, with no apparent damage to the back of the head, is either an optical illusion or deliberate tampering with the Zapruder film, because we have that sketch. And somebody must have altered the x-rays to match the altered Zapruder film; that sketch certainly leaves no doubt about that! And gosh, I must be part of the conspiracy to be posting my "lies" and "feeble explanations" here. I feel so completely foolish now...

Thanks for clearing that up. :crazy:

[TruthIsAll]

67. You must be delusional by now...

To retain your sanity, read this..
http://grandsubversion.com/atpyspg2.htm

[William Seger]

68. WOW! What a stunning piece of evidence!

Yep, no doubt about it now! Somebody altered the Zapruder film and the autopsy photos and the x-rays. That sketch proves it!

Bye-bye! :hi:

[wuushew]

12. Personal testimony is the worst type of evidence

One of the many reasons so many innocent people are on death row today.

Also why would one expect a recounting of events several years later to be more accurate than when one first stated them? I certainly don't think my memory of watching the challanger disaster is any more clear or vivid then when I saw it in 1986.

That is why we must focus on the Zapruder film itself and not other people's recollections of the film. Recollections are not tangible.

[JohnyCanuck]

45. Rather reported on the film within days of viewing it. NOT years.

Rather's report on CBS of what he supposedly saw on the Zapruder film came within a few days of his viewing of the film.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

8. "Thousands upon thousands of people" didn't have to be...

...anywhere close to the conspiracy...they just had to know how to take orders. Very, very few people knew all of the details of the conspiracy.

Here's a few links you might want to read to give you a glimpse into how well the press is controlled:

Operation Mockingbird -
The Subversion Of America's Free Press By The CIA
<http://www.rense.com/politics6/mockingbird.htm>

Operation Mockingbird: CIA Media Manipulation
<http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_louise_01_03_03_mockingbird.html>

Short book review: Davis, Deborah. Katharine the Great: Katharine Graham and the Washington Post. 2nd edition.
<http://www.namebase.org/sources/IZ.html>

Short book review: DiEugenio, James and Pease, Lisa, eds. The Assassinations: Probe Magazine on JFK, MLK, RFK and Malcolm X.
<http://www.namebase.org/sources/gC.html>

[birdman]

11. So the press that exposed Watergate and the Pentagon papers

was actually being controlled by the government ?

Or are they actually only controlled during times of assassination
conspiracy.

So Rather gets his orders from dark forces about what to say
about JFK but isn't in on anything and just feels that it's
a normal journalistic procedure.

[Minstrel Boy]

30. Yeah, the Post and the Times

are beholden to no one.

Norman Solomon, in "The Pentagon Papers: Media Praise Ringing Hollow," tells of "the November 1988 speech Katharine Graham delivered to senior CIA officials at the agency headquarters in Langley, Virginia, where the Washington Post publisher said: "There are some things the general public does not need to know and shouldn't. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows."
http://www.fair.org/media-beat/010614.html

The Times pulled a reporter out of Guatemala on the eve of the 1954 coup at the request of the CIA. In 1961, the Times sanitized and downplayed a story about the upcoming Bay of Pigs invasion at the request of President Kennedy. After the 1982 El Mozote massacre, the Times reassigned its El Salvador correspondent to New York under pressure from the Reagan administration. More recently at least one reporter for the Times withheld information about the CIA's use of U.N. weapons inspectors to spy on Iraq.
http://www.fair.org/activism/china-response.html

[Minstrel Boy]

15. The subversion of the press by the CIA

known as "Operation Mockingbird." No tinfoil here, Birdman. It's the way of the world.

...


With or without the cooperation of local governments, Frank Wisner, an undercover State Department official assigned to the Foreign Service, rounded up students abroad to enter the cold war underground of covert operations on behalf of his Office of Policy Coordination. Philip Graham, a graduate of the Army Intelligence School in Harrisburg, PA, then publisher of the Washington Post., was taken under Wisner's wing to direct the program code-named Operation MOCKINGBIRD.

"By the early 1950s," writes formerVillage Voice reporter Deborah Davis in Katharine the Great, "Wisner 'owned' respected members of the New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles, plus stringers, four to six hundred in all, according to a former CIA analyst." The network was overseen by Allen Dulles, a templar for German and American corporations who wanted their points of view represented in the public print. Early MOCKINGBIRD influenced 25 newspapers and wire agencies consenting to act as organs of CIA propaganda. Many of these were already run by men with reactionary views, among them William Paley (CBS), C.D. Jackson (Fortune), Henry Luce (Time) and Arthur Hays Sulzberger (N.Y. Times).

Activists curious about the workings of MOCKINGBIRD have since been appalled to find in FOIA documents that agents boasting in CIA office memos of their pride in having placed "important assets" inside every major news publication in the country. It was not until 1982 that the Agency openly admitted that reporters on the CIA payroll have acted as case officers to agents in the field.

http://www.mediareviewnet.com/Operation%20Mockingbird%20CIA%20Media%20Manipulation.htm

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.html

http://www.voxfux.com/features/mockingbird/mockingbird8.html

[cosmicdot]

16. considering there were, what, 3 networks in the time frame

blackmail, threat to life, limb and/or livelihood ... can be very persuasive ... especially from the crow's nest of Walter Cronkite's successor's position ... seeing and knowing how many people "died" in the wake of the murder ... it's not that difficult to fathom ... there is no statue of limitation on an anonymous phone call or anonymous note to Mr. Rather ... put oneself in his position and imagine receiving a threat ... if one was required ...

one can be ordered
one can be threatened
or both

[William Seger]

22. Give it up, guys

Okay, after all these years of mainly waiting to see if anything substantial would ever come of all this, I've finally done my own "independent analysis" of the Zapruder film (using the complete sequence I found on another site), by cutting small sections of frames 313, 314, 315, and 316 and pasting them onto frame 312. (I included enough detail of the car to allow proper alignment.

Sorry, Johny, but Rather is exactly right: In the "head shot" frame 313 and in frame 314, Kennedy's head has snapped forward about 2 inches from where it is in frame 312. Forward -- the same direction all the blood is going in 313, 314, and 315. In frame 315, the head has returned to approximately the position of 312, and then in subsequent frames, Kennedy falls back and to the left.

Looking at the frames carefully, I'd say the most plausible explanation for why the head fell back and left after snapping forward is the simpliest one: that his chin just bounced off his chest.

So, after all these years, I finally have formed my own (evidence-based!) opinion: People who say that the Zapruder film shows Kennedy getting shot from the front are just plain wrong.

You owe Rather an apology for repeating that bullshit about him lying.

[wuushew]

6. Didn't the autopsy tell us anything about the direction of the shot?

Of course the bullet passed through both soft tissue and bone so one might argue the findings are not conclusive.

[maine_raptor]

10. Autopsy????? What Autopsy?

You mean that thing they did that night that they called and "autopsy"? Hell I've seen better posts done on road kill then what they did to JFK.


BTW TruthIsAll...check out Thompson's book Six Seconds in Dallas. Interesting take on the head shots. Thompson measured the distance between JFK's head and the handholds on the back of the limo. What he found was a frontal movement at 312, followed by a backwards move at 313. It suggests two hits at the same time. First from behind, second a frame later from in front. Such a duel hit would be consistant with the massive damage reported by the medical staff at Parkland.

edit for typos

[wuushew]

14. If these men are still alive you should harrass them

Day after day until they breakdown under the strain of betraying their professionalism. Unless you become the next victim in the JFK conspiracy.





Date 11/22/63 1300 (CST)

Prosecter: CDR J.J. Humes, MC, USA (497831)

Assistant: CDR "J" Thornton Boswell, MC, USN, (439878);
LCOL, Pierre A. Finck, MC, USA (04 043 322)

Full Autopsy

Ht. - 72 1/2 inches Wt. - 170 pounds Eyes - blue Hair - Reddish
brown

Pathological diagnosis: Cause of Death: Gunshot wound, head.

Signature: J.J. Humes, CDS, MC, USN

Military organization: President, United States

Age: 46 Sex: Male Race: Caucasian

Autopsy No. A63-272

Patient's Identification: Kennedy, John F., Naval Medical School

[Silverhair]

13. Your don't know what happens in a head shot.

When a bullet hits the skull, the splatter does not occur from the entry wound. The major damage, and the brains spray occurs at the exit wound. The skull recoils into the direction the shot came from.
THOSE ARE THE LAWS OF PHYSICS. NO AMOUNT OF CONSPIRACY THEORIZING WILL CHANGE THEM.

An exploding bullet would look differently too, because you would have a moving explosion. The expanding ball of the explosion would itself be moving, crating a directional explosion.

If you are going to try to analyze something like this, it would be helpful if you would bother to learn basic physics.

[KFC]

19. Leave my little buddy alone

We are talking about a belief system. Not science. Physics has nothing to do with it.

The JFK conspiracy groupies just have their panties in a bunch lately because ABC is coming out with a documentary that is reportedly counter-conspiracy. Think back of how you felt when you were told that Santa Claus was not real.

By the way, where the hell were you on November 22, 1963 and why do you know so much about head shots???????????????????????

[Silverhair]

21. OMG, Now they will be saying that SILVERHAIR was..

a CIA codename for a deep cover weapons instructor/provider who did pre-op recon and strike planning.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wuushew]

24. Physics still are valid

The bullet applies it's force over a different area when leaving the body. Remember initally the bullet is piercing the skull so it doesn't lose/transfer a great amount of energy to the victim. On exit however those conditions have changed. Brain matter existing the skull at speed would cause a motion consistent with newtonian physics.

[TruthIsAll]

29. Tell me this wound is NOT in the front side of the head.

Deny.Deny.Deny. It won't fly. The picture tells it all.

[Silverhair]

36. Exit wound. n/t

[jsw_81]

25. Look at frame 313

Which way did the blood and brains go?

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Silverhair]

44. A detailed explanation.

When a fast moving bullet enters a skull it pokes a small hole in the skull. It then sets up a presssure wave in the fluid medium inside. (The brain acts like a fluid. Think thick, but not frozen, ice cream.) The pressure wave moves tissue away from the bullet entry site, creating a wound cavity much larger than the bullet itself. The bullet is at the very tip of the shock wave, still moving. The bullet then its the skull cap again, this time going out. Again it pokes a hole in the skull, which creates a weak spot in the skull. The pressure wave arrives at the same time as the bullet, and hitting the weak spot, causes the skull to blow out. Tissue matter sprays out as ejecta. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The skull jerks away from the EXIT wound with the same value momentum as the ejecta.

Your examples fail because the do not deal with a penetrating and exiting wound in tissue.

Once again you should learn physics before seeking to analyze something like this.

[maveric]

32. Entrance holes are smaller than exit blowout. Am I not wrong here?

The smaller hole from that wound was in the front and the massive blowout was in the rear. Plus with the head snapping back as it did and the brain matter which landed on the rear of the limo I can only figure that at least one of the shots that hit JKF came from the front. Oswald was shooting from the rear.
What I have just mentioned along with the ludicrous magic bullet theory clinches the conspiracy for me.

[Silverhair]

37. Massive blowout is in the front.

You can see it in the pictures in the post. The big pink blossom is brain matter spraying forward.

[maveric]

39. Behind the right ear isnt the front.

ook at the frames again.

[Minstrel Boy]

43. Look again:

Kennedy's head is turned away from the camera. You can see his right ear. What part of his head is blown out?

[Pepperbelly]

46. right front ...

what you are seeing is the scalp reflected back from the expulsion of the missile and the blast.

[slaveplanet]

50. + this is confirmed

when Jackie crawls on the trunklid to retreive the skull tissue

[Minstrel Boy]

18. The CIA and the "failure" of the media

An excerpt from The Assassinations study of "The Failure of the Fourth Estate":

Rather was the first to see the Zapruder film, and gave a description of what he saw on that film that has never matched what the public saw in that film. Rather described Kennedy’s head falling "forward with considerable force." But all of us who have seen the film know that Kennedy’s head goes back and to the left. Was the film edited since that first time Rather saw it? Or was Rather somehow that wrong about what he saw? Did CBS’ close relationship with the CIA have anything to do with these events? CBS’ Walter Cronkite, whose heartbreaking announcement of Kennedy’s death is seared forever in our collective consciousness, was said to have been on the CIA’s list of assets by Sam Jaffe. Sam Jaffe was an FBI informant who was also working with the CIA. The CIA was forbidden to operate domestically, but the FBI of course was not. On occasion, the CIA asked the FBI to work with an operative, presumably because anything of importance reported to the FBI would be forwarded back to CIA through the FBI liaison office.

C.D. Jackson ordered Richard Stolley to acquire the Zapruder film for Life magazine. C.D. Jackson was a former OSS operative, as well as a friend of Allen Dulles. Could that CIA relationship have had anything to do with the purchase, which effectively kept the film locked up and away from public view for many years? Hugh Aynesworth was one of the Dallas reporters who covered the events immediately following the assassination of President Kennedy for his paper. Was it just a coincidence that Aynesworth had applied to work at the CIA one month prior to this event?

Priscilla Johnson had obtained an interview of Lee Harvey Oswald during his stay in the Soviet Union. She had also made friends with a defector highly prized by the CIA: Stalin’s daughter. After the assassination, she additionally made friends with Marina Oswald and later wrote the book Marina and Lee which Marina deemed a pack of lies. CIA documents have since revealed an ad hoc relationship with Priscilla Johnson, and a confidence expressed in 1962 by CIA officer Donald Jameson, chief of the CIA’s Soviet Russia/Covert Action division, that "Miss Johnson can be encouraged to write pretty much the articles we want."

Priscilla married George McMillan. McMillan wrote a book about the Martin Luther King assassination in which he claimed that James Earl Ray alone shot King. Never mind that McMillan himself had told a reporter before he began his work that he did not plan to investigate the assassination, and that he was therefore free to write a book solely about Ray’s life. The reporter who published that comment in 1969 was the same one that reviewed his book in 1976: Jeremiah O’Leary, yet another acknowledged CIA media asset. The book came out as the newly formed House Select Committee on Assassinations, formed to investigate the assassinations of John Kennedy and Martin Luther King, was struggling to get a budget that would enable it to accomplish its monumental task. O’Leary, who was friends with David Atlee Phillips, the CIA’s propaganda master, wrote a glowing review of George’s book, ending with this breathtakingly obvious propaganda motive: "The House Select Committee, among others, should take the reporting of George McMillan into account when it begins probing the murder of King. McMillan has done a good deal of the committee’s work already when it comes to deciding whether the world knows all there is to know about Ray and why he set out to kill Dr. King.…" So we have a CIA asset pushing a book by another man with possible ties through his wife to the CIA saying James Earl Ray acted alone. Coincidence, or conspiracy?

http://www.theassassinations.com/excerpts.htm

[jsw_81]

23. The head shot

If you've seen the film it's obvious that the back of Kennedy's head is intact after the final shot. The blood and tissue exploded forward out of an exit wound, clear evidence for a shot from the rear. There is no evidence for a shot from the front. None.

I know many of you are inclined to believe that Kennedy was killed by a massive conspiracy involving CIA/Mafia/oil/Bush family because of your political bias, but the simple fact is that every single piece of credible evidence points toward Lee Oswald being the lone assassin.

[maine_raptor]

27. Ahhh not quite "no evidence"

The Doctors/Nurses at Parkland all saw a "massive exit wound" in the back of the President's head. This fact is well documented. Now these are medical professionals with a lot of experience with gunshot wounds.

Several years ago one of the doctors was show the autopsy photos and later said that's not what I saw at Parkland that day.

[livinontheedge]

31. Your "well documented" fact is not so "well documented"

If it was, you would link us there.

[maine_raptor]

33. Link??????????

Talking about a book (remember those things, they were popular at one time).........damm if I can remember the title though.

It was by one of the doctors that was on duty that day (he was also on duty when LHO was brought in 2 days later) McCullum I think was his name.

I do remember reading Thompson's book "Six Seconds in Dallas" and there was a number of interviews that he did with the doctors and nurses that stated the same thing.

The differences between what the folks at Parkland saw and what the autopsy doctors saw have been mentioned in any number of books that have been written on this topic. Hence the phrase "well documented".

[Padraig18]

35. Dr. Malcolm Perry? n/t

[Minstrel Boy]

47. "Trauma Room One" by Dr Charles Crenshaw

who was resident surgeon at Parkland and attended to both Kennedy and Oswald.

http://www.paraview.com/crenshaw/crenshaw_excerpt.htm

I have the book in front of me. There are two tables, listing 44 witnesses at Parkland, who gave the earliest statements concerning the location of the wounds. Every one of them says "right rear."

[maine_raptor]

48. Ahyup it was Crenshaw's book

That I was thinking of. Not the second version you've linked to, but the first one; "JFK: Conspiracy of Silence"

Thanks Minstrel Boy

:toast:

Have one on me!!!!!!!!!!

[livinontheedge]

54. Me thinks this book has no credibility.

Something this sensational would have had a publisher of substance if the facts could have been verified. This book isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

[Minstrel Boy]

55. Jeesh, talk about a rush to judgement

:eyes:

Your coincidence theory is faith-based, if you can reach such a hasty and uninformed conclusion.

Crenshaw won a defamation suit against the Journal of the American Medical Association, which tried to discredit him and smear the book upon publication.

[maveric]

38. What about the flap of skull/brain that was one the back of his head

after the final shot? Are we looking at the same film? Jackie, after the shot and noticing thedamage, reached to the back of the limo to retrieve something. What she retrieved wasnt her keys or compact but a chunk of her husbands brain.
What frame shows the back of the head intact? What was flopping around the back of the presidents head AFTER the final shot?
Watch the film man!

[Pepperbelly]

42. I agree with most of what you wrote EXCEPT ...

Oswald. I do not think he had anything at all to do with the murder. In fact, the evidence is that he was not even ON the 6th floor at the time of the killing.

[Padraig18]

34. Link to autopsy photos:

http://www.celebritymorgue.com/jfk/jfk-autopsy.html

[JackRiddler]

59. WOW! That settles it...

Are these authentic? It leaves little doubt of front entry/rear exit.

As far as the Zapruder film is concerned, it sure looks like a front exit (all that blood going forward, plus evidence of a brief snap forward as in the other thread).

So which was tampered with? Zapruder film was in the morgue for six years. Hmmm....

[Pepperbelly]

40. You misinterpret what you see I fear ...

The damage shown in frames 313, 317, and 320 was from a rear entry. The expulsion of blood and tissue seen in 213 is clearly an exit wound. However, for what it is worth, it is just as clearly from the rear horizantal rather than rear vertical as would be required for the TSBD to be the origin.

[Minstrel Boy]

41. Washington Post: board finds two brain specimens examined,

and cannot resolve discrepancies between what the Parkland doctors and the Bethesda pathologists saw.

From the Nov 10, 1998 Washington Post:

WASHINGTON - The latest batch of John F. Kennedy assassination documents raises new questions about an examination of the president's brain and lays out unresolved discrepancies in other medical evidence.

The more than 400,000 pages of records being made public at the National Archives Monday were compiled in the past four years by the Assassination Records Review Board, an independent panel that Congress set up to collect and release material related to Kennedy's death in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963.

Congress did not direct the review board to reinvestigate the assassination, and the panel issued no formal opinions on any aspect of the controversial murder. But in the board's effort to expand and clarify the record, details surfaced that:

Suggest two different brain exams may have been conducted at the Bethesda, Md., Naval Medical Center, raising questions about the authenticity of the brain examined.

Fail to resolve discrepancies between how physicians at Parkland Hospital in Dallas described Kennedy's head injury immediately following the shooting and how it was subsequently described by pathologists at Bethesda.

http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/2brain.html

And an essay on possible forgery of X-rays and photos:

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/griffith/Problems_with_X-rays_and_photos.html

[stlsaxman]

56. Was Gerald Ford on the Warren Commision? And is he the last member...

of the Warren Commision alive?

I ask because I'm sure I heard somewhere that the WC findings would remain
classified until after the death of all members on the commision.

Anyone clarify this for me?

[TruthIsAll]

60. Yes and yes

...

[DemBones DemBones]

65. What do you think the odds are of those documents being

released after Ford's death?

If the shot was from behind, I guess Jackie wasted her time crawling on the back of the car trying to retrieve Jack's brain.

:shrug: